Shahrukh Khan to play Jawaharlal Nehru, or not?

Wed, March 21, 2012 7:15pm UTC by 3 Comments
Shahrukh Khan to play Jawaharlal Nehru, or not?

The actor is apparently in the reckoning to play Nehru in Krishna Shah’s Birth of a Nation

Rumours were abuzz online about Shahrukh Khan playing former PM Jawaharlal Nehru in Australian director Bruce Beresford’s new film Birth of a Nation. Beresford is apparently helming Krishna Shah’s project on Nehru’s daughter and former PM Indira Gandhi, and is in Mumbai for casting. A website also reported that the filmmaker gave a presentation in which some Bollywood and Hollywood actors’ faces were morphed into the characters of his film. It was there that Shahrukh Khan appeared morphed as Jawaharlal Nehru, it said.

But BollywoodLife has learned from sources that Beresford is not attached to direct Birth of  a Nation. So, we don’t know what the presentation was about, and whether it did take place at all. In that case, we’re not sure about SRK being a part of the project either! So, did SRK just miss out on a chance to play a historical figure?Subscribe to me on YouTube

  • Bharat Bhatt

    We would like to bring to your notice that the information in your article that “Bruce Beresford’s agent in LA, USA David Gersh has denied that Bruce is attached to direct the film ‘Birth of a Nation’ is incorrect and has been printed without any knowledge of Mr. David Gersh and Movie Moghuls Pvt. Ltd.

  • Bharat Bhatt

    Mr. David Gersh has denied that he has given any such comment to any reporter of bollywoodlife.com or any other publishing company and we have written proof of it.

    So we kindly request you to pull it down and publish an apology on your website before we send a legal notice regarding the same. We hope that this matter should be taken care of without any delay.

  • Deh

    Great post. I think you do a really good job of getnitg an important conversation started. There’s a little more to be said, though, of the argument capitalists make about the stifling of innovation in non-capitalist societies. You deny it without argumentation. Maybe it’s because you don’t take that claim too seriously; neither do I. In any case, for the sake of argumentation, I think a good way to go about rejecting the capitalist claim that there is a stifling of innovation in non-capitalist societies would be (i) to press the capitalist to pin down exactly what he means by innovation and (ii) to state the crippling costs of this so-called innovation. (i) seems like a genuine challenge for the capitalist. One way to motivate (ii) might be to suggest that there is some compromise to our humanity despite a greater degree of innovation. This route is a familiar one, I think, for the non/anti-capitalist. For example, the capitalist’s claim might be that the recent healthcare reform socializes medicine in such a way that will stifle medical advancements. The claim is that because doctors and researchers will be paid less (this is not an uncontested claim), there will be fewer, highly-qualified people pursuing these professions and those who do will have less incentive to work harder and advance the field. The non-capitalist could simply bite the bullet and accept that there would be less innovation but that this loss is offset by our creating more overall fairness and human dignity (i.e., more people would have access to affordabl healthcare, an [arguably] noble state of affairs in and of itself). Of course more would have to be said to fully cash out the argument only hinted at here. I think it’s promising, though.


Next ARTICLE
ALL NEWS
PREV ARTICLE
ALL NEWS