Actors in to politics

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, CNR said:

I believe depends on individual ..evari game plan vadidi..This is not simple to analyze

Ultimately cinema actors after achieving everything in the movie career..They want to change the career business or politics . 

1.I believe they feel politics is the best career to choose because of fans and less investment ( Mostly MLA money)

2. If they become big they have same following, power and money.

    In the end I feel whoever deserves become good politician and follow the people. In movies there is luck but not in politics. Politics is hard work , intelligent and strategist comes into power because of democracy.  

politics depends on more luck than even movies. The world is too complex for anyone to understand, and that's why these fcuking politicians exist. But nobody knows what they are doing.

[CNR]

Just now, uttermost said:

politics depends on more luck than even movies. The world is too complex for anyone to understand, and that's why these fcuking politicians exist. But nobody knows what they are doing.

How coming into power is luck. Tell me one CM in all over India came into power with luck. 

 

I will tell 100 movies and directors made money with luck

[uttermost]

bottomline: both are dishonest professions that attracts psycopaths. politics more so. 

so movie stars jumping into politics is natural.

[uttermost]

3 minutes ago, CNR said:

How coming into power is luck. Tell me one CM in all over India came into power with luck. 

I will tell 100 movies and directors made money with luck

every politician who became a 'leader', because of the circumstances. Not because he could play 1000 others who were vying for the positions. its one in a million shot - which is why its luck.

movies flopping or succeeding is fairly predictable at the time it is made or atleast by the time it is edited.

[CNR]

4 minutes ago, uttermost said:

bottomline: both are dishonest professions that attracts psycopaths. politics more so. 

so movie stars jumping into politics is natural.

That is wrong perspective..Cinema profession is creative and politics is making lives better by implementing policies procedures.

There are bad people everywhere and abuse power, that does not mean all are wrong. There are few people fight for right things in the society. 

[Demigod]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

every politician who became a 'leader', because of the circumstances. Not because he could play 1000 others who were vying for the positions. its one in a million shot - which is why its luck.

movies flopping or succeeding is fairly predictable at the time it is made or atleast by the time it is edited.

In todays politics to get elected you do not need to win 51% votes... even if u can wil between 15% to 20% votes you are a leader as other 80% votes will be shared among another 5 or 6 candidates competing for the post.. 

[uttermost]

Just now, CNR said:

That is wrong perspective..Cinema profession is creative and politics is making lives better by implementing policies procedures.

There are bad people everywhere and abuse things that does not mean all are wrong. There are few people fight for right things in the society. 

cinema wastes precious resources to provide a kind of entertainment that pushes people further into idiocy. An ideal society would not have cinema. Its not art. Its just manipulation of your senses. sort of like badly made p0rn show without fcuk scenes in every shot.

the idea of cinema itself is wrong. Even if cinema is to be made, the kind of budgets that it is made at is atrocious. Pls don't say that its someone else's money, and not public's money. Every single money in circulation is public's money. cinema is one of the worst ways to use it. especially for a country where one third lives in horrible poverty.

[Demigod]

2 minutes ago, CNR said:

That is wrong perspective..Cinema profession is creative and politics is making lives better by implementing policies procedures.

There are bad people everywhere and abuse power, that does not mean all are wrong. There are few people fight for right things in the society. 

Yes there are few good people every where but the irony is they have very less power to influence or change the system... me personal stand is movie stars trying their luck in politics is waste of their resources and it is a gamble which hardly pays off..

[uttermost]

2 minutes ago, Demigod said:

In todays politics to get elected you do not need to win 51% votes... even if u can wil between 15% to 20% votes you are a leader as other 80% votes will be shared among another 5 or 6 candidates competing for the post.. 

electoral politics comes later. first he has to win leadership within his party. That's the biggest lottery. for electoral politics, he'll have plenty of help from the party. Until then, he's on his own.

[Demigod]

Just now, uttermost said:

cinema wastes precious resources to provide a kind of entertainment that pushes people further into idiocy. An ideal society would not have cinema. Its not art. Its just manipulation of your senses. sort of like badly made p0rn show without fcuk scenes in every shot.

the idea of cinema itself is wrong. Even if cinema is to be made, the kind of budgets that it is made at is atrocious. Pls don't say that its someone else's money, and not public's money. Every single money in circulation is public's money. cinema is one of the worst ways to use it. especially for a country where one third lives in horrible poverty.

Cant agree with this... cinema is an art form...and its a medium to communicate your thoughts or showcase your talent..or even take you to some other world...best examples would be Avatar, Jurassic park, terminator..etc moreover the entertainment it provides is unmatched in countries like India... I enjoy so much watching a good comedy...moreover it is a very big industry which employees millions of people and that way contributes to the economy too..

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, Demigod said:

Cant agree with this... cinema is an art form...and its a medium to communicate your thoughts or showcase your talent..or even take you to some other world...best examples would be Avatar, Jurassic park, terminator..etc moreover the entertainment it provides is unmatched in countries like India... I enjoy so much watching a good comedy...moreover it is a very big industry which employees millions of people and that way contributes to the economy too..

manipulating audience reaction is not art. Its just like a magic trick or circus show, that seeks to thrill. Its not art.

the question to be asked is, do people really need entertainment? dont worry, the question may seem silly now. in a couple decades, it'll be asked, and the answer from most will be NO.

 

[Demigod]

2 minutes ago, uttermost said:

manipulating audience reaction is not art. Its just like a magic trick or circus show, that seeks to thrill. Its not art.

the question to be asked is, do people really need entertainment? dont worry, the question may seem silly now. in a couple decades, it'll be asked, and the answer from most will be NO.

 

art¹

ärt/

noun

 

1. 1.

   the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

    

   in this case even magic is also art... and arts are necessary for society..even after couple of decades people still need entertainment.. may be the sources or medium might change..

[uttermost]

people don't need movies. They also don't need politics.

They'll live well without both these obscene power mongers, that use social capital they gained through the course of their career to their advantage.

people need to organise and get work done, they want done.

movies and politics are distractions from that work.

[uttermost]

Just now, Demigod said:

art¹

ärt/

noun

 

1. 1.

   the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

    

   in this case even magic is also art... and arts are necessary for society..even after couple of decades people still need entertainment.. may be the sources or medium might change..

arts being necessary for the society doesn't justify a major part of the economy being spent on consuming it. Its like the world runs on entertainment. Every computing device is used to access entertainment.

Its all a waste of fcuking resources. mining all those cobalt, yttrium, and other rare metals just to make devices for people to watch their favourite p0rn show or their favorite superhero.

[Demigod]

2 minutes ago, uttermost said:

people don't need movies. They also don't need politics.

They'll live well without both these obscene power mongers, that use social capital they gained through the course of their career to their advantage.

people need to organise and get work done, they want done.

movies and politics are distractions from that work.

Politics are part of any structure be it Democracy or dictatorship.. you cannot get rid of them and the highlighted part(self governance) in your comment will only work at a very low level not as you move up where masses are involved..