Oh god this bitchy reporter, she thinks she is smart only for her English which is shit like her voice. Malikha slammed this bitch in an interview - th-cam.com/video/kHSikgTOz70/w-d-xo.html Though well said Jim!
He was wrong. All she did was praise the series for not reducing the character to stereotypes and invited Arjun to talk more about his portrayal. Jim got offended for what reason?
Why does that mean he has to be in Hollywood? For a Western industry, it's not like Hollywood has been the most progressive either (breeding and keeping quiet generations of misogyny and abuse, only recently focusing on minority portrayals for the sake of minorities). Of course, it's far ahead of Bollywood in terms of egalitarianism and liberal ideas, but isn't that a reason for him to stay in Bollywood and work alongside the many others (without a major spotlight) who also believe in changing the backwards structures of the Indian industry from within?
@@mehasrivastav3476 Hollywood is where the nepotism starts and finishes. As for it being egalitarian and liberal that is just as a soft power to gain access to overseas markets and dominate other cultures whilst appropriating others' cultures. Jim is just part of that Agenda and nothing more. He looks very Jewish to me and so it seems he has been placed in Bollywood to do the necessary.
Bollywood is a Hindi speaking community jim major issue is he cant speak good hindi his a descent actor par angrezi bakchodi hi kash Indian cinema hota.
Oh god this bitchy reporter, she thinks she is smart only for her English which is shit like her voice. Malikha slammed this bitch in an interview - th-cam.com/video/kHSikgTOz70/w-d-xo.html Though well said Jim!
@@gaganbisht849 And what, pray, makes you think you can when I apparently cannot? Jim has lived in India, US, and Australia. In fact, I have lived in all three countries so I know a thing or two about those accents. And his accent sounds manufactured. I don't see why that is surprising.
@@acidicascetic or maybe his accent sounds so real even if it's fake. Like when i watched Neeraja not even for a single moment he made me realize that Arabic is not his language. So, faking of accent should be done by only those individuals who can make it sound actually real. Not by people like this irritating host!
This wasn't slapstick. Anyway, what is he giving back? He clearly did not listen to her question, because she was praising the series for not reducing the character to typical stereotypes. He got offended for no reason. Very silly indeed.
Kudos to Jim. We tend reduce complexities of a character and simplify it to make it palatable. Worst when we give excuses in flowery language to cover up the gaffe than politely admitting the mistake
@@acidicascetic frankly even I cannot understand why everyone is so offended. The interviewer was trying to draw a clear contrast between Bollywood's stereotyping of gay men vs Arjun Mathur's very practical portrayal of a homosexual man
A Persian Farsi legend Jim sarbh sir I salute you n your Farsi community, we feel proud to have persian living in india ... I have so much respect your community and religion alongside with your culture sir I hope that Zoroastrianism spread more n we see more templs in India latter on
I don't think the interviewer targeted only his sexuality . But she rather wanted to ask Arjun about his opinions about Bollywood's portrayal about Homosexual characters.
I think he was just trying to put himself on a higher moral ground of intellect.... the question apart from her high pitch and a little irritating voice was pretty decent and respectful to the character.
I'm aghast to see the reactions....this man is a fantastic actor and one can sense the level of maturity he has ....we need to look into ourselves as a society bcuz we Indians get judgemental and pass a verdict about anything and anyone to soon.
Jim’s portrayal of a homosexual man in Padmaavat was commendable! His acceptance as a heterosexual character in the show was indeed difficult for me when I started watching Made in Heaven. Malik Kafur was a finely done character and so was Adil Khanna!
Jim, in the simple but profound words of your colleague in "Made in Heaven": Be wise. Be kind. I've noticed Jim take this unnecessarily aggressive stance often in interviews, which almost seems to come from a place of perceived moral or intellectual superiority. His demeanor is very different with people in positions of greater power. The interviewer could've chosen her words more carefully (and it appeared to be a case of nerves more than anything else), but she VERY clearly had no intention to insult gay people in any way. Jim's reaction was unnecessarily defensive and in fact, divisive - don't "make" someone wrong when they're actually probably an ally. There are other ways to educate on the nuances of communication without pulling faces. Making someone feel small is not wise. Making someone feel ignorant is not kind. It only reveals your lack of compassion and childish desire to assert your perceived superiority.
