Monday Morning Questions! With a Question for YOU! How Many People Can You Love?

Angie and Niki and I started going back and forth on the Wednesday post last week about whether it is possible to be a fan of multiple people/sports teams at once.  Which began to make me realize that there might be multiple ways of being fans.  And I am curious, out of the 3 categories I am thinking of, which you might identify for yourself.  Oh, and this is also the weekly post to bring up any general discussion topics you might want to talk about!

This is where you can ask anything from the personal (“what is your sports team?”) to the specific (“what are the sports teams in India?”) to the general discussion (“how is sports fandom different in the US versus India versus the UK and so on and so on?”)

The only rule is, you have to let me answer first!  Because that way I can set the tone of the discussion.  But please jump in and join the conversation once I have started it off with my answer.

 

Now, my question for you.  Which of these descriptions best fits you?

1.1. In Indian film/sports/American film/TV/Anything, there is only one person/team that you care about and you cannot manage to care about anything else even when you try.  So, for instance, someone who is a Shahrukh fan but cannot bring themselves to be interested in or care about Hindi film beyond Shahrukh.

 

2.  There is that one true love in your life in terms of sports/Hindi film/etc., but you can also care about and enjoy the greater system around them.  So, for instance, someone who is a fan of the Cubs, but can also enjoy just watching baseball.

 

3.  You are able to hold multiple equal loves in your heart in sports/film/everything.  So, root for many teams equally, follow many actors equally, and so on.

 

Personally, I am a strong 2 in terms of film fandom.  I love my SRK, but I also love Salman and Aamir to a lessor degree and in a very different way.  And I can love Nagarjuna and Madhavan and Nivin too.  But overall SRK reigns triumphant forever and ever and no one else can ever come close.

But then in sports, I am a strong 1.  The idea of rooting for a not-Chicago team is just unimaginable to me.  What is the point of sports if Chicago is not playing?

 

How about you?  Are you a “one true love, but I can care about other people” kind of person, or a polyamorous “I just keep falling in love” kind of person, or a “one true love and everything else is pointless” kind of person?

Advertisements

73 thoughts on “Monday Morning Questions! With a Question for YOU! How Many People Can You Love?

  1. I’ve been a part of several fandoms down the decades. In terms of individuals, I’ve been in the fandoms of various cricketers from all over. With actors, I usually have an OMG this actor exists moment and then I watch all their films and read up about them and follow their pap streams for a while and then that fades and I usually end up following their films as they release but with much less intensity. Strongly indian cricket fan and cricket lore fan till IPL, had a F1 fandom period for a while, had a Russian thing since Tatu released their maiden album and that’s led to me learning about the entire country beyond what general history taught me and being in the Putin fandom ever since (run a page plus two fb groups about the guy)

    Tv fandoms are a lot- TWD, GoT, FRIENDS, Westworld, Stranger Things and of these I’ve explored the GoT fandom the most.

    Oh and there’s Bahubali and Prabhas fandoms too.

    I guess I’m more of a love it gotta learn all about and then ease off a bit kind of a fandom person.

    Liked by 1 person

    • So, brief passionate affairs kind of thing? I used to be kind of like that, but in really not cool fandoms. I went from Fred Astaire to Gene Kelly to Cary Grant. And then a brief Frankie Avalon period. Then just generally filling in the gaps, tried everything in American film before 1964 to see what I liked. And then when I was 19 I found Shahrukh and there was something different. I still go through phases, I did Hong Kong films for a while, Rocky movies, but Shahrukh is just on a whole other level then all of them. And I kind of can’t be as passionate as I was before because all my passion is in Shahrukh, so the rest of it doesn’t have as much passionate in it as it used to.

      Also, I have a really hard time with the idea of being a sports fan when you don’t have a local team! Which I know is just me, but it’s such a big part of my fandom! You move across the country , but you remain a devoted fan of the team from where you came from, or you are a fan of the team your grandfather liked, and it’s this really specific complicated unique identity. My boss has watched every single football game with his daughter since she was born, complete with dressing her in little sports fan outfits for the game, and taught her to say “Go Packers” before she was 2. Because he is an exile from Packer country in enemy territory and by golly his daughter is going to be a fan of the right team.

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 6:27 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Oh yess… They do feel like passionate flings too!

