Hritik is perfect to play Akbar. He is young, engergetic, handsome(girls come to see that) and talented. If u think SRK/AMIIR were good choices then u are a dumb. SRK/AMIR are old now and don't have appealing charisma for character, if would have been alright if the part was for middle age Akbar, but this role is younge and maturing akbar.
share[deleted]
Hrithik doesn't look baby faced at all.
He's tall handsome, athletic, well-built, young(ish) and charming. The perfect hero in anybody's books. This role was made for him. He's the only actor I would want to see play Akbar.
The reason why Akbar is famous is due to him becoming emperor at 15 and conquer lands as he got older (if i get my history right). So, it's okay to pick hrithik, or maybe someone else around his age to potray a young and strong emperor. It'll be VERY weird if someone as baby-faced as Shahid Kapoor plays Akbar though. No offence, but SRK can look baby-faced too. Anyway, a good actor can play any role thrown to him. It's all in the facial expression.
shareJudging by the trailers hrithik has made no attempt to try and mould himself into the role, he swaggers in the same style as he does in every film. I think it would have been a hoot if he played the role just like he did in Koi Milgaya! which is marginally his only "performance" role yet.
shareI agree ejazbutt.
He's not trying to fit in the role.
Mmmm, well, 'swagger', he's never walked quite like that in any other film, so I wouldn't say he's exactly the same in that incredibly narrow sense...
I think he seems very different, but at the same time, I can't tell; how could you? There's mostly snippets of just him visually, and visually he's perfect in my eyes. but I'm also curious (Seriously, no sarcasm) what you find in that brief view of what seems like he's not trying?
From an acting point of view, I think it's WAY too early to make judgments of how he's fitting it or not. The trailers are just flashing images at this point.
But I'm certainly impressed! He carries himself completely differently.
[deleted]
A fresh faced person would also look quite convincing to play such a high profile role. After seeing Neil Nitin Mukesh, I think he would have suited a lot as Akbar. As far as his acting skills are I have no idea. Its possible that Hrithik may pull it off.
shareI think HR will surprise everyone...he is far more savvy and talented than he lets on and people are looking to pan him just because of his immense popularity mostly derived from fairly inferior and non-challenging vehicles where he gets by mostly on his face and body. But face it, he hasn't really had much challenge to his talent yet...this could just be his chance to be taken seriously and get better roles in future. I just have a feeling that he will stun everyone and really do a great job...but of course, a lot depends on how good the script is. I hope it is way better than "Asoka" which really disappointed me.
shareI personally want Jodha Akbar to work, regardless of who's playing the key roles, mainly because of the respect and awe that Ashutosh commands after giving us epics like Lagaan and Swades. The promos do look grandeour and every frame oozes off it.
ASOKA was one movie that I simply loved for its breathtaking cinematography by Santosh Sivan who also directed it. It actually looked its period (I got the same feeling when I saw LOTR: The Felowship Of The Ring). The only screw ups were ShahRukh, Kareena and Johny Liver. Anu Malik may not be considered in the same league as AR Rahman when it comes to composing a period flick with sincerity, but his work didn't feel all that out of place. SRK COULD'VE made a good emperor, unfortunately he was allowed to be at his hammiest best, something which Ashutosh managed to succesfully restrain in Swades. ASOKA could've been a masterpiece, except for the lack of dedication to take it as seriously as it should (I'm still waiting for someone else' POV).
The reason why I'm getting nostalgic about ASOKA is because I don't want, like some of you, Jodha Akbar to walk the same path. I mean after metaculous research in authenticity and painstaking detailing in costumes, sets, the era and spending a bomb, I don't want it to collapse because of a weak script, screenplay or poor direction. Making a movie on such a large canvas, does not give you another opportunity for corrections. It will either be hailed as one of Ashutosh's masterpiece or ridiculed a mistake, like ASOKA. Well I'm hoping its not the latter.