You say you have watched his interviews and have noticed his sense of superiority. Then you must've also noticed that he is a very intelligent person and don't you think a smart, sophisticated person deserves better questions? The point isn't that she didn't intend to insult gay people. The point is why she had to go straight to that character's sexuality and choose that as her first question and thus focusing attention on this particular subject. And how do you justify her reply after Jim's comment? It really didn't make any sense and to me, it was more like babbling than a convincing explanation. It's not just about this interview and this particular interviewer. It's about media people in general who don't bother to come up with more mature and thoughtful questions. I mean is it an obligation to be nice to everyone and sugarcoat everything all the time?
@@nilen8676 Hi Nile - thanks for joining the discussion and sharing your perspective! In the India I know, her question - or least the intention behind it - is incredibly relevant. This character was groundbreaking in the way it went far beyond the usual gay stereotypes typically portrayed on screen. It was probably THE most interesting thing about the series - without this sensitive and nuanced portrayal, I for one would've found the series fairly vapid. Yes, there were interesting shades of grey in every character, yes the series discussed social issues - but really, nothing new there. So then why would you NOT focus your attention on the most interesting, groundbreaking thing about the series? It's not like she said "how did you feel about portraying a gay character and weren't you afraid of being typecast"... it was literally about the fact that this was a refreshingly new portrayal and let's dig into that. Yes, she could have phrased it better, but the intention was quite obvious. Her reply was nervous babble - partly because she was probably thrown by Jim's overly aggressive reaction. But I believe her when she says there was a discussion about whether or not to give away much about the actual complexities of the character before the release of the series. You want to let it dawn on the audience versus fully dissecting the frog. Lastly OF COURSE we would love for every media person to come up with the most sensitively, nuanced, thoughtfully phrased, polished to perfection questions. But guess what. The media is just another industry. There are people who've had privileged schooling and exposure and are intellectually gifted with the luxury to explore and build upon their gifts, unburdened by daily struggles. And on the other end of the spectrum are those for whom the daily struggles are all-consuming, who do not have the exposure or access of the so-called elite, even if they have the intellectual gifts. The privileged group is a mere 1% - not just in media, but in the country. Let us not alienate, is my point. Let the so-called sophisticated, intelligent section have more empathy and understanding for the 99% they tend to look down on with contempt - and instead, seek to understand through dialogue. To share perspective with kindness and humility. And to listen genuinely, because their own perspective probably needs some shifting as well. As it did in this case - given the anchor's question was perfectly valid!
What was his perspective? What was wrong with the question? In fact she was praising the series for NOT reducing the character to homosexual stereotypes. Jim's reaction made no sense.
I think the interviewer handled the situation quite well. She asked the question based on the promo where the filmmakers chose to focus on the sexuality of one of the two protagonists (for sensation obviously), so how is she supposed to know about his 'motivations' when it was not covered in the trailer?
The show wasn't came on air when the interviewer asked this question. It was just a promotion for the new launch which will going to be released soon. And The show was not particular about homosexual also. So you can't question about only homosexuality when you haven't seen the series. These were the reasons Jim was offended. If the show was released then it would not have the problem also it was a layered character where homesexuallity was a part but not totally based on it.
@@anushreekale4125 The show isn't particularly about homosexuality but that's what the promos focused on with regard to Varun's character, so it makes sense the interviewer asked that question to him. You're only going to ask questions about things the teaser or trailer focuses on. She even explained that they had a discussion bts where they decided that they'll leave it to the audiences to discover the depth of the character Varun is playing on the show, that they didn't want to spoil it for anyone.
I think she was trying to frame the question differently but it came out all wrong.. her heart was in the right place... Not related but was anyone else distracted by Jim's sexy neck and chest peeking out of his shirt
I have seen All the episodes of Made in Heaven '.Arjun is so sensual and played his character with such a fineness .I like the songs in these series especially the Urdu ones.Sametime Jimmy did his role flawlessly. I LIKE the elegance and calmness of his character.I think he is the innocent one.
I don't understand why media portrays everything that Bollywood industry people do in a negative manner. Jim was very polite and spoke what he felt. He was not 'angry' with the interviewer. C'mon!
I don't find anything wrong with the question. The question was about Arjun's brilliant portrayal of a homosexual man vs Bollywood's highly dramatized and impractical stereotyping of gay men. What's there to take offence in this case? No doubt the character has many complexities to it but the interviewer is only asking questions based on what she saw in the trailer. To find out and understand those complexities, one would need to watch the entire series.
