Is Stardom Already Dead?

www.fanpop.com

I am suddenly missing the romantic distance with the world of films which existed even fifteen years earlier. It has been replaced with an intimacy, or an imposed familiarity in recent years, which has robbed the celluloid world of its magic. News channels, tabloids, newspaper supplements have exposed the stars and their everyday lives to such a degree that their enchanting charm has remarkably weakened. As I was musing how Madhuri Dixit’s willing return from a self-imposed exile amid strident media clamour has done her more harm than good, the openness to which all the stars are willfully subscribing is rendering them ordinary. Ordinary people with ordinary aspirations! When stars are a click away, they do not remain stars. But that does not seem to affect their projected stardom at least apparently. When everyone is hankering for media attention and is ready to make commercials out of their own lives and put them up on billboards, the definition of stardom must have undergone a transformation. The more you are visible, the more is your popularity, replacing the old definition that the less available you are, the greater is your stardom. But is that really so? Some old golden rules are sometimes hard to break, I suppose.

bollywoodanthropology.blogspot.com

That secrecy and enigma are the hallmarks of stardom is realized the hard way almost every Friday. A film’s fate is decided on the basis of the first day’s collection and stardom is enjoying a very short lease at the theatres. Perhaps, we cannot have another ‘Sholay’ or another ‘Hum Aapke Hain Koun’ again: I mean films which picked up through word-of-mouth publicity after suffering a not-so-delightful start. The general public does not need to dwell on any one star, nor does it have the time to do so. Every star is equally always, already available, so, where’s the scope of romanticizing about them? And, if we miss them at the theatres, why the films will be aired within a month on the television or well, the DVD will be available much too soon. Although the industry profits are now tied up with the private channels and DVD companies, and no one is perhaps suffering remarkable material loss, what is being lost is the magic of stardom and its long-lasting spell.

gypsy-therebirth.blogspot.com

As far as Bombay cinema is concerned, this trend of stars abandoning ivory towers of mysterious lives and stepping on to the earth is perhaps contingent upon the changing themes of current films. The larger-than-life hero is dead; and the virtuous maiden waiting for her lover has found her place in the curio shop of Bollywood. Films are brushing more closely with reality or life as we live it. Filmmakers have to hide behind the new generic label of ‘Superhero films’ if they have to make their heroes larger-than-life. Therefore, stars are no longer inaccessible dreams, but lived realities. Although films such as Dhoom or Jab Tak Hain Jaan have still kept the world of fantasy inviolate, every film is at least attempting to imitate a semblance of realism, if they cannot afford be too realistic. But stardom as it is traditionally understood is bound to die: I mean why Naseeruddin Shah was never a star as Amitabh Bachchan was or still is? Shah was always the man of the neighbourhood, while Bachchan was that superhero who exists only in fantasies. While films are gradually becoming realistic, that traditional star is steadily counting his days. With one exception, perhaps: Salman Khan? Right? But then, he is no exception indeed, if we probe a little deeper. Although he is still larger-than-life, in fact, almost super-human in every film of his, none of his films enjoy a long life at the theatres. He too is a victim of availability. 

Just a thought! Share your views!