Hritikh, well, like some of you rightly pointed out, does not SEEM to have got into his charachter enough to make one believe that its actually Akbar your watching on the big screen. I mean, think Gabbar Singh (Sholay), Bhiku Mhatre (Satya), Vijay Verma (Deewar), Sub-inspector Anant Velankar (Ardh Satya), Munnabhai (Tezaab) and many more. Those were living breathing charachters in flesh and blood that raised the movie to a totally unimaginable dimension. Not for a moment would you be distracted by the actor's off screen image. Something that I ccouldn't get off watching Hritikh or Ash in the promos. But as most hopefuls and optimists, I pray that more than Hritikh or Ash, Ashutosh pulls it off, critically as well as get the box office ringing. I mean, its not every film-maker's cup of tea to think out of the contempary and dare to tell a story thats not the usual masala crap dished out repeatedly by the likes of Karan Johar, Bhansali and the Chopras.
For all you fans out there, lets hope the movie does well and brings a smile on our faces when we leave the darkened hall, knowing well that the Indian Film Industry has more than a handful of torch bearers who will continue to make our country proud and shine as bright as ever.
Amen!
Let me start out by saying I have a lot of respect for Ashu and the dedicated way in which he approaches making his films. To most it may seem that he has a lot of clarity in who to cast in his films. But here are a few facts to consider:
1. For Lagaan he went to Aamir, SRK, Hritik, back to Aamir who finally agreed to do the film. So he did not start out with a clear choice. BUT ALL WOULD AGREE that Aamir ended up as the perfect choice in how he played the role and was directed to play it. When SRK was asked about letting Lagaan go he said he was glad as there is no one else who could have played Bhuvan better than Aamir. So Ashu and Aamir gave the best possible Bhuvan to us.
2. For Swades Ashu went first to SRK and said that no one else could have done Mohan better than SRK. I think all would agree on that.
3. For Jodhaa Akbar he went to Aamir, SRK and then to Hritik. I think for the youthful Akbar, Hritik has the age factor in his favor. For the box-office there is Dhoom 2 hangover in the Hritik Aish pairing. But for the discerning viewer there is also the Dhoom 2 horror in that pairing. Neither of these actors can spontaneously deliver a good performance. But they are decent director's actors as Aish has shown in Raincoat and Hritik in Lakshya. So there is still some hope. But the promos do make it look like we are getting more of the usual from the lead pair - Aish is still walking in her doe-like prancing walk, Hritik is still doing a smirky soulful look. Maybe the worst parts happened to end up in the promos. I am willing to give Ashu the benefit of doubt.
ASOKA was one movie that I simply loved for its breathtaking cinematography by Santosh Sivan who also directed it. It actually looked its period (I got the same feeling when I saw LOTR: The Felowship Of The Ring). The only screw ups were ShahRukh, Kareena and Johny Liver. Anu Malik may not be considered in the same league as AR Rahman when it comes to composing a period flick with sincerity, but his work didn't feel all that out of place. SRK COULD'VE made a good emperor, unfortunately he was allowed to be at his hammiest best, something which Ashutosh managed to succesfully restrain in Swades. ASOKA could've been a masterpiece, except for the lack of dedication to take it as seriously as it should (I'm still waiting for someone else' POV).
LOTR was not a period film but a fantasy. In fact many would agree that SRK and Kareena were perfectly cast in Asoka. If Asoka failed at something it was in showing the continued evolution of the emperor and his work in spreading Buddhism. The movie should have been titled Prince Asoka because it really was a journey from Prince to Emperor and ended very soon after. The story was set in 200 AD or so, a period for which there is no written history FROM THE TIME. It did and excellent job of authentically portraying that era and staying true to known facts.
The reason why I'm getting nostalgic about ASOKA is because I don't want, like some of you, Jodha Akbar to walk the same path. I mean after metaculous research in authenticity and painstaking detailing in costumes, sets, the era and spending a bomb, I don't want it to collapse because of a weak script, screenplay or poor direction.
In fact this is a fantasy and not history at all. There is extremely detailed written history of the period - Akbar's diaries - called the Akbarnama, and in that no mention is made of Jodhaa Bai. This is Ashu's fantasy love story!!!
I mean, its not every film-maker's cup of tea to think out of the contempary and dare to tell a story thats not the usual masala crap dished out repeatedly by the likes of Karan Johar, Bhansali and the Chopras.