Interviewer assumes that playing a homo-sexual character is some super tough thing....as if homosexual men have some super complex ('not normal') reactions going on within them unlike their hetero-sexual counterpart (which is 'normal'). Also, it didn't help that it was her very first question...like nothing else about the series mattered. So it is pretty offensive. and very narrow minded question.
I agree - this for me was overreaction and just being too sensitive. I get the need to 'normalise' it and this could easily have been a 'you play a gujarati, or you play a rich person or any aspect of the character and explore that' - why does there have to be so many eyebrows and backlash for the woman who asked the question? You create characters and give them sexual orientation on screen because you know and want the audience to be fascinated with it, in addition to other aspects of the character. But you don't want the press / interviewer to be fascinated with it?
He had a great response to an entirely insensitive question by dumb dumb reporter. Why is it that people can’t move forward from human sexuality, it is so intriguing to so many yet they approach their ignorance in such a terrible way. Great job Jim, these are the types of responses stupid people deserve.
Loved each character in this series. Specially these two men. Vulnerable side of men so beautifully put together. Probably because it was written by women. Shobitha Rockstar Arjun Mathur awesome actor n character Jim Sharb I believe is a blessing for the industry. Need more characters like them.👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I was in this audience. He was savage and I wanted to stand up and cheer. But well... I was print media, so I had some amount of decorum to maintain. I felt a bit bad for the girl because she probably didn't write the question but that was just such a burrrrn! 🤭
This is what happens when interviewer try to be over smart and not respecting the guest’s reply- idiot she was. Well done Jim and it was very sarcastic!
No I think the question was valid, she just pointed out that in the past homosexuals have been shown in a mocking and caricaturish way, this character was presented in a normalised way and how did you handle that. I think it was a very valid question and I would personally applaud the director, casting and the actor to have pulled it off so well. Jim actually responded very defensively and made a big deal out of a question that sounded complementary.
More then sarcastic or angry , he was rather calm polite and in proper sense . .. before he spoke unlike the anchor who was in shock till end where she repeated "hetrosexual" .
Correction : He was neither angry nor sarcastic, but pretty direct and polite!
lol exactly
yes, so true Isha...I think he answered amazingly...that question was truly weird and good he disagreed straight off
"Well, it was really difficult playing a heterosexual male, you know." That's not direct..... that's sarcasm dear!!
Oh god this bitchy reporter, she thinks she is smart only for her English which is shit like her voice. Malikha slammed this bitch in an interview - th-cam.com/video/kHSikgTOz70/w-d-xo.html
Though well said Jim!
He was wrong. All she did was praise the series for not reducing the character to stereotypes and invited Arjun to talk more about his portrayal. Jim got offended for what reason?
"Well, it was really difficult playing a heterosexual male, you know." Haha, savage Jim.
Does this dude not realize hes in India. That shit dont fly here. No one likes gandu shit on TV. That's a damn fact.
@@AmanSingh-wb5tp dude shut up
He wasn't angry for God's sake! He was just telling what he felt. In a very polite manner.
Sarcasm is not polite. Ever.
@@vizikachoudhary7937 He was quite direct, not sarcastic
@@vineetagoel792, his reply was pure sarcasm when she came to him. And, who said sarcasm can't be direct?
He looked pissed. Politely.
Jim should’ve been in Hollywood. He’s too mature for Bollywood lmao.
Why does that mean he has to be in Hollywood? For a Western industry, it's not like Hollywood has been the most progressive either (breeding and keeping quiet generations of misogyny and abuse, only recently focusing on minority portrayals for the sake of minorities). Of course, it's far ahead of Bollywood in terms of egalitarianism and liberal ideas, but isn't that a reason for him to stay in Bollywood and work alongside the many others (without a major spotlight) who also believe in changing the backwards structures of the Indian industry from within?
@@mehasrivastav3476 Couldn't agree more.
@@mehasrivastav3476 Hollywood is where the nepotism starts and finishes. As for it being egalitarian and liberal that is just as a soft power to gain access to overseas markets and dominate other cultures whilst appropriating others' cultures. Jim is just part of that Agenda and nothing more. He looks very Jewish to me and so it seems he has been placed in Bollywood to do the necessary.