        I think I had an SRK phase around the time DDLJ came out because my mom remembers me gushing over him but I don’t have any recollection of that at all. Also never found any bollywood “hero” as attractive to feel flingy about. There were just so many cricket stars from around the globe to capture my fancy when I was growing up plus boy bands plus I was already watching enough western films and TV and somehow Indian TV was full of either Govinda films or hairy Akshay and hairy Sunil Shetty or hairy Anil Kapoor films and Amitabh Bachchan classics!! teen me in love with Backstreet Boys and Boyzone didn’t really get the feels for hairy dudes!!

        I guess the Prabhas fandom is the first true Indian actor fandom I’ve been in!! And that’s probably because I have a type IRL 😂

        Liked by 1 person

        • Welcome to Indian actor fandom! I love it because my only comparison is golden age Hollywood male star fandom, and there is a much smaller community for that!

          On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:21 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Like

        • Asmita-You & I should hang out.I am stealing WestWorld,Stranger Things,Friends, Prabhas & Baahubali from your list.Will add BlackMirror,Sherlock/Benedict Cumberbatch,Fahad Fazil & Sai Pallavi.Ditto for being ‘fan’ in the truest form for the first-time with Prabhas.

          I am a 3.Loved Madhavan & Surya-simultaneously-during college days.Until few years back,the availability of information on actors were mostly via film magazines mostly & had to wait for movies to be available on CDs/premier on TV-far less intense than the stalking on social media pages,binge-watching on streaming platforms & conversing with absolute strangers on instant chats.
          One ever lasting love that stood the test of time would be Mani Ratnam movies.Still get excited like a little girl on hearing any news about Mani Ratnam movies.
          The question I want to ask you Margret is ,have you compared the dynamics of fandom in India v/s the west.In general,the fans of an Indian actor are zealously devoted to him/her.Apart from an occasional Baahubali,the fandom in India is centered around the actors than the movies/shows.With my limited understanding of the fandom in West,I presume it is less about the stars & more about the movies/shows/content?Can you throw some light on how the two compare?

          Liked by 1 person

          • An Internet hangout counts as real, right?? 😂

            That’s a brilliant question about the nature of fandoms btw. I think Margaret might be converting to the Indian style of fandoms!!!

            Like

          • I took a seminar in college on fandom, and that ended up being the topic of my thesis. so I have ALL KINDS of info to drop on you!

            First, frustratingly, academic studies of fandom tend to focus on what we might consider “male” fandom rather than “female” fandom. “Male” fandom is more about content and puzzles and rules. Think people who learn how to speak Klingon and have elaborate theories for the end of Game of Thrones. Whereas “female” fandom is about relationships and people. Fanfic, falling in love with a movie star, that sort of thing.

            “Male” fandom doesn’t seem to exist in India, at least not for Indian content. I don’t see a lot of message boards about the “real” solution to the Ittefaq mystery or something. It’s all about the emotional connection, with a film or with a star, there is no need to bring logic into it.

            In America/the West, “female” style fandom tends to be either ignored or abused, or most often not considered “real” fandom. If you are only watching The X-Files for the relationship between Mulder and Scully, you are doing it “wrong”. Anyone who follows a TV show or movie series or band or movie star because of a personal connection is merely a “Fangirl” and that’s all.

            The studies of these types of fans tend to slant towards the psychological. For instance, “women loved the Beatles because it gave them a sexual outlet”. Or, alternatively, they are defensive, “you think because I am a woman I only love the Beatles because it gives me a sexual outlet, but I really do like the music.” There is a reluctance to own the emotional component of fandom.

            Indian film scholarship has a slightly different problem. Ashish Nandy was the most prominent person to write about fandom, and he decided from his Ivory Tower that films were melting people’s minds, keeping them complacent and stupid essentially, his most famous article is titled “Slum’s Eye View of Politics”. And it is soooooooooooooooooo STUPID! He argues that films were made by uneducated people for uneducated people, which is just blatantly false. Unless your definition of educated is “Studied overseas and only speak English”. Since the start of film, most actors and writers and directors have had at least some college, more than the vast majority of Indians, and the fans of films have been not just “slumdwellers”, but everyone except the very highest class.

            There’ve been a bunch of authors (my favorite is Lakshmi Srinivas) who argued against Nandy, primarily focused on how the audience does in fact “read” the text rather than simply accept it. That is, both in terms of star texts (the kind of persona an actor presents) and films themselves. The “uneducated masses” are capable of saying “that film was stupid” or “that actor is probably lying about this one thing, but I still love him because of that other thing”.