See what I wrote above. Rajasthan is up in arms as Jodha Bai was the daugher-in-law of Akbar not his wife, and they are also concerned that Akbar is being showed as a benign emperor when he actually killed many many Hindus in Rajasthan. I am not taking sides in this - merely saying that authenticity is in question and fantasy is the expectation as stated by Ashu himself! I see no reason why Ashu should not have his digression into fantasy like the Bhansalis, Chopras and Johars!!!
'A wed wose, how womantic'
Lagaan was a joint venture between Aamir and Ashu (AK Productions). Hrithik was only a newcomer at the time the movie was being produced. No one else was approached for the role.
shareJA is going to be okay, but it aint gonna be no Mughal E Azam. The story seems cliched, about an Emperor King falling in love with a Warrior Princess. You know what I passionately hate about in the JA promo? When Jodha and Akbar are sparring with each other and Jodha has the upper hand and forces Akbar to go into defense. Thats such a crock of bull.
shareSorry I mean no offense to fans, BUT if JA is no Mughaleazam I'll be glad. I slept through MEA every time I tried to watch it. This is why I want to watch JA despite misgivings, I think Ashutosh has what K Asif did not have.
'A wed wose, how womantic'
Thats weird, because I revel in every line of dialogue from Mughal E Azam. I can understand why it can seem to be boring though, because half the magic comes from understanding the classical form of Urdu they speak.
shareLOL! I grew up in an Urdu speaking culture and speak and can compose poetry in fluent Urdu! It is not that it is because MEA is a most boring snooze inducing film for me.
Bhut tareef suni thi galiyon mein nukkadon pe jiski
Kareeb jaa ke dekha to sirf dhuan hi dhuan mila
'A wed wose, how womantic'
Well, its not possible for everyone to like one movie I guess. I mean, Pulp Fiction had its share of critics. But I guess you're in the teeny tiny minority because everyone swears to the greatness of Mughal E Azam, from big name directors to newcomer actors, including an entire generation of Indians.
If JA didnt stack up to MEA, only you will be satisfied whereas the rest of the world will be not. Comparisons are inevitable.
I've seen 'Mughal-E-Azaam (1960)'(MEA) and 'Asoka (2001)' and now finally 'Jodhaa Akbar (2008)' (JA).
MEA was not a snooze-feast for me but also not a really impressive classic work of cinematic art. I like Asoka far more. For me Gowariker's Akbar film is far more a conventional fairy tale than both Asoka and MEA.
IMO the lead actors and Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai were selected for beauty and star power solely not for acting skills.
I really like period films and thus I like JA - somehow. But for me it is certainly one of the weaker period films despite all the gold-laden costumes and beautiful sets.
It reminds me mostly of 'Cleopatra (1963)' and 'Mughal-E-Azaam'. Both films expended tremendous amounts of capital for costumes and sets and told history through love stories. Though both films used strong actors these films feel mediocre to me and boring. Somehow the artistic is missing. And if you then use, as in in the film JA, actors of IMO moderate acting powers the only asset of the film JA are background stuff as corporeal beauty, costumes, sets, and music.
IMO Gowariker filmed a sentimental standard love story we can find in many popular fantasy books (warrior woman doesn't want to marry the mighty male, yields to father's wishes, has some issues with her husband's wishes and due to her penchant for independence holds him off, both are learning to understand the other, but experience mayor misunderstanding before they can unite, separation and fight follow, happy end). Despite this triviality, the love story works for me because I like warrior princess stories . Nevertheless, my "willing suspension of disbelieve" is often hard pressed. For instance when I have to swallow that a larger muscle-bound war-trained male might be beaten in a sword fight by a smaller slender household-trained female . Or when the emperor tames a "wild" elephant, that looks more like a nice well-behaved elephant lady with tusks to be searched for, and manages after the first mount to direct the "wild" elephant at his will, moreover without any mahout device .
But even during the love story parts it was Hrithik Roshan and Aiswarya Rai in costumes not a Mughal emperor and a Rajput princess I saw.
