MovieChat Forums > KitesĀ (2010) Discussion > kites? jeans? wtf is wrong with bollywoo...

kites? jeans? wtf is wrong with bollywood!

Why do they come up with such crap names. This was a serious, tragic film. A more apt title would have perhaps not fooled the audience into expecting a frothy musical with song and dance aplenty. Superstitions backfire all the time. The title reminds me ANOTHER crapfest that was touted to be "cross over" cinema, which sadly couldn't even cross over to the northern section of its own home turf. The film was called "Jeans". What is next? Thongs? Boomerangs? They ought to shoot the latter in Australia with the native chick being aboriginal as the love interest of our studly bollywood hero.


Well in the beginning of the film there is narration by Hrithik and he mentions something in relation to kites and being in love. . .if I can remember. But yeah, why the movie is called "Kites" is beyond my imagination. . .

The film was called "Jeans". What is next? Thongs? Boomerangs?


Omer Bhatti is Michael Jackson's Biological Son! End of Story!


Jeans was a Tamil movie not a Bollywood movie. Silly films with random names seems to be universal among the big film industries in India.


I absolutely agree.

May be roshans took a wrong turn with Kites. Miserable K-Attachment.
What happened?? in the end Kites can't even soar high.


The title "Kites" has everything to do with the movie. The two leads were able to soar like kites due to their love for each other, but unfortunately - like kites - they were tethered by various things that made it impossible for them to stay "in the air" forever. That's a really basic way of explaining it, but the title makes perfect sense.


Great explanation, phillyspice! That clarifies it a little better. Actually didn't see it that way. Thanks!


Omer Bhatti is Michael Jackson's Biological Son! End of Story!


''What is next? Thongs? ''

Well Done Mate. That just made me burst out laughing. Haha classic :')

Regarding Bollywood. It definitely is up there with one of the worst film industries in the world. First of all people consistently always want to see the same actors which are popular in every film (Aamir Khan, Salman Khan, Shahrukh Khan, Hrithik Roshan, Amitabh Bachan & A few others) which only stretches out to about 20 actors/actresses overall. Which will appear in every single blockbuster film every year - And they will hate on any new actor which comes along all of a sudden (Harman Baweja, Anurag Sinha to name a few). Which is really bizzarre to me.

Other than a few films like Johnny Gaddar finding an intelligent Bollywood Movie is like picking out a needle in a hay stack. Seriously I think Bollywood is just another bad representation of Indians or India.



Oh,please---I would hardly call Bollywood the worst film industries in the world---I've been into Bollywood flicks for just over a decade, and that is a major generalization if I've ever heard one. With all the junk/BS Hollywood puts out on the regular, believe me, Bollywood does not have a claim on making some of the worst films ever. I've seen films from all over the world, from many different countries, and you're going to find some good, some bad in ALL of them. And, heck,people see the same actors/actresses in Hollywood films all the time too--Tom Cruise, Sandra Bullock,Seth Rogen, Will Smith---that's nothing new or unique to any country with the population to substain a thriving film industry.

First, check out some films from director Ram Gopal Varma--his films tend to be way more gritty and realistic than the usual Bollywood stuff---see SATYA,COMPANY,D:UNDERWORLD BADSHAH,for example---they're all off the hook in terms of quality---I mean, his films tend to be very good, that is. I suggest you start with those---they're definitely worth it.

I also love the dance scenes,especially if they're creative and really good (or clearly hip-hop influenced) because I grew up on musicals, so I always thought they were cool as hell, and still do---they're the most fun part of a Bollywood film--besides the actual action and plot, that is.



I'm gonna have to just go in for the kill because it seems like some of you people don't pay any attention when watching a film.

1. The title is explained in the first couple of minutes in the movie.

2. It's explained clearly that "kites" is referring to someone who may be soaring in the wind but someone else is always holding the string.

3. I don't know anything about India but in Latin American countries it is very common to say something like "Lo trae como papalote" roughly translated to "She has him like a kite". Meaning that she does as she pleases with him since she has the strings. It's the exact same concept of a "puppet on strings" for the English speakers.

4. This is EXACTLY how the four main characters interact. At first it is Jay and Natasha who are playing with the two Indian siblings and after when they decide to flee, they realize they are now the Kites/Puppets with strings attached to the other people who are manipulating their fate because they have so much control over them.

So maybe use your imagination and pay attention before b!tching about Sh!t as usual.