            Bringing it back to me, what initially intrigued me about Indian film and made me want to study the fan culture was how accepting it was of the “female” style of fandom. It’s okay to say “I love this actor”, you won’t get laughed at or thrown out of the discussion because you are letting your heart rule your head. And part of that is fandoms for Stars over and above their films, because you can have that particular connection to them.

            This has also had a massive effect on content. The films of one particular actor truly do create their own genre. In the West, fandom is very genre driven. Sci-Fi or Vampires or whatever. But in the Indian film industry, every movie of Shahrukh Khan creates as cohesive a genre as, for instance, every Ann Rice book and adaptation. Part of Indian films recent drive towards being “Modern” and “Western” seems to be an attempt to avoid that, to teach the audience to appreciate a mystery versus a love story and so on. The major corporate studios HATE this kind of fandom because they cannot control it. Unless you are a personal friend of Shahrukh Khan (hello Adi and Karan!), you can’t make a “Shahrukh Khan Film” that will drive in all the fans of that genre. And so they are trying to wean people away from personality fandom and towards genre fandom. However, so far I don’t think it has worked.

            Anyway, if you want more info, here’s my thesis. The first chapter (I think) is my massive literature review that goes over the history of Western fandom, Indian fandom, and how they have been studied: http://via.library.depaul.edu/cmnt/27/

            Liked by 2 people

          • Ironically, even the films and actors that led the march against the actor fandom genre in indian films ended up creating their own actor fandom genre. Case in point- Nawazuddin, Irrfan, Richa Chaddha.

            Like

    • It’s been like 6 hours since I read your comment Asmita, and I’m still shocked that there are Putin fandoms and people really join them.

      Like

        • Political figures can look very different depending on where you are in the world. One thing I have enjoyed about getting to know India through their films and otherwise is the opportunity to question my own impressions and determine what is true and what is false. India has a long and unique relationship to modern Russia which can be hard for westerners to accept in a variety of ways.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Yes, I was equally shocked when I learn there are people named Lenin in India, or that there are bars with Hitler photos and stuff in Thailand. As a Polish I find it inconceivable.

            @Bollywood Newbie Serial killers fandoms is something horrifying. How sick one must be to be part of it?

            Like

          • And from the other side of things, until I began to get into the films and therefore Indian history, I had accepted as just a basic article of faith that Gandhi was saintly and beloved and without flaw. Now I know that he was a good, even great, man, but also made mistakes and had critics like anyone else.

            Here’s a fun one, in America Woodrow Wilson is generally considered a minor unimportant President. But I have heard that in Poland, he has streets named after him and stuff because of his efforts to create an independence Poland post-WWI. He’s “our” figure, and yet he had more impact and is better remembered somewhere else.

            On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 2:47 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

            >

            Liked by 1 person

      • Let me shock you some more– India has been a traditional Soviet/Russian ally and the soviets saved us from American/British subs during the Bangladesh liberation war – the same time Nixon called Indira Gandhi a bitch for keeping India’s foreign policy independent! Truly shocking 😂

        Like

        • Yeah I knew about Nixon and Russian help, those are politic games, but but the other thing is to like a guy so much that you invest your personal time to read/write about him. But I think is more like, when you know somebody by sight and you think: oh he looks like a nice guy, I like him. But if he is your neighbour and keeps intrude in your family matters you are like: why this guy doesn’t leave me alone? He should just mind his buisness 😉

          Like

          • Strange that I have to explain how fandoms work to a person on a film fan’s blog on a post about fandoms 😂

            PS, as a Putin fan of over a decade and a Russia fan for longer, what exactly do you think I mustn’t have heard against the guy? 😂

            I’m not going to have this conversation. End of.

            Like

          • Agreed, there is no benefit in continuing this discussion, so I will use my all powers as Queen of the Blog to ask no one else to continue it, and to moderate your comments if they appear. I feel both Asmita and Angie clarified their positions perfectly in this last exchange.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Interesting question! I’d say I’m a serial #2, a bit how Asmita describes, becoming very intensely attached to someone, learning everything/watching everything, learning their context, then backing off after a while but still continuing to follow them and their work. And some of these attachments last a long time. From my childhood the fandoms I still carry with me are Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Stephen King, and Duran Duran. As an adult it’s been Harry Potter and Discworld–MuggleNet was my first experience of online fandom. I had a brief fling with Hugh Jackman before becoming obsessed with Hugh Laurie (during the early seasons of House MD, but I like him in everything). But since 2015, my main fandom has been, of course, Shah Rukh and Hindi films. I’m squarely in the #2 category with him and them. I like watching other Hindi movies sometimes–especially women-centered and/or strong ensemble films–but Shah Rukh fascinates me in a unique way. I can watch and enjoy him in almost anything, for an unlimited amount of time. And I follow the careers of other actors/actresses, but not on a day to day basis as I do with Shah Rukh. I’d love to see Hugh Laurie and Shah Rukh work together–preferably in an adaptation of a Discworld novel!

