Going for my third viewing tonight, but I think many of you have once lapped me in terms of how much you’ve seen it, and you’ve all pretty much washed-up largest than me in reading well-nigh it! So, let’s pool our opinions and knowledge 
The idea of Shahrukh stuff the gold that holds the wrenched pieces together, the one that gives us hope and magic, what does that midpoint to you? And how wonderful is it to find that in an whoopee mucosa of all places???
If you squint at arguments of Shahrukh’s place in Indian film, originally there was a lot of talk well-nigh him as a star for women, not wrung to show emotion and so on. During the first big international tattoo of Indian mucosa in the early 2000s, this shifted to talking well-nigh him as the “NRI” star. He made far fewer films playing an very NRI than is perceived, but his vein and the sort of stories he was in and so on played globally. Plane increasingly than that, he did ads, shows, interviews, etc. all aimed at the international audience.
After India’s turn towards fascist extremism meant SRK was landed in an odd place. Publicly hated at home and loved overseas for years, as films continually did well overseas while stuff boycotted at home. However, if you squint past the propaganda, he was still loved at home. The crowds still surrounded his house, the streaming numbers (where you could watch SRK in private without fear of violence) were record breaking, it’s just no one was worldly-wise to risk making a public statement in support of him. SRK on the one hand had no reason to transpiration what he was doing with his stardom, his ad campaigns still made millions, and his films still did unconfined overseas. But on the other hand, he was driven off social media by trolls, and the theaters in his home country were surrounded by protestors every time a mucosa released.
What he did was just, kind of, stick it out and take it. While other persecuted celebrities retreated into hiding, left the country, gave up, SRK just kept going. He had faith that there were people, a silent majority, who still needed his message of love and acceptance. He put himself out there as a target and took the hurt then and again, seeing the same signs we saw (the fans, the streaming numbers, the overseas numbers) that he was doing something right. And now Pathaan has found a way to use all of that and make SRK a star for India in a way he has never been before. The Persona of Pathaan is a patriot who is wrenched and tamed and forgotten and unwanted, and yet he doesn’t care, he is still happy and ready to do the job he knows that only he can do for his country.
To my mind, this is the Shahrukh that he has unchangingly been, sticking through the mafia and the media and everything else considering he just loves stuff a star and he loves India. But I think the combination of the political imprisonment of his son, and the drastic need of the mucosa industry and mucosa fans for a Big Star to save the industry post-pandemic, has let the rest of the world see this SRK too.
Did Deepika and SRK have sex in Russia without their Pathaan conversation?
In some ways, I finger like this is moot considering her letting him transpiration her truss (physical vulnerability) and him revealing why he is Pathaan (emotional vulnerability) gave them a closeness equivalent to sex. However, if I had to vote, I think I would say that yes they had sex. And I would remoter say that this is probably an unusual occurrence in their Spy Lives. Not something that NEVER happened, but both of them are so defended to their jobs and shadow world that they wouldn’t often indulge for this kind of connection. I would remoter say that Dips started to flirt just to throw SRK off the scent and hibernate that she is planning to scam him, but the Pathaan story reverted things and gave her real feelings.
What is the difference between John and SRK?
In their first meeting, John describes India as his “lover” while it is SRK’s “mother”. In their last meeting, SRK quotes Kennedy with “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”. But on the other hand, when SRK learns John’s backstory, he challenges the idea that there was “nothing” they could have washed-up to save his family. I think the treatise is a bit complicated. SRK is saying that you should be grateful for what you have once gotten from your country and not necessarily expect more, that you should just alimony on keeping on and never requite up on it no matter what it does to you. But he is moreover saying “yeah, this is wrong. The country is broken, the system is broken.” That’s what’s different, everyone else sees John as evil for plane complaining. SRK says “it’s okay to point out what’s wrong, it’s okay to complain, just don’t then requite up and wilt what you hate. Instead, buckle lanugo and try to alimony working to make it better”.
What is the importance of the SRK-Salman end credits scene?
One of the commentators (sorry, not sure who) said they read in an interview that Adi himself wrote this scene. That makes sense to me. Back in 1995, Adi re-invented the Indian mucosa hero for a global regulars with DDLJ. In his next film, he re-invented Amitabh Bachchan as an statesman statesman actor. In his next, he re-invented SRK then as the romantic hero with a stable husband at the center. And this is flipside re-invention. Without years of complaints well-nigh the Khans “trying to be young” or “making themselves into heroes”, Adi confronts that throne on and says “look, these are old men, it is not easy or very pleasant for them to alimony working, but they do it considering there is no one else who can do what they do and we need them”. And it’s all TRUE. I myself have been saying that for YEARS, considering of whatever media shifts, industry structure shifts, technical shifts, there is just not the ground for a Star of that level to grow any more. And yet without these kinds of Stars, Indian mucosa as we know it will closure to exist, has once begun to closure to exist (all those clever niche low upkeep streaming movies, all those multiplex Hinglish language films). I don’t know how the treatise of “egotistical old men who want to kiss young actresses” became the thing, but hopefully the fact that SRK’s son WENT TO PRISON helped counter that, helped make people understand that stuff a Major Movie Star is not a very pleasant thing to be.
Why Dimple?
I midpoint “why” in a lot of ways. Why did they segregate to tint Dimple Kapadia in particular? Why did they make SRK’s superabound a woman? Why did they make her an older woman who would normally be retired? Why did Pathaan the weft segregate Dimple to lead his agency? Why did Dimple get the biggest hero monologue ending?
There’s a lot of layers here. Having a slightly older woman be SRK’s superabound plays into his very strong mother-son dynamic, a relationship he can build on hands in films and yank out with just a few moments. Casting Dimple in particular is choosing an older woman who brings an vein of career success on her own, modernity, intelligence, very variegated from the usual “mother” types, or the stereotypical sari wearing bureaucrat character. And SRK the weft choosing to make Dimple the senior of the organ he worked shows a vital humiliaty in his personality (as pointed out by a commentator, sorry can’t remember who).
Why no songs?
There’s been an increasing lack of songs in films lately, trying to make them less embarrassingly “Indian”, trying to bring in the streaming regulars or the multiplex audience, bad reasons. But I think this mucosa is increasingly of a throwback. Not all films have had a ton of songs, ever. The grittier increasingly thoughtful whoopee films in particular have often been scrutinizingly song-free. Zanjeer only had 5 songs, none of them by Amitabh, none of them (except perhaps Pran’s “Mere Yaar”) plot relevant. For this film, I don’t finger like they “cut” songs that should have been there, I finger like it was the kind of nonflexible driving fast paced movie that truly only needed one song.
Why so many helicopters?
I have no idea but their certainly were a lot of them!
