Nawazuddin Siddiqui slams streaming platforms for prioritizing profit over art: 'Baazar toh ban hi gaya'
Nawazuddin Siddiqui criticized streaming platforms for prioritizing profits over creativity, calling them marketplaces. He warned that overemphasizing commercial aspects harms art. Recently, Anurag Kashyap called Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos 'the definition of dumb,' sparking mixed reactions, including a subtle jab from Ekta Kapoor referencing Kashyap's 'saas-bahu' remark.
Nawazuddin Siddiqui
has frequently voiced his concerns about the Hindi film industry's shortcomings. Recently, he also took aim at streaming services, accusing them of putting business and profits ahead of creativity and artistic quality.
According to him, these platforms have turned into commercial hubs, losing sight of true artistic values.
Streaming Platforms Turning into Marketplaces
Talking to SCREEN, Siddiqui said, 'Irrespective of any platform or any process, it starts out as great and then turns into a market. Baazar toh ban hi gaya hai. Studios in India keep saying we need 'commercial' qualities attached to every project. I don't agree with that.
If the product is of a certain quality, then the commercial aspect eventually gets attached to it organically.'
The Harm of Overemphasizing Commercial Aspects
He explained that placing too much emphasis on the commercial side of art can cause significant harm. Over time, projects that begin with great passion often end up becoming purely business ventures.
Anurag Kashyap
's Recent Comments on Netflix CEO
Just days before this, Anurag Kashyap, the director of 'Sacred Games', took a sharp dig at Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
Responding to Sarandos's comments about Netflix's first Indian original, Kashyap said, 'I always knew the tech guys are dumb when it comes to story telling but Ted Sarandos is the definition of dumb is what I didn't know.'
Mixed Reactions and
Ekta Kapoor
's Subtle Jab
His statements sparked varied responses across social media platforms. Among the reactions, Ekta Kapoor from Balaji Telefilms subtly mocked Kashyap, referencing his 'saas-bahu' remark in a hidden criticism.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
11 minutes ago
- Mint
Who will inherit Amitabh and Jaya Bachchan's wealth, Abhishek or Shweta? The star couple says...
Amitabh and Jaya Bachchan, the iconic star couple, have reportedly made a major decision about who will inherit their wealth – son Abhishek Bachchan or daughter Shweta Bachchan Nanda. Amitabh and Jaya tied the knot on 3 June 1973 and have recently celebrated their 52nd wedding anniversary. The power couple, who have long been icons of Indian cinema, are believed to have outlined a clear succession plan for their family wealth to ensure a smooth transition for future generations. In an old interview with Rediff, Amitabh Bachchan revealed that he and Jaya have a clear stance on how their assets will be divided among their children. BigB shared that the couple wants to divide their assets'equally' between their son and daughter. 'When I die, whatever little I have will be divided equally between my son and daughter. There will be no difference,' the veteran actor said, adding that they had decided this years ago Addressing daughter Shweta's share in his property, Amitabh Bachchan said that he believes that she has equal rights as Abhishek, despite the norms of Indian society. 'Everyone says that a girl is someone else's wealth. She goes to her husband's house, but in my eyes, she is my daughter, who has equal rights as Abhishek,' he said. In 2023, the veteran actors gifted Shweta their lavish Juhu bungalow, Prateeksha, worth at least ₹ 50 crore. According to the election affidavit Jaya Bachchan filed in February 2024, the Rajya Sabha MP's net worth was ₹ 1.63 crore for 2022-23. The affidavit also mentioned that her husband, Amitabh Bachchan's net worth was ₹ 273.74 crore for the same year. The Bachchan couple's combined movable property has been valued at ₹ 849.11 crore, while the immovable property amounts to ₹ 729.77 crore. This means their combined assets are over ₹ 1,578 crore. Meanwhile, according to the Hurun India Rich List 2024, Amitabh Bachchan and his family's assets are valued at ₹ 1,600 crore.