    With sports I don’t follow or support any teams. I tend to watch big events like the World Cup or college basketball playoffs, but otherwise nada.

    I’m following conversations about Padmaavat collections with interest. Movie critics/journalists seem very happy it is succeeding–I guess in part because it’s been such a lackluster year and a half in terms of box office? What’s your take on it so far? Given that you’ve been talking about how these big star-based films aren’t doing as well, while smaller story driven films are doing more steady business? Is it still part of the Bahubali hangover, with people wanting more semi-mythical epics? How troubling is it that this film with it’s regressive notions of womanhood and manhood is so very popular?

    Liked by 1 person

    • I just got my father a set of Jeeves and Wooster for Christmas! Which is why I can love Hugh Laurie, but never find him attractive. He was sooooooooooo brilliant in that, I just look at him and think “Bertie Wooster”. On the other hand, John Hannah totally is my witty British dude fantasy.

      I don’t know if I want to see Hugh Laurie and Shahrukh work together, but I really want to see them interview together! The cleverness would be OFF THE CHARTS.

      And I am withholding judgement on the Padmavat box office until I see the per screens. What I am hearing from a bunch of sources (including Niki here) is that they went really far in making sure they released everywhere and were the only film available. So the per screens will tell the real story.

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 7:20 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Liked by 1 person

      • I watched the Jeeves and Wooster series when they first came out, and didn’t give Hugh Laurie a second look. Once I got the hots for him as House, he became retro-actively cute as Bertie–though he is definitely one of those guys who gets better looking as he ages.

        Though on the surface he and Shah Rukh look nothing alike, one quality they both have that I find irresistible is their easy athleticism and seemingly effortless control of their faces and bodies. Hugh was a rower in college and still keeps in great shape through boxing and other sports. Just watching the way they both breath when at rest–from their stomach, with their diaphragm, not with their shoulders, gets to me. (I may be a weirdo.)

        And you are right, an interview with both of them would be so much fun. Trying to think who would be familiar enough with both of their work and personalities to do justice to such an interview.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I hadn’t thought about their athleticism! It’s part of their performances, you are right. Not like they are action heroes, but they act with their whole bodies, whether that is pratfalls or body language in a love scene, or anything.

          Also, I feel like there must be a British desi person out there who grew up watching SRK movies, and also BBC, who could do an amazing interview. Archie Punjabi? WE know she loves SRK.

          On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:47 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Liked by 1 person

    • In India, we have a system of politeness that restricts intelligent or objective discussion of art created by people who have reached or crosses superstardom especially when 100-200 cr at the box office are guaranteed to them.

      That’s why you’d find no-one discussing exactly how bad Salman’s last few films have been, why there exist no analysis of what’s wrong with SRK’s career and why he hasn’t had the pan Indian record breaker in a while and that is precisely why journalists are cheering on Padmavati. Not because any of them will take a day off work or buy overpriced tickets to watch the film again and again. Because it’s polite to say the film which is expected to fetch 100-200 cr (nevermind the 200+ cr budget which means it needs to earn at least 400 cr to be a 200 cr ki success) is ‘good’ and ‘nice’ or ‘slightly slow paced’ because nobody in India judges a film’s success by the actual profits it made. It’s all about sustaining the makers’ and actors’ brands (once they’re all established names) because you don’t want to be the journalist that said oh look how bad this film was just in case this big name director or actor ends up making a huge blockbuster somewhere in the next few decades and THEN you’d look foolish for having said the bad things today and not believing in them today!! 😁

      Liked by 1 person

      • Wow. It does have a feeling of “access journalism”, but it feels like some folks are more honest about it than others. Like Anupama and Rajeev pretend to objectivity, while Faridoon from Hungama kind of shamelessly kisses up. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • If you listen to and watch Rajeev and Anupama, they always carry that feeling of being watched. Like the people they’re speaking about are their primary audience and they’re accountable to them and not the audience. Their tone and choice of words changes with who they’re talking about. The politeness is dialed up up up when it’s a big name who constantly makes bad third rate films *cough* Salman *cough* and the same politeness is dialed down down down when it’s a no name star.

