Krish is a good story teller. No body has any questions about it. Can he tell it effectively or not? Remains a big question for every critic before watching his new film.
These days, he seems to be lacking in clarity. The director is giving interviews to National Media about how Kangana ruined Manikarnika.
Many did advice him before working with Kangana that such a sit action could arise. Now, many believe him and sympathise with him, even though Kangana is telling a different story altogether.
Many found it egotistic and unnecessary to give herself the first credit as a director, when she herself for many days claimed to be reshoots like first Unit director as Krish was absent and busy.
At a time when Krish needs to deliver a nail on the coffin, he seems to be confusing himself and others as well. On one hand, he is saying that Kangana ruined his Gold into Silver.
At the same time, he is claiming the movie to be good enough to become a hit and he is receiving appreciation. He also said that Kangana did not make an historically accurate film and at the same time, he is praising her.
Well, if he can stick to one version and give clarity about what he is really upset about, is it credit? Is it historical accuracy? Is it his version? Or is it about changes to his vision? Or Or is it about his omission? What is he really upset about? If he can clearly state it, then people will able to give him better support! Right now, he is just getting trolled for whatever he said!
These days, he seems to be lacking in clarity. The director is giving interviews to National Media about how Kangana ruined Manikarnika.
Many did advice him before working with Kangana that such a sit action could arise. Now, many believe him and sympathise with him, even though Kangana is telling a different story altogether.
Many found it egotistic and unnecessary to give herself the first credit as a director, when she herself for many days claimed to be reshoots like first Unit director as Krish was absent and busy.
At a time when Krish needs to deliver a nail on the coffin, he seems to be confusing himself and others as well. On one hand, he is saying that Kangana ruined his Gold into Silver.
At the same time, he is claiming the movie to be good enough to become a hit and he is receiving appreciation. He also said that Kangana did not make an historically accurate film and at the same time, he is praising her.
Well, if he can stick to one version and give clarity about what he is really upset about, is it credit? Is it historical accuracy? Is it his version? Or is it about changes to his vision? Or Or is it about his omission? What is he really upset about? If he can clearly state it, then people will able to give him better support! Right now, he is just getting trolled for whatever he said!