The parts, where history is described, feel actor-wise even worse than the those produced by the lead actors, more like a motley crew of laymen acting in a carnival road-show. The actors feel as if they had no background knowledge of their story and mostly stand or sit around stiffly as decorative mannequins. So when re-watching the film I skip many history parts and concentrate on the love story.
The only actor who was somehow convincing for me was Sonu Sood playing Jodhaa's cousin Sujamal.
Often I'm induced to laugh about the dialogue, especially when points of the Mughal rule are discussed, this is certainly unintended comic. But, this film is so idealistic that it sometimes becomes hilarious for me. I really like the idealism of this film: religious tolerance, honouring the wife's wishes, female independence, spare the foes. But please use some sophistication writing the script (perhaps the subtitles are far worse than the real text).
In conclusion, I have not the impression that Hrithik Roshan played Mughal emperor Akbar but a fantasy king in a fantasy love story. And filmi Jodhaa is a complete invention complying with modern sensibilities based on the fact that Akbar married the Raja of Amber's eldest daughter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariam-uz-Zamani. But that fantasy love story worked well enough for me that I felt entertained.
Yet, if 'Asoka' was distorting history and MEA romanticising history then JA is tampering history (for instance Akbar was Jalaluddin's birth name and the Rajput princess had to convert to Islam).
--- each brain develops its own preferences ---
He hasn't had much of a challenge to his talent yet?! Obviously you didn't watch Koi Mil Gaye or Krishh....
shareagreed!
shareWell, that in itself is not a BAD thing...great films like El Cid, Ben-Hur,
and The Ten Commandments, among others, were at least that long. I just hope the obligatory music numbers fit in with the action as they did in Lagaan and Mangal Pandey, and are not goofy and inappropriate like they came off in Asoka.
The really screechy female ones that sound like cartoon insects are the worst.
It may sound sexist, but when it comes to Hindi films they'd be vastly improved by having the women in the music SEEN but not HEARD. Let them dance all they want, but for God's sake stop the irritating screeching and cutesy "Pepsi commerical" stuff, especially in a serious drama! I think that's a large part of what killed Asoka, giving it a very choppy and uneven tone and quality which ultimately did it in, sapping the strength of the drama.
Agreed with everything said here so far. But just to point out that LOTR was not a period movie.
shareMovies like Ben Hur and 10 Commandments are over 40 years old. The world was different back then and it was okay with people to spend 3+ hours at the cinema halls. But rarely these days a hollywood movie clocks over 2 hours. Thats because the world has changed and nobody has that much time to spare, even on weekends. Thats why Lagaan is such a miracle. I dont think neither Hrithik nor Aish has got the charisma or the talent to hold an audience for that long. Hrithik cant even deliver lines properly, judging from the promos.
"Hum Hindustan ko ghalat haathon mein nahi jaane deynge!" sounds more like a girly whine than a royal decree.
[deleted]
he is not perfect...he is not able to deliver a dialogue
sharespeak english man
shareWell, first of all I lasted 3 hours. Not only did I last, But felt transported back to the Mughal period. HR has carried the movie superbly all the way (ya, I have seen the film and not judging by "trailor"). We dont expect 5" something stammering dwarfs to fit into an Emperor's role. "Facial expressions" has limits. He has the looks,the personality and charisma to play the Great Ruler (unlike his senior and fellow colleagues in Industry). Be it in romantic, sentimental, serious or funny scene, he has been outstanding. Greatly supported by Ashutosh (Director) and ASH he has done full justice to his role.
shareI totally agree!!!!!See the movie and do not judge it by the #trailor#
shareEven Reviewers who don't love the movie are saying Hrithik is amazing as Akbar; I'm not surprised, because I've been very impressed with his growth as an actor from Koi Mil Gaya on, but I'm looking forward to the surprise of his detractors!
sharehritik is amazing as Akbar in the film..I saw it last nite and wow he bowled me over with his performance..He looked amazing too..
share
i agree with most of u, who state that hrithik is expressionless in this movie. He makes no attempt in fixing up his acting, how can you compare hrithik with the likes of aamir, srk and salman (who tries everything but still can't get an award). Given the current sorry state of the bollywood industry i am sure this film will pull it off, as bollywood fans have turned cheap. All the good films perform bad and crap works. everytime hrithik gets nominated for a best actor he wins. To add salt to injury he even won it for doom 2 when he was a villain and filmfare awards are compared to oscars, give me a brake. Actors should be judged on ability something hrithik has not got, a good dancer does not make a good actor, he was over rated b4 knph, neil nitin mukesh, shahid kapoor, emraan hashmi and john abraham are way better but do not get the credit they deserve. Come on bring back the nineties.