          That’s why it’s hard to rely on them. Plus, they always constantly score films high on factors like styling and costume.

          If you look at any bhansali production, the latest one included, and you compared the costumes to our couture designers’ current work, you’d find NO difference. So why do we laud Bhansali for costumes when there’s ZERO innovation and when he’s actually not been true to the period his films are set in???

          Liked by 1 person

          • I feel like it is messy for the leading reviewers to also be interviewers and reporters. It’s two different skill sets, and different priorities. Even without consciously changing their opinions, there will be a natural change when you know so much more about the process of making one film than the other, are so much mroe familiar with one actor, and so on and so forth.

            Like

          • In a perfect world, a film critic would require a uni degree on film criticism plus at least one doctorate and there’d be entire academic journals published weekly just on film criticism and a film review by a critic would need to be approved by peers to be accepted widely.

            Everyone else would have to write a review with a disclaimer like “I’m not an expert and this is just my personal untrained feelings about this film/actor”. Like the one you give here on this blog with the difference being you’re more qualified to talk about films than 80% of film critics in India 😂

            Like

          • Going back to my Swara post, again, it’s not hard! Just say “I feel this” “this is objectively true” and keep the line clear between the two.

            On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:52 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

            >

            Like

          • That would require owning up to the sentiment which means you longer have the “this is what everyone feels” garb to bully an individual with. Saying “I think women should choose death over rape” makes you an asshole. Saying “all women have a choice to choose death over rape” absolves you of the personal responsibility of what you’re suggesting. If someone takes your advice, you can always blame society for her death.

            Like

        • Going back to fandom studies, the problem is that the vocal fans are so unreasoningly for their hero right or wrong, and the English language writer reporter types are so stuck in politeness and so on.

          But researchers who actually went out into the world found conversations like, well, ours! People who like actors, but not to the point of losing the ability to reason. And who don’t feel like they have any reason to pretend an opinion they don’t feel. The regular old general audience, who is consistently insulted and ignored.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. I think I must fall into the #1 category. I like lots of different actors, directors, genres, etc but in a take-it-or-leave-it kind of way. I’m not going to die if I miss the latest Hugh Jackman film, or do an internet search on how his next movie is coming on. However Shahrukh has been the one focus of my heart and mind for over 10 years and everything else is defined in relation to him. If I had to miss his latest movie I probably would die, even if I suspect I’m not going to like it.
    Similarly, although I am not an avid sports fan, I have supported the same football team since I was 5. Even if I don’t actively follow their games, particularly since I no longer live in the city where they play, I would no more pledge allegiance to a different team than ditch my own family. I suppose it’s a weird kind of tribal thing.
    That’s not to say I can’t have different sorts of love at the same time, things I am passionate about, like chocolate, art …. and my children!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes! Same! You and I can hang out. I don’t even follow sports closely, but to change official team allegiance would be like betraying my whole family and identity. Absolutely a tribal thing.

      And same with Shahrukh. 13 years he’s been a part of my life, it’s not a fandom, it’s a every minute of every day he is there in the background kind of thing.

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 7:49 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Liked by 1 person

      • “13 years he’s been a part of my life, it’s not a fandom, it’s a every minute of every day he is there in the background kind of thing.”
        So, actually, it’s neither #1 nor #2 nor #3 🙂
        I can relate the most to this remark and Zindagi’s description than to the fan-numbers’ descriptions.

        Btw, I’ve put your thesis into my favorites the last time you posted it, but didn’t read it yet. I’ll certainly do 🙂

        Like

        • Oh goodie! If my research was correct, you will read it and find it strangely familiar. I’m essentially just studying you. And me. And a lot of other people who comment here.

          Liked by 1 person

    • You know I never thought about it before, but when I picture a Bears fan, somehow I never picture someone under 200 pounds. Maybe because it makes them look Bear-like? No wonder they had to make the stadium bigger, to fit in all those nicely sized people!

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:36 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

  4. I was thinking if I’m more type 2 or 3, but I guess 3 , even if my crushes are not totally equal. Now that I think more about it I have never been a “I can love only one” fan. In my first bollywood phase I was Shahrukh, Akshay Kumar, Sunil Shetty and Sidharth fan. In that period I have been watching only hindi / telugu and Madhavan was doing mainly tamil films so I couldn’t watch him much, but I do remember when I saw him in Zara Zara Behekta Hai and in Rang De Basanti.
    Then I stopped watching indian movies entirely for few years. When I came back I was all like: I will watch all Madhavan movies. I still haven’t finished.
    Oh and in music I’m the same: I’m not able to be a fan of just one artist. In fact I’m Alejandro Fernandez, Luis Miguel and Chris Young fan . And here they all are equal (maybe apart of Luis Miguel who is kind of jerk in the real life).

