If anyone doesnt agree that filmfare awards are unfair has not watched hindi films at all!!!! filmfare is ’’supposed’’ to be most the prestigious and another oscar for indians, but ironically it only acknowledges POPULARITY as oppose to TALENT (if indians are trying to compete with the west and claim filmfare to be india’s oscar, they need to watch hollywood awards more often). in my opinion, within the past decade where the awards went to the well-deserved was in 1994 where madhuri and no so popular nana patekar won. in 1995, shah rukh ( who else? ) absurdely got best actor for DDLJ. now kajol DID deserve her award, but shah rukh??? the overly obnoxious character who looked like a bull dog througout the whole film because of his raggedy hairstyle????? I heard he paid filmfare for that award. 1996 was just RIDICULOUS where karisma got it for raja hindustani. this boiled my blood especially since manisha was overly deserved for khamoshi and seema biswas for bandit queen. that year really proved that it was a popularity contest and not a talent one. they only gave karisma the award because it was the ’’turn’’ of her career and they felt sorry for her. anyways, thinking about her time boils my blood so ill stop about her.
1997 was another ’’well planned’’ award night, just becauses DTPH was the biggest it they just HAD to give it to the main trio’s in there. ok, ill admit madhuri DID recieve an award that year but only for mrityudand where she did splendly. anil kapoor deserved it for virasit, but instead they gave it to that stupid shah rukh as usual, to top it they felt the picture would be incomplete so they might as well give it karisma too!!! this is ridiculous, none of these trio’s deserved it. I can go on and on about how unfair these are, but there are too many politics involved with filmfare, I dont even waste my time watching the damb show on tv when it comes. and I know for a fact that most people will agree with me on this one.