Bollywood is shit but is still full of mature people too, so put your sarcasm in your ass
Stop being a stupid liberal. Thu née bathukulu, epudu chudu manalni maname takkuva chesukovatam.
He's not angry he very intelligently dealt with the insensitive questions asked by the reporter.
Jim is being underused by bollywood , he has a great potential for European cinema
Bollywood is a Hindi speaking community jim major issue is he cant speak good hindi his a descent actor par angrezi bakchodi hi kash Indian cinema hota.
European cinema is bullshit. Either hollywood or bollywood, these make better movies.
@@priya30081 You clearly haven't watched enough Europeans films, otherwise you wouldn't say that so confidently.
Not European 🤣 I'd say he's perfect for Hollywood. He's truly exotic.
Tu badaa European Cinema ka casting director hai
His reply won my heart, kidney and liver.
same bhai same 😂
De de ussko 😝
I'm second handedly embarrassed. Kudos to Jim for being his candid self.
The way the anchor handled the situation speaks volumes of her experience in the field. Also, Jim raised a valid point too.
I keep listening to Jim's interviews REPEATEDLY. Someone has some substance than just airport looks, six pack etc. Jim is ❤️🔥
Jim is parsi but he looks more Israeli tbh
Tf? Matlab kuch bhi?
Like what 😅
@@creativeschmuck8132 Like Adam Sandler
@@creativeschmuck8132 Lmaoo yeah he does, I agree
Its the 👃
Jim nailed it and killed it! Loved his response to mindless, clueless, discriminating, stereotyped question!
Jim is very underrated actor...i am fan of his acting.
Jim you're beyond Bollywood. I love your response.
That interviewer was soooooooooo irritating
Oh god this bitchy reporter, she thinks she is smart only for her English which is shit like her voice. Malikha slammed this bitch in an interview - th-cam.com/video/kHSikgTOz70/w-d-xo.html
Though well said Jim!
Oh God I thought you were a feminist
Well said neha that girl was so bitchy
I think I know the reporter, I've dated her cousin, that shrill shrieky voice, that's Freishia Bomanbehram
Love Jim Sarbh for his answer and prompt and apt response!!! He’s my hero now!!!
""Jim Sarbh gives a FITTING and BADASS reply to a HYPOCRITICAL and OVERSMART anchor"
There, i fixed it. You're welcome.
Fitting, yes. Badass, not so much.
My eyes were glued on him throughout ❤
Vapan Serma
Because why not!😂
So were mine.. haha!
I loved Jim sarabh,he really went for it and kudos to him,I don't know when we will shift the centre of our conversations to relevant things
Man his response wasn’t sarcastic.
That’s king behaviour 👑
Give some big budget films to JIM, some meaningful role, character for, he's genius in acting 🇵🇰
@Faisal A Malik 'meaningful *role'.
Stop this exaggeration
3:03 I heard the laugh of Ravan's sister !
!!!! I thought Dolly Bindra's sister!!
@@littlebitofthisandthat9042 haha they all are family!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
Jim Sarbh's answer is the only reason I liked this video
If you liked his answer, then
don't hit like for the video.
Why the hell is she so loud? 😳
Jyothi Jagadish exactly 😓
Ya I agree I had to reduce the volume when reported talks
That's a strategy to get your point across.
I fell in love with him all over again
The anchor's fake accent, sharp pitch & redundancy are so irritating. Specially BIGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Where does Jim get his accent from? Come on, they're all faking it, trying to make it. :)
@@acidicascetic nah he actually lived in tons of countries, got his degrees abroad, so at least he has a genuine reason behind his accent
@@acidicascetic Jim's accent is not fake at all..! U can't even differentiate between real and fake accentsm
@@gaganbisht849 And what, pray, makes you think you can when I apparently cannot? Jim has lived in India, US, and Australia. In fact, I have lived in all three countries so I know a thing or two about those accents. And his accent sounds manufactured. I don't see why that is surprising.
@@acidicascetic or maybe his accent sounds so real even if it's fake. Like when i watched Neeraja not even for a single moment he made me realize that Arabic is not his language. So, faking of accent should be done by only those individuals who can make it sound actually real. Not by people like this irritating host!
The worse thing an interviewer can do is not let the interviewe speak
Jim is a phenomenal actor and a wonderful human being. The interviewer on the hand is loud as hell.
The reason I like him.. Witty and Sharp, and knows how to give it back the slapstick to those who deserves.