    Like

    • I don’t know if I have ever been a fan of any musician. I like Glenn Miller better than Benny Goodman, and Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy are my favorite Indian composers. But it’s not like I loooooooooooooove them or have any interest in them personally, I just like their music.

      Your fandom sounds a lot more interesting! Able to branch out to all sorts of people and things at once. Meanwhile, I am just chugging along with Shahrukh taking 80% of my life, and everyone else sharing the occasional 20%.

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:53 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I’m not much of a fandom person in general. I’ve never really passionately followed one actor or series. I do get fascinated with certain things in pop culture, like for a while I was obsessed with pre-code Hollywood movies and the whole cultural context for those movies (The Great Depression, radical shifts in sexual behavior) and also obsessed with Jane Eyre adaptations.

    My gateway to Bollywood was Aamir and I’ve binged on most of his (good) movies but now I’m exploring all of it. I still crush on Aamir the most because I just think he’s talented as hell but I’m really fascinated by the history of the industry and how it evolved and how it’s different from Hollywood and how all that fits in with the radical shifts in media consumption over the past 20 years (something I’m professionally interested in as a social media manager). And now I’m crushing on other actors like Shashi and young Amitabh and young Salman. And female crushes too on Kangana and Vidya.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I am really curious to check in with you again in 5 years and see if your Aamir fandom has solidified or faded away. For me, I started out really in love with Shahrukh, and then sort of figured out the industry in general and watched everything from everybody. But I kept coming back to SRK and eventually it turned from a crush and a gateway person to, like, just part of my life. But I know for other people, like Angie, the actor sort of gives you the start and then you watch everything they do for a while, and then you are, not exactly “done” with them, but they fade into the background.

      Also, I just remembered why I was just thinking about pre-code Hollywood! It was talking about the FilmFare Awards! Because the Oscars, with all their noble pomp and circumstance now, were originally created as part of the Code backlash, to cover up all the sex scandals and wildness in the newspapers with this nice respectable awards ceremony.

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:09 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

  6. Asmita describes the kind of fan I am perfectly. I fall into fandoms really easily and get obsessive about seeing all of that actor’s work, reading all the author’s books, acquiring all the music by an artist, etc. But then I move on to the next one pretty quick but still have loyalty to the old fandoms. I think my enduring fandoms in Hindi film are definitely Hrithik Roshan (to a certain extent), Shahid Kapoor, Anushka Sharma, Abhishek Bachchan, Saif Ali Khan, and Rani Mukherjee (notice no big Khans!).

    Liked by 1 person

    • Boy, you are loyal to your male actors! I don’t think Hrithik, Shahid, or Abhishek have had a big crowd-pleasing star role in a couple years at least. With the women, Anushka and Rani, you have been a bit luckier.

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 12:58 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Speaking of Hrithik I watched part of his debut movie and I realized that he is constantly miscast as this cocky player when he’s much, much better as a sweet, gentle almost naive type. He’s so big and athletic and ridiculously good looking that I understand why he’s getting shoved into action/player roles but it’s really too bad. I get the feeling he’s all mush inside (in a good way).

        Like

        • Yes, absolutely!!!! I don’t know what you have seen already, but Koi Mil Gaya and Mujshe Dosti Karoge are wonderful ones where he is very sweet but not that experienced.

          Of course the downside is Mohenjo Daro, where they had him play a sweet innocent boy, which is perfect for his persona but terrible for his appearance! It was jsut ridiculous being told about this innocent farm boy, barely grown up, and then looking at clearly 40 year old Hrithik.

          On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 4:31 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Like

          • I somewhat agree. But when he plays too sweet it can go wrong fast, all of the Krrish films for example…they’re just so painful to watch – from the cringe worthy portrayal of autism to the innocent superhero, it’s all awful. There are moments of Guzaarish and Kaabil that are also really unfortunate-Hrithik portraying any kind of disability (mental or physical) is just asking for over the top, saccharine portrayals that undermine the characters. I do like the dopey cockiness from films like K3G and Mujshe Dosti Karoge, even in Lakshya and other films it works.

