You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Actors

    Why do Indian film-goers like mannerism and unnatural over-acting?

    Dev Anand used to act with his head tilted at one side. When I first saw his film, I seriously thought that he had a sprain in his neck! He used to wear a cap and carry a scarf. Raj Kumar, another popular actor of yester-years, used to wear a terrible wig and say 'Jaani'. Rajinikanth's stunt with cigarette is extremely popular. In the so-called 'critically acclaimed' film 'Pink', Amitabh Bachhan wore a wig, perhaps to indicate that he was playing the role of an eccentric lawyer.

    Most of Indian villains are bald-head. Shakti Kapur's mannerism is well-known. Sharukh Khan first came to limelight with his stammer:"K..k..k...Kiran". I can quote innumerable examples of mannerism and unnatural acting of Indian film-stars.

    I would like to know why Indian movie-goers like such mannerism and unnatural over-acting? Don't they think this is ridiculous?
  • #602406
    The movie is to be made to attract viewers. Whatever viewers wanted will be included in the movies. If you see Tamil movies, the heroes will always go for over action. Tamil people are hero worshippers. They like heroes who are famous for over acting. So they do that and viewers enjoy.
    In old telugu movies NTR and ANR the heroes of yester years used to follow the suit. Again Telugu audience gave them tremendous response. They continued the same. Each actor was having his own mannerisms. They are well known for these. If they don't show those mannerisms movie will get failed. So directors insist. producers request and audience cherish.
    But of late we are observing lot of changes . People especially younger generations are going for natural action movies and slowly the trend is changing.
    In Dramas when the actor recites a poem he had to extend the end with his raga for long time. Otherwise audience don't feel happy. So if you hear the poem will be 2 or 3 minutes but end tail will get extended for 6 minutes with raga.

    always confident

  • #602453
    Films are for amusement and if people are fan of a particular actor because of his style and mannerism they will go to his movies again and again. Rajkumar was not a very attractive actor but his dialogue delivery impressed people and his films were much in demand.

    Anyway these stars and superstars are known for their styles and in every lane and corners of a town we will find youngesters copying their style and trying to mimic them in all ways from dialogues to dressing.

    With maturity, people start realizing that it is all business gimmicks and good directors are simply making money out of it. Only then we start detaching our attachment to these styles.

    Knowledge is power.

  • #602463
    Yes some stars of Indian film be it North or the South get famous through their mannerism and that is the indication to their popularity and identity. Rajnikanth got famous for his style to pop up cigarette and light it with style. Sivaji Ganesan used to walk with style and that is his mannerism. Fans does not want those actors to act in ordinary way. They love their mannerism and insists that should be continued. While the famous actor and former CM NTR used to smile and show his hands full of rings and that is his specialty. And Balakrishna , his actor son used to show the mannerism by beating the thigh.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #602523
    It is natural that, people want to see things that they know, they can't experience in their life. If they see the same things in a movie which happens to them in their daily lives, then their is no fun. They want Shahrukh to romance with a girl in some hilly area; they want Rajnikant to light the cigarette in a stylish way; they don't want to see a middle class family coping up with their problems. By watching movies, people want to escape from their daily struggles and that is exactly what these movies do. This is the reason that movies with mannerism and overacting are appreciated while the movies with realistic acting don't do much business.
    Don't sweat the small stuff and it's all small stuff.

  • #602544
    Mr. Nilesh: Your view about entertainment and films are not fully correct. Have you seen films like 'Golmaal', 'Anand', 'Padosan', 'Anuradha', 'Naram Garam', Guddi' and many other films which provided healthy family entertainment? I am mentioning only Hindi films here. Unnatural, artificial acting provides artificial entertainment only.
    Non-violence is the greatest Dharma; So too is all righteous violence.

  • #602547
    These are some old movies you have mentioned Mr. Partha and to be honest I don't know much about them. I will give a recent example. There was this movie named Manjhi, a beautiful movie with a heart touching story and acting was as real as it can get. Though the movie was well appreciated by the critics, it didn't earn much on the box office. This was because not many people want to see these kind of films. Then, there was this film named happy new year. The movie had no storyline whatsoever but still it was a blockbuster earning over 200 crore rupees. This was because the movie showed things which were really unrealistic and too good to be true. This is what the normal public wants to see.
    Don't sweat the small stuff and it's all small stuff.

  • #602553
    Mr. Nilesh: If you haven't even heard the names of the common popular Hindi films, then how can I elaborate my previous response? I have not even mentioned the so-called 'art films', I have only mentioned that commercially successful directors like Hrishikesh Mukherjee or Basu Bhattacharya gave one after another commercially successful film without excessive mannerism or over-acting by the actors.
    Non-violence is the greatest Dharma; So too is all righteous violence.

  • #602555
    Movies came after stage Dramas. In stage dramas of old days, the dialogues and acting were the two main factors to convey the story. As the actors themselves were drivelling dialogues and those days either microphone and amplifications were absent or were in their early stages and not of good capacity, the actors have to 'extra do' the acting and even 'shout' the dialogues so that it is audible to the audience . So it all resulted in 'dramatic' or extra and artificial mannerisms. Most of the yesteryear actors, actresses and even technicians came from drama field. So those movies had the drama hangover.

    But later on, when prole came out from the Film institute started producing or directing movies or acting in them and handling photography, a sort of realism came into the movies. By and by movies came to be shot outdoors from the artificial sets in the studios. So movies became subtle and matter- of-fact type with visuals supporting the story and minimisation need of verbose dialogues or overacting. Many e real good movies came during these times. When technology moved in and creativity started decreasing, artificiality and exaggeration started coming in.

    The new generation expected much more from a movie than they can get from around their environment and from real world. So as per demand , to impress and captivate the viewers, many of whom are vulnerable youth stage viewers, the actors and actresses have to resort to mannerisms and artificial behaviours to depict themselves as super heroes and super heroines.

    Movie goers now have many things, and they yearn for more which they are not able to achieve in real world. So they fantasise and merge themselves with the screen characters as it it were they themselves. They see in the heroes and heroines their own sub conscious reflection of their unrealised dreams.

  • This thread is locked for new responses. Please post your comments and questions as a separate thread.
    If required, refer to the URL of this page in your new post.