This wasn't slapstick. Anyway, what is he giving back? He clearly did not listen to her question, because she was praising the series for not reducing the character to typical stereotypes. He got offended for no reason. Very silly indeed.
Kudos to Jim. We tend reduce complexities of a character and simplify it to make it palatable. Worst when we give excuses in flowery language to cover up the gaffe than politely admitting the mistake
What was the mistake, specifically?
@@acidicascetic frankly even I cannot understand why everyone is so offended. The interviewer was trying to draw a clear contrast between Bollywood's stereotyping of gay men vs Arjun Mathur's very practical portrayal of a homosexual man
@@tamasapatra397 yeah I feel she didn’t ask a offensive question either
A Persian Farsi legend Jim sarbh sir I salute you n your Farsi community, we feel proud to have persian living in india ... I have so much respect your community and religion alongside with your culture sir I hope that Zoroastrianism spread more n we see more templs in India latter on
Jim is a very talented actor but he is not the last Parsi. There are several Parsi people in India.
The interviewer is really irritating. Such a shrieky voice already and still talking loudly on top of it trying to overpower Jim 's point of view.
He is answering politely. And yes, maybe the writers of Bollywood Bubble need to work on their title writing skills
Does Jim have any audiobook??? His voice ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Damnnn
Yeah his voice is like a cup of coffee in the morning 😇😇
@@srishti1322 it's just like having sex with him
I don't think the interviewer targeted only his sexuality . But she rather wanted to ask Arjun about his opinions about Bollywood's portrayal about Homosexual characters.
I feel the same. I am unable to understand what irked Jim.
Tamasa Patra I think he’s gay that’s why he felt insecure
I think he was just trying to put himself on a higher moral ground of intellect.... the question apart from her high pitch and a little irritating voice was pretty decent and respectful to the character.
Shruti Pandey 100% it was just unnecessary
The interviewer should have had framed her question better. The way she explained the question was more worse.
I'm aghast to see the reactions....this man is a fantastic actor and one can sense the level of maturity he has ....we need to look into ourselves as a society bcuz we Indians get judgemental and pass a verdict about anything and anyone to soon.
Jim’s portrayal of a homosexual man in Padmaavat was commendable!
His acceptance as a heterosexual character in the show was indeed difficult for me when I started watching Made in Heaven.
Malik Kafur was a finely done character and so was Adil Khanna!
Jim is my spirit animal
Came here after watching mallika dua's story
Me too
Mallika dua sucks
Mee to
Pratham Bhatia
Thankyou! You said it! YES!
What story? Link?
This is not saying "getting angry" ...its called being realistic reasonable logical. #BangOnJ
Jim, in the simple but profound words of your colleague in "Made in Heaven": Be wise. Be kind.
I've noticed Jim take this unnecessarily aggressive stance often in interviews, which almost seems to come from a place of perceived moral or intellectual superiority. His demeanor is very different with people in positions of greater power.
The interviewer could've chosen her words more carefully (and it appeared to be a case of nerves more than anything else), but she VERY clearly had no intention to insult gay people in any way. Jim's reaction was unnecessarily defensive and in fact, divisive - don't "make" someone wrong when they're actually probably an ally. There are other ways to educate on the nuances of communication without pulling faces.
Making someone feel small is not wise. Making someone feel ignorant is not kind. It only reveals your lack of compassion and childish desire to assert your perceived superiority.
I had the same thoughts but you wrote them better.
You say you have watched his interviews and have noticed his sense of superiority. Then you must've also noticed that he is a very intelligent person and don't you think a smart, sophisticated person deserves better questions? The point isn't that she didn't intend to insult gay people. The point is why she had to go straight to that character's sexuality and choose that as her first question and thus focusing attention on this particular subject. And how do you justify her reply after Jim's comment? It really didn't make any sense and to me, it was more like babbling than a convincing explanation. It's not just about this interview and this particular interviewer. It's about media people in general who don't bother to come up with more mature and thoughtful questions. I mean is it an obligation to be nice to everyone and sugarcoat everything all the time?
@@nilen8676 Hi Nile - thanks for joining the discussion and sharing your perspective!
In the India I know, her question - or least the intention behind it - is incredibly relevant. This character was groundbreaking in the way it went far beyond the usual gay stereotypes typically portrayed on screen. It was probably THE most interesting thing about the series - without this sensitive and nuanced portrayal, I for one would've found the series fairly vapid. Yes, there were interesting shades of grey in every character, yes the series discussed social issues - but really, nothing new there.
