Women-centric movies are by far the exception and not the rule. Leading women are paid a fraction of men for their work in Bollywood. Often their roles are that of mere props in a testosterone-fuelled narrative for men, by men and of men. Leading men will play the ‘hero’ literally for decades while women are relegated to the older sister, significant aunt, young mother roles. So why should Akshay Kumar, at 54 being cast alongside 24-year-old Manushi Chillar surprise us? Check out the trailer of Prithviraj and the conversation it started.
The film is described as a historical epic action drama (clearly they couldn’t pick just one or two genres) and stars Akshay Kumar as the legendary 12th-century king Prithviraj Chauhan. Sanjay Dutt is cast as Kaka Kanha, Sonu Sood is Chand Bardai, Manushi Chhillar plays Sanyogita. The movie is based on the epic poem Prithviraj Raso by Chand Bardai
Also known as Khiladi Kumar, fans love Akshay in any action role.
They thought Kumar was getting repetitive and recalled his very over the top portrayal of a transgender in Laxmii.
People had their own reasons for disliking the trailer – some disliked it because it stars ‘Canada Kumar’.
The leading man is 54 but the leading lady is 24 – and this is considered normal. It isn't as though the story demanded a large age gap because of historical reasons.
This is far from unusual in Bollywood – in one film a 54-year-old Sunny Deol had been cast opposite Neha Sharma who was then one-third his age! Such a massive age gap is not even acknowledged much less explained. It is perfectly alright for the man to be literally decades older, but the reverse is never, ever the case.
According to the encyclopedia Britannica, Prithviraj Chauhan was born in 1166 and died in 1192 at around the age of 26. So what really is the need to cast an actor more than double the age of the historical figure portrayed – or does authenticity or accuracy matter not a whit in Bollywood?
Firstly it is a shame that most of the top ‘heroes’ in Bollywood today are 50 plus. They are seen as the ‘bankable stars’ which is why younger talent rarely gets a chance. Filmmakers don’t want to cast people more appropriate to the demand of roles, even when the age of the actor seems incongruous; even laughable.
And here, what is sauce for the goose isn't sauce for the gander by any stretch. By the time a woman in her 30s shows the first sign of maturity or takes the plunge into matrimony, her career as an actor is practically written off. But why blame just Bollywood – it is the classic Indian double standard – one rule for the boys and quite another for the girls.
Do you have something interesting you would like to share? Write to us at [email protected]