            But we also all know that I prefer Hrithik in angry (Agneepath) or arrogant (Bang Bang, Zindagi, Dhoom 2) roles!

            Like

          • Oooo, I forgot about Lakshya! That’s just a perfect role for him, it takes him from dopey lost kid to silent noble guy, his two strong suits.

            Like

      • I am very loyal though I definitely see all of their faults and acknowledge their terrible performances and film choices. I just want them all to keep finding the magic they’ve found in past films that I’ve loved. Shahid is definitely the most consistent of the guys, for sure! So underrated.

        Like

        • I have to admit to a bit of Shahid fandom myself. Vivah, Jab We Met, Kaminey was just such a good streak, I keep waiting for him to regain that magic.

          Like

          • But I would argue you he has with regained that magic somewhat with R…Rajkumar (a masala film out of his comfort zone in which he acquitted himself well), then critically acclaimed performances in Haider and Udta Punjab. There was a desolate bit in between the two peaks with a lot of just ok rom-coms and lighter fare (though I did like Dil Bole Haddipa! and Mausam more than most and of course Shaandaar is one of my personal “cult” favorites). Even in Rangoon and Padmaavat we see him trying to cement his place as a “serious” actor (if not successfully based on box office of the first and his reviews in the second). He has it all and I just hope he can continue to get some respect, but what I really want is a few more fun rom-coms from him before he ages out (because I’m always going to want to watch a rom-com before a serious film).

            Like

          • And once again, the wailing and moaning start of Shraddha in his next film. That should have been it, his next fun rom-com! But now it will be merely a sloggish misery. At least the romance storyline part of it. Oh well, maybe the movie after that one will be a fun rom-com. Or maybe Shraddha will somehow surprise us!

            On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:43 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

            >

            Like

  7. I am most definitely a 3. I don’t know if that’s being eclectic or promiscuous, but I have lots of favorite authors, actors, musicians and other creative types. Some are “don’t miss”, the ones I make sure to see, read, and/or hear. Leonard Cohen, a singer songwriter named Jesse Winchester, Shah Rukh, Meryl Streep, James Stewart, Katharine Hepburn, Neil Gaiman, Jane Austen, Sarah Vowell…. my mind is an orgy.

    Sports? My loyalty is with the University of Maryland, as an alumna and a retired professor. Outside of college sports, I follow women’s professional soccer, but not much else.

    Next week you can ask the same question about the people we avoid — artistic cilantro, if you will.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ooo, I like that idea for next week’s question!

      Also, now I am picturing Shahrukh, Meryl Streep, and Jimmy Stewart all in a movie together. It would be AMAZING! Oh heck, there’s our fantasy Philadelphia story remake cast!

      On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 6:12 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Regarding Sports teams – there’s this regionally that used to exist in sports that has loosened up, thereby making it seem more reasonable to be a fan of any team. Once upon a time, the Brooklyn Dodgers all hailed from Brooklyn or surrounding areas. So of course the Dodgers were your team because the kids trying out might have gone to school with your kids, and the organization was a big local employer, provided business to local concessioners, etc. Nowadays, the teams have players from across the nation, if not the world (Seattle Mariners biggest player was Ichiro from Japan when I lived there, almost half the Chennai kings are not Desi), the coaching and production staff is similarly from everywhere, the concessioners are national orgs, and in the usa the teams themselves change cities whenever another city offers to build them a better stadium. So unless you are someone who attends games live in person, there is no huge reason for your local team to be the team you root for anymore.

    Regarding actors and directors, I have my favorites whose work I tend to follow, but I can’t really say that I am a “fan” because I have never joined a fan club or tried to get to know about them as people. I mostly learn about them as people via osmosis, like by checking out this blog for example, when I’m interested in a controversy or an upcoming film or in the industry broadly.

    Like

    • Now I’m thinking about it, maybe that is why Chicago fans are a bit extra fervent? Our teams have never been anywhere else, and people do actually go to the games a lot, even just to stand outside the stadium, at least it seems like it based on how crazy the city trains get on game day.

      I like that definition of “liking” actors versus being a “fan”, if you make an effort to learn about them as people.

      Like

  9. I love the bonding experience of being a fan.One of my favorite moments was while I was shopping for Prison Break, I was stopped by random people on the way to the cash counter just to let me know that “It’s a wonderful series.You’re going to have a great time.” All my movie crushes tend to be when they play vulnerable characters.Such as Shahrukh in Deewana when he begged Ma with tears in his eyes “Give me, Kiran Ma” .Or Spike in Buffy when he says he’s a fool for love and she tells him “You’re beneath me.”Or recently Kumar Gaurav in Begaana when sings sorrowfully “I’m finding excuses to die.This world is not worth living.”