So then why would you NOT focus your attention on the most interesting, groundbreaking thing about the series?
It's not like she said "how did you feel about portraying a gay character and weren't you afraid of being typecast"... it was literally about the fact that this was a refreshingly new portrayal and let's dig into that. Yes, she could have phrased it better, but the intention was quite obvious.
Her reply was nervous babble - partly because she was probably thrown by Jim's overly aggressive reaction. But I believe her when she says there was a discussion about whether or not to give away much about the actual complexities of the character before the release of the series. You want to let it dawn on the audience versus fully dissecting the frog.
Lastly OF COURSE we would love for every media person to come up with the most sensitively, nuanced, thoughtfully phrased, polished to perfection questions. But guess what. The media is just another industry. There are people who've had privileged schooling and exposure and are intellectually gifted with the luxury to explore and build upon their gifts, unburdened by daily struggles. And on the other end of the spectrum are those for whom the daily struggles are all-consuming, who do not have the exposure or access of the so-called elite, even if they have the intellectual gifts. The privileged group is a mere 1% - not just in media, but in the country. Let us not alienate, is my point. Let the so-called sophisticated, intelligent section have more empathy and understanding for the 99% they tend to look down on with contempt - and instead, seek to understand through dialogue. To share perspective with kindness and humility. And to listen genuinely, because their own perspective probably needs some shifting as well. As it did in this case - given the anchor's question was perfectly valid!
@@acidicascetic hey! I read your comments. Must say, you are really articulate
@@acidicascetic Thank you for this. Jim's reaction comes across as trying too hard to be holier-than-thou, though it's probably not his intent.
Kudos to the journalist who takes it sporting. I like her professionalism.
Sarbh talks like he is from a different planet If he chooses deliberately this kind of characters he should know he should face such questions
Wow awesome Jim I loved your spontaneousness
Jim's perspective is too wise for bollywood
What was his perspective? What was wrong with the question? In fact she was praising the series for NOT reducing the character to homosexual stereotypes. Jim's reaction made no sense.
" i did not write the questions" . So why are we hearing this irritating voice. " good for them for roasting her so well.
I LOVEEE JIM. THIS IS HIM AND HE IS SO BEAUTIFUL INSIDE OUT 😌
I think the interviewer handled the situation quite well. She asked the question based on the promo where the filmmakers chose to focus on the sexuality of one of the two protagonists (for sensation obviously), so how is she supposed to know about his 'motivations' when it was not covered in the trailer?
Anuj Pramanik true true, i think the question was just phrased a little awkwardly
It is about framing a question and again not making it worse when explaining. A quality an interviewer must have
The show wasn't came on air when the interviewer asked this question. It was just a promotion for the new launch which will going to be released soon. And The show was not particular about homosexual also. So you can't question about only homosexuality when you haven't seen the series. These were the reasons Jim was offended. If the show was released then it would not have the problem also it was a layered character where homesexuallity was a part but not totally based on it.
@@anushreekale4125 The show isn't particularly about homosexuality but that's what the promos focused on with regard to Varun's character, so it makes sense the interviewer asked that question to him. You're only going to ask questions about things the teaser or trailer focuses on. She even explained that they had a discussion bts where they decided that they'll leave it to the audiences to discover the depth of the character Varun is playing on the show, that they didn't want to spoil it for anyone.
she is too loud and speaking more than the ones she is asking. eww
I think she was trying to frame the question differently but it came out all wrong.. her heart was in the right place... Not related but was anyone else distracted by Jim's sexy neck and chest peeking out of his shirt
Yes. Also. I'm turned on by your comment.
Not at all. When she explained the question, it showed her true observation. That is not how a professional interviewer should be.
I have seen All the episodes of Made in Heaven '.Arjun is so sensual and played his character with such a fineness .I like the songs in these series especially the Urdu ones.Sametime Jimmy did his role flawlessly. I LIKE the elegance and calmness of his character.I think he is the innocent one.
Such a savage reply... No where sarcastic and angry
I don't understand why media portrays everything that Bollywood industry people do in a negative manner. Jim was very polite and spoke what he felt. He was not 'angry' with the interviewer.
C'mon!
