As long as the characters are different there is no issue of typecasting. His work with Bhansali has him playing a different character each time. Ram, Bajirao, Khilji are all completely different characters. On top of that his last two films are Simbaa and Gully Boy. One is a pot boiler masala film. The other being the best film and best performance of his career.
What im thinking is that even though the character he play are often different but he somehow always bring same emotion even if that charcater not supposed to.. In that area, Ranveer Singh kinda fails cuz hebis full of energy always even if his charcater doesnt need it
@@freddievuite1398 disagree. He was restrained in Lootera and Gully Boy. Theatrical and intense in the Bhansali films as was the requirement for those films.
The best performance of him was lootera I believe than his bhansali zone or gully and dildhadak nee do movies in lootera he was composed perfect pitch of voice and a lovely character
It's like srks strength is romance salmans strength is action masala films same way Ranveer has done well in historical movies and tbh I'm fine seeing him in historical movies as he has given great performances but also I can't wait for 83.
Yea I guess that’s a good argument…and I liked him both in Bajirao and Padmaavat. It’s just that I think he has the potential to do something totally different, eg: SRK in Swades..
@@Filmanter yeah that would prove how good he is the way srk did a veer zaara and swades perfectly in 2004 looking forward to his upcoming films especially 83
What do you mean with strength? Acting or genre of the movie or box office? If do you mean acting, Definitely the strength of SRK is characters that are bad, Don, Darr, Baazigar, etc not romance characters. About Ranveer I think that yes gus strength is historical movies, about Salman is just box office and yes his strength in that is masala movies.
@@SD-eo8bx what I mean in strength is srk has proved time and time again he is the king of romance so afcourse it is one of his big strengths but I agree with you even negative roles are something that really suit him
i dont know why SRK became biggest star in India.. when all ge did is romance movies with his friends yash chopra nd kjo.. even amitab became famous for playing macho mard in 70s.. if getting typecasted is recipe for super stardom.. ranveer is doing just that
Yep valid argument, but look at it from the “actor” perspective. Even SRK started raising many eyebrows with his acting performances only when he distanced himself from the formulaic movies that he had become synonymous with. Swades, Chak De and MNIK are widely considered to be some of his most prolific ‘acting’ performances, and none of them were the traditional SRK star-oriented movies..
![[UNCUT] "บอสณวัฒน์" แฉ! แหล่งซุกเงินแก๊งบอส ขยันผิดที่ไม่กี่ปีก็เข้าคุก l คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ l17ต.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BL56qIfXYZM/mqdefault.jpg)
As long as the characters are different there is no issue of typecasting. His work with Bhansali has him playing a different character each time. Ram, Bajirao, Khilji are all completely different characters. On top of that his last two films are Simbaa and Gully Boy. One is a pot boiler masala film. The other being the best film and best performance of his career.
What im thinking is that even though the character he play are often different but he somehow always bring same emotion even if that charcater not supposed to.. In that area, Ranveer Singh kinda fails cuz hebis full of energy always even if his charcater doesnt need it
@@freddievuite1398 disagree. He was restrained in Lootera and Gully Boy. Theatrical and intense in the Bhansali films as was the requirement for those films.
Are you sure Ram Leela was a period film?
It seemed to be set in present but with Bhansali's touch, like Guzaarish and Saawariya
Definitely not a period film you’re right…but it was treated like one I guess
The best performance of him was lootera I believe than his bhansali zone or gully and dildhadak nee do movies in lootera he was composed perfect pitch of voice and a lovely character
It's like srks strength is romance salmans strength is action masala films same way Ranveer has done well in historical movies and tbh I'm fine seeing him in historical movies as he has given great performances but also I can't wait for 83.
Yea I guess that’s a good argument…and I liked him both in Bajirao and Padmaavat. It’s just that I think he has the potential to do something totally different, eg: SRK in Swades..
@@Filmanter yeah that would prove how good he is the way srk did a veer zaara and swades perfectly in 2004 looking forward to his upcoming films especially 83
What do you mean with strength? Acting or genre of the movie or box office? If do you mean acting, Definitely the strength of SRK is characters that are bad, Don, Darr, Baazigar, etc not romance characters. About Ranveer I think that yes gus strength is historical movies, about Salman is just box office and yes his strength in that is masala movies.
@@SD-eo8bx what I mean in strength is srk has proved time and time again he is the king of romance so afcourse it is one of his big strengths but I agree with you even negative roles are something that really suit him
@@udaykapur9778 That makes sense.
i like it
Why u so Underrated ??
I hope our family grows with time..
Bro please do video on SRK top 5 performances
i dont know why SRK became biggest star in India.. when all ge did is romance movies with his friends yash chopra nd kjo.. even amitab became famous for playing macho mard in 70s.. if getting typecasted is recipe for super stardom.. ranveer is doing just that
Yep valid argument, but look at it from the “actor” perspective. Even SRK started raising many eyebrows with his acting performances only when he distanced himself from the formulaic movies that he had become synonymous with. Swades, Chak De and MNIK are widely considered to be some of his most prolific ‘acting’ performances, and none of them were the traditional SRK star-oriented movies..
Look at the beginning of his career and you will know why