    Like

    • That Prison Break story is delightful!

      Now I am trying to think of other vulnerable characters. Oooo! Have you seen Rocky? Not 3-5, but 1 and 2, just the ultimate in vulnerable male.

      On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:08 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Stallone reminded me a lot of Sunny Deol a lot in Rambo.Or maybe it’s the other way round.I hope it’s not as bloody as Mark Wahlberg’s The Fighter which scared me off wrestling movies.I didn’t even watch Brothers.

        Like

        • Oh man, Rocky is amazing! It’s not a boxing or a wrestling movie at all, it’s a human drama. You’re gonna love it. At least, I am 99% sure you will love it, I could always be surprised.

          The original of Brothers, Warrior, is another just amazing one for vulnerable men with broken hearts.

          On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:33 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Like

  10. I would say I’m more of a 3 but like Angie mentioned earlier, not all my loves are equal. I love the Dallas Mavericks and I don’t think I would ever root for another NBA team but I don’t feel that way about the Cowboys anymore. When it comes to football, I’m more likely to root for other teams such as the Patriots because I’m not attached to anyone who’s apart of the Cowboys organization anymore unlike the Mavericks.

    Similarly, when it comes to actors Mahesh is definitely first with Varun Dhawan coming in at a really close second. I would say Naga Chaitanya is my third favorite. Then there are actors like Nani, Suriya, Varun Tej, Ayushmann Khurrana, etc. who I would watch every movie of but they aren’t exactly my favorites yet.

    Like

    • You know what is unique in your answer? You allow for love to grow! Everyone else has this “I fell in love at first movie” story, whether or not they fell out of love later or fell in love with someone else. But you allow for the possibility that you may not love someone at first, but will grow to love them over time.

      On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:18 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Hmm, I never thought about it like that before.

        The one person I find interesting is Varun Tej. I hated him coming in because he was another one of Chiranjeevi’s nephews who were getting into the industry. Then I ended up liking his first two movies and I kind of tried to force myself to like him. But in reality, I liked the movies he did but not exactly him. Then Fidaa came and completely changed how I felt about Varun Tej. I watched a movie called Mister that Varun Tej did (it was considered one of the worst movies of the year) and I actually enjoyed it because of Varun Tej. And now I’m really excited about his next release!

        Like

        • You are a woman of discernment and judgement! Unlike the rest of us who fall hard and fast and for no good reason.

          I feel like I remember you having a similar reaction with Varun? You didn’t like him a whole ton in SOTY, but everything changed after Humpty?

          On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 2:09 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Like

          • Yeah, I liked him way better than Sidharth but I wasn’t like “this guy is so awesome”. I liked both Varun and Alia enough to want to try watching Humpty which made me fall in love with both of them.

            Like

  11. Pingback: Wednesday Watching Post With a Question for YOU! Also, What Are You Watching and Reading and Thinking This Week? | dontcallitbollywood

  12. well i’ve no favourites in movies or TV shows except for the opinion they must be good
    as for actors i love Manju Warrier(deep respect for her as a person as well )
    as for sportsmen do like Abhinav Bindra but again not my favourite..
    I don’t know i don’t really idolize anyone even Manju Warrier i respect her but don’t idolize her ..also not afraid to call out anyone’s BS
    yes i know i’m weird…in terms of love(that hasn’t happened yet) i would definitely choose one true love .. thank god for that…but that doesn’t mean i would stop caring for the people around me ..i can’t imagine myself being that self-centered..sorry i know you’re expecting fun answers but i’m just giving you a fact..

    Like

    • So there is no one you would consider yourself a “fan” of? But you are a fan of movies in general, to the degree of being interested enough to follow and comment here? That is really interesting!

      On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:14 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • nope no fan of anyone..but yes i do love good movies..oh and can talk about it for hours but not a fan ..i love good movies for the way it is made as a big budget or as small budget it is as long as it leaves a mark in my mind i’l love it..don’t even ask how i’l react to the bad ones..as for commenting here i love where there is an open and healthy discussion and if it is about movies then i wont think twice ..you might disagree with something i might with something else and then someone would completely disagree/agree with what both of us say

        Like

  13. Pingback: Hindi Film 101: Fan Studies, “Female” versus “Male” Fans, and Fan Power | dontcallitbollywood

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s