I don't find anything wrong with the question. The question was about Arjun's brilliant portrayal of a homosexual man vs Bollywood's highly dramatized and impractical stereotyping of gay men. What's there to take offence in this case? No doubt the character has many complexities to it but the interviewer is only asking questions based on what she saw in the trailer. To find out and understand those complexities, one would need to watch the entire series.
Interviewer assumes that playing a homo-sexual character is some super tough thing....as if homosexual men have some super complex ('not normal') reactions going on within them unlike their hetero-sexual counterpart (which is 'normal'). Also, it didn't help that it was her very first question...like nothing else about the series mattered.
So it is pretty offensive. and very narrow minded question.
I agree - this for me was overreaction and just being too sensitive. I get the need to 'normalise' it and this could easily have been a 'you play a gujarati, or you play a rich person or any aspect of the character and explore that' - why does there have to be so many eyebrows and backlash for the woman who asked the question? You create characters and give them sexual orientation on screen because you know and want the audience to be fascinated with it, in addition to other aspects of the character. But you don't want the press / interviewer to be fascinated with it?
He had a great response to an entirely insensitive question by dumb dumb reporter. Why is it that people can’t move forward from human sexuality, it is so intriguing to so many yet they approach their ignorance in such a terrible way. Great job Jim, these are the types of responses stupid people deserve.
I loved his take on it.
0:49 his expressions 🤣🤣🤣
😝😝😝😂😂😂
Jim is exceptional actor 💓
Trust Jim to be the gem that he always is.
Very smart and needed response !
Loved the series.... Please come out with season 2
Came here after Son Of Abish, and this is damn cute!
The lady just won't let them speak. She keeps interrupting.
Oh my God! That was one reply Jim ❤
He is just so cool,love him 😍
he is so good
the way jim talks
I can see why Jim would be offended with the question, but after her explanation, he could have been a bit nicer.
I loved him for that
This mam is beyond bollywood, his thought process are very forward for conservative indian thinking!
Jim deserve to be in hollywood
Jim gave her good. So happy to hear it.
he wasn't angry, he was annoyed :D
Loved each character in this series. Specially these two men. Vulnerable side of men so beautifully put together. Probably because it was written by women.
Shobitha Rockstar
Arjun Mathur awesome actor n character
Jim Sharb I believe is a blessing for the industry.
Need more characters like them.👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
3:01 nailed it
Jim ! He rocked !! Wow man
I loveeeee this guyyy
Jim u just killed her bro wid ur savage reply hatsoff
3:10 Jim's expression is like.. Abe bolne de naa 🤣
After she offered her explanation he could have been a bit gracious about it.
Jim sarbh's reply on heterosexual character was awsm!
AREE RELAX .. HES NOT.ANGRY .. HE MADE HIS POINT . CLEARLY AND POLITELY . AND THATS HOW IT SHOUJD BE .
Jim is so handsome 😍😍
Respect sir, Jim Sarbh ❤
He is amazing
3:03 i got scared by that lady's laugh.....sooo irritating.....
Even Jim looks sooo irritated by this lady at 3:10
I think I'm in love with Jim. ❤️
It's about time ...well said Jim...
Love his witt
3:03 non professional interviewers.
Jim ❤️❤️❤️❤️
I was in this audience. He was savage and I wanted to stand up and cheer. But well... I was print media, so I had some amount of decorum to maintain. I felt a bit bad for the girl because she probably didn't write the question but that was just such a burrrrn! 🤭
This is what happens when interviewer try to be over smart and not respecting the guest’s reply- idiot she was. Well done Jim and it was very sarcastic!
Jim, I love you for this answer. Regardless of people calling you elitist or having superiority complex, you nailed it.
No I think the question was valid, she just pointed out that in the past homosexuals have been shown in a mocking and caricaturish way, this character was presented in a normalised way and how did you handle that. I think it was a very valid question and I would personally applaud the director, casting and the actor to have pulled it off so well. Jim actually responded very defensively and made a big deal out of a question that sounded complementary.
I love Jim Sarbh
Mahn...jim is lit...whether it be neerja, or Raabta..or padmaavat or sanju...its superb
Well done Jim 👍
Thats Savage n brilliant!
Jim you are world class
More then sarcastic or angry , he was rather calm polite and in proper sense . .. before he spoke unlike the anchor who was in shock till end where she repeated "hetrosexual" .