Sadly Over-hyped

Great Film overall

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Blistering performances.

I understand that movies are made for the sake of entertainment, but I am ashamed that the only type of entertainment that is appreciated by Indian viewers is romance, which this movie is really about. I read the comments section of this movie and I see a lot of people make excuses to why so much romance was involved in what should have been a serious dramatization of Asoka the tyrant and Asoka the saint. They say that without romance the movie would not have been entertaining. The ones that say this likely have never seen the real good stuff such as Lawrence in Arabia. Seriously, imagine Lawrence of Arabia movie, not imagine if several scenes portraying his multilayered character were replaced with some romantic scenes with a scantily clad beauty in the desert. That movie would have been laughed at globally. A similar form of adulteration was done in the plot of Asoka. I am startled by the kind of praise this movie has received despite the utter dilution and corruption of topic at hand. The problem with general Indian audience is they do not even know what makes a good movie. If someone made the movie Asoka without romance and mostly focusing on conquests and spiritual messages, the same fans who are praising this movie would have loved it and probably called their all time favorite. Problem with Indian movie making industry is you very rarely get movies that have been flawlessly directed and focused on a certain topic. This has made the fanbase laud mediocrity. I am terribly disappointed in Santosh Sivan who went this route, possibly at the behest of producers. I do not doubt Sivan's credentials, but someone like Gowariker would have probably made a far superior flick by condensing the romance to about 10% of what we saw. Sivan and SRK probably took this route to earn profits, but this movie was a huge disappointment at the box office. I believe that if this movie got a Gowariker treatment where he would not give two f***s about catering to the masses, the movie would have done much better.

I rented this movie because the text on the cover appealed to me. It was speaking about the transformation of a King who lived in the 3rd century India and turned from a warrior to a Buddhist and then helped to spread the message. I also suspected from the cover that it is a grand epic, based on a true story I didn't hear about so far. I got the epic part right, there were plenty of action, battle scenes. But I was disappointed because the Buddhist years of Asoka's kingdom were not pictured at all. Instead the whole movie was focusing on the love story thread.(Side track: My house mate walked in while I was watching the movie and said he was "in love" when he saw the actress playing the king's love interest, Kareena Kapoor, granddaughter of legendary Raj Kapoor.) I was hoping to see how Asoka transforms from the mightiest and bloodiest war hero to the calm Buddhist, but saw none of it. Thus it was not entirely believable for me, that just because he lost his true love and found her after the battle that would be enough to turn him into a meek person. And why did they have to put in the obligatory music-video-clip type of songs, all 5 of them. They were fun, but didn't add anything to the movie. To close on a plosive note I would like to acknowledge that it was shot beautifully and the cutting was modern. Mostof it was a treat for my eyes. A tad bit too long though with its 170 minutes.

Ashoka was a great emperor of India and his contribution towards the uplift of Indian people (Hindus and Bhuddists) is an indelible trait of his towering personality but unfortunately it has not been properly projected in this historical movie.Instead, the young Ashok (icon of the Mauraya Hindu Kingdom) is depicted like a replica of the medieval uncivilized conqueror Chengez Khan. Why has the conversion of Ashok to Bhuddism, his contribution towards the alleviation of the Indian people by undertaking various welfare and development works has not been highlighted in the film ? He is mostly remembered as a people's King of ancient India like Cyrus was for the Persian people. The director's money minting mentality can be amply read as he has endeavored to reveal the early gory and cruel picture/character of the future just and altruistic ruler of ancient India. Why has