Must agree 100% with you there.
Not good as an actor? False dude. His performances are pretty gud in movie except for those with Kareena. It was the worst thing filmfare ever did by giving HR best actor for dhoom 2. If they had given for Krrish , it would have been better. But i felt the most deserving was Aamir Khan for RDB. Even his Fanaa performance was better than HR is krrish.
shareMmm, I'm actually watching JA tomorrow, but I'm a little wary, because the reviews describing the movie (acting-wise mainly) are kinda similar to those from Dhoom 2 (which I absolutely despised). However, I have no doubt that the technical aspects of JA will be fantastic. So yeah...
shareI'd have to agree. Aamir's performance in RDB was ubelievable, and definitely blew away Hrithik's role in Dhoom 2.
However, I just saw the movie, and I'd have to say that Hrithik did a pretty good job portraying Akbar. I couldn't imagine Aamir or SRK doing that same role.
all the charactors are not upto the mark, even if u compare to casting & characterisation of Oscar nominated Lagaan. i dont have courage to compare this film to MUGHAL-E-AAZAM. I am talking about the presentation, when Ben Kigsley played GANDHIJI we could see GANDHIJI, not Ben Kingsley, but in this film i could see only Hritik & Ash. Even Dr. Chandra Prakash played Chnakya, i could see chanakya, same way Akbar was not HANDSOME, TALL, i feel any new face with good acting skill would have justified the role, bcoz none of the known indian star have the capability to portray any historical character who are THE GREAT. Ashutosh should have courage to cast most appropriate person to cast & people to believe him as AKBAR THE GREAT.
share[deleted]
what u r not agree with MeA. Ashutosh is a big name after LAGAAN, people come to see his film without stars too & he would have gone to cast somebody from hollywood, infact this was d right time to explore, it would have been classic.I would like to tell u that I was also d part of this film, apart from casting there are so many flaws which are basically forced- whatever he has planned & shot accordingly, could not use in d film only to decrease d lenth of d film. cud u notice dummy swords(HR-ASH & ASH-SONU fights), wrinkled felt cloth in d film.
share
well honestly i am a hritik roshan fan. but he playing Akbar is really a joke. if you know even a little about Mughals who ruled india during 15 to 18th century, you know that they were not tall, they didnt have long shaped faces at all. their accent was persian and their mostashes were streight rather than curved. so i felt stupid myself watching a 6 feet plus tall long shaped face akbar trying to speak urdu in a Punjabi accent. But still i think it was Ashutosh's falt and not hritik's. Thats why Old Mughl e Azam is such a special film.
I was initially skeptical if I should watch JA or not... I'm not much of a period movie fan, but after a lot of persuasion, I did go for the movie and finally saw it last night!
I have to say, I was completely amazed by Hrithik's acting. The first time I liked him, was in Koi Mil Gaya! And even though he "looked" good in Dhoom 2, his performance wasn't something to rave about!
But in JA, the guy has just surpassed my expectations! I agree the promos show the same stoned look, but the entire movie is another cuppa tea! His diction, his grasp of Urdu is just mind blowing. His portrayal of the Shehenshah of Hindustan was just amazing - be it his voice quality or the authoritative command as the emperor of India.
And not just his diction, but his facial expressions just showcased his class. Whether romantic scenes or the expression of instant anger... you could just see it all in his eyes!
As much as I love Aamir Khan's acting, I don't think anyone could have performed a better Akbar than Hrithik.
Kudos to Ashutosh Gowarikar for the excellent direction as well!