Mint
17 minutes ago
- Mint
How Dilip Kumar let it all out on the screen
By the time Indian cinema entered its classical phase in the late 1940s, Dilip Kumar had completed his self-discovery as an actor to a large extent. The basic features of his hero were earmarked: an introvert who had been wronged, takes it to his heart and generates a complete catharsis of a whole range of emotions. He portrayed the search for an ideal self—one proclaiming true emancipation through love but desires it to be materialized only in a just society; and as that is not possible in actual reality, the self has to perish to validate this idealized conviction. The actor, in fact, represented the popular novelist Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay's model of a vulnerable, self-destructing hero in Bengali literature. Several of his films depicted Dilip Kumar as an unrequited lover seeking a kind of liberation from the unjust world through a prolonged internalized suffering (often ending in death) as seen in S.U. Sunny's Mela, S.K. Ojha's Hulchul (1951), Nitin Bose's Deedar and Gunga Jumna (1961), Ram Daryani's Tarana (1951), Bimal Roy's Devdas, S.U. Sunny's Uran Khatola (1955), Hrishikesh Mukherjee's Musafir (1957) and K. Asif's Mughal-e-Azam (1960). In contrast, he, during this phase, was also seen in somewhat morbid anti-hero characters such as in Shaheed Latif's Arzoo (1950), S.U. Sunny's Babul, Mehboob Khan's Andaz and Amar, and R.C. Talwar's Sangdil (1952). Explaining the roles Dilip Kumar played in most of his films right through the 1950s, Nikhat Kazmi says: '[He] always opted for internal emigration as a course of action. This was a great escape. A voyage into the unknown, which is undertaken not because one is enticed, but because one is disgusted by something. In his iconoclasm, he represented a rebellion that was akin to that of the Bohemians of Baudelaire's age. He was like the group of desperadoes who tried to break away from the nice and easy positivism of bourgeois society. Charles Baudelaire, Verlaine, Arthur Rimbaud, Paul Gauguin, Van Gogh were the tramps, the heavy drinkers and the unrivalled artists who chose to destroy everything in themselves that may be of no use to society, who raged against themselves too. For them and for the hero as immortalized by Dilip Kumar, happiness itself was something that is banal and vulgar. In a letter of 1845, addressed to a friend, Baudelaire writes: 'You are a happy man, I feel sorry for you, Sir, for being happy so easily. A man must have sunk low to consider himself happy.' However, Dilip Kumar never wanted to sink so low. On the contrary, he doggedly sought nobility in sorrow and imbued it with a romanticism that lingers even today." Remember his famous dialogue from Devdas: Kaun kambakat hai jo bardasht karne ke liye peeta hai, main to peeta hun ki bas saans ley sakun (Which wretched person drinks to tolerate, I drink so that I can at least take a breath.) No wonder, the world of acting often ushers performers into the limelight, where performance anxiety can run high. The stakes are elevated, and heart rate may surge. Surprisingly, sometimes this stress can become a catalyst for improved performance, embracing the concept of positive stress in challenging situations. However, a more complex challenge arises when method actors choose to inhabit their characters beyond the stage or camera's lens. As they tap into past emotional experiences, whether joyful or traumatic, unresolved emotions can linger. This emotional baggage may manifest as heightened emotional instability, intensified anxiety, fear or even a sense of falsehood, accompanied by bouts of acute sleep deprivation. Such emotional turbulence can pave the way for psychological distress, leading to emotional fatigue. According to experts, this emotional fatigue often arises when actors create dissonance between their actions and authentic feelings. Research indicates that when method acting is employed judiciously and with proper emotional regulation, it need not lead to excessive fatigue. The key lies in striking a balance between immersion in the character and the ability to resurface, ensuring a harmonious coexistence of art and emotional well-being. Dilip Kumar's profound commitment to his roles and his deep involvement with the character he portrayed, in film after film, at that stage of his career, led to serious psychological issues, so much so that he had to consult a psychiatrist in England. The advice given was simple: switch to comic roles, which he did with aplomb and poise! His consummate performances in S.M.S. Naidu's Azaad (1959) and S.U. Sunny's Kohinoor (1960) in a carefree, jovial and jaunty manner revealed how he could move from one genre to another with remarkable ease and finesse. However, later in A. Bhim Singh's Gopi (1970) and Tapan Sinha's Bengali film Sagina Mahato (1970), Sagina in Hindi (1974) and Asit Sen's Bairaag (1976), Dilip Kumar attempted to introduce some new elements in his acting style, though not always with much success. He designed his comedy through an over-talkative, one-track mind and as an obsessed simpleton who was a victim of the circumstances, but unlike his earlier roles, he did not internalize his suffering; he responded to it with a sense of simplicity, quite the same way Raj Kapoor did in film after film. He also improvised his mannerisms spontaneously to depict the character he was portraying on the screen such as repeatedly jerking his head and clinking his eyes. However, the audience did not take to it... Dilip Kumar's second innings began with the 1981 multi-starrer Kranti by Manoj Kumar followed by Ramesh Sippy's Shakti. Eight films followed through the 1980s and another three in the 1990s, in which Dilip Kumar made his presence felt with his individualistic stamp and authority. These films included Subhash Ghai's Vidhaata (1982), Karma (1986) and Saudagar (1991), Ravi Chopra's Mazdoor (1983), and Yash Chopra's Mashaal (1984), not of course counting the 1998 Qila by Umesh Mehra, which was a complete dud... Excerpted with permission from The Man Who Became Cinema: Dilip Kumar, published by Penguin Random House India. Also read: 'Jungle Nama': A thrilling play for children reimagines the myth of Bonbibi
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Aamir Khan reveals his No. 1 insecurity of his early days: 'Other top male actors made me nervous because...'
In the dynamic and often unpredictable world of Hindi cinema , Aamir Khan has carved a unique niche for himself as someone who constantly strives for excellence. His journey began in the late 1980s with Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak, a film that not only introduced him to audiences but also catapulted him to instant stardom. Over the decades, he has continued to maintain a strong presence in the industry, becoming one of its most respected figures. Despite his stature as a leading actor, Aamir once struggled with self-doubt, especially regarding his physical appearance. During the early stages of his career, one of his biggest concerns was his height. Standing around 5 feet 5 inches tall, Aamir felt noticeably shorter than many of his contemporaries at the time. Stars like Sunny Deol and Jackie Shroff dominated the screen with their towering presence, and Aamir often questioned whether someone of his height would be taken seriously in the industry. This sense of unease stayed with him for a while, particularly when actors like Amitabh Bachchan, Vinod Khanna, and Shatrughan Sinha—taller, commanding personalities—ruled the silver screen. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Crossout: New Apocalyptic MMO Crossout Play Now Undo During a recent interaction on a YouTube talk show, Aamir revisited these feelings when asked about a humorous line in the trailer of his upcoming film Sitaare Zameen Par , which pokes fun at his height. He admitted that, in the past, such remarks would have deeply unsettled him. However, over time, he grew more comfortable with himself and gradually shed that insecurity. A pivotal moment in his journey toward self-acceptance came through a conversation with renowned writer Javed Akhtar . Akhtar had once advised him that humour, when used wisely, could be a powerful tool during tough times. The ability to laugh at oneself, Akhtar explained, acts as a buffer against life's emotional bumps. This idea stuck with Aamir and helped him view his own perceived shortcomings in a new light. In another earlier discussion on a YouTube channel, Aamir had acknowledged that his height used to make him feel inferior and uncertain about how audiences might react to him. He feared rejection based on appearance alone. But with time and experience, he came to understand that talent, authenticity, and sincerity mattered far more than physical traits. Sitare Zameen Par, directed by RS Prasanna, stars Aamir alongside Genelia Deshmukh and introduces several fresh faces including Naman Misra and Simran Mangeshkar. The film is set to hit theatres on June 20, promising a heartfelt story brought to life by a cast full of new energy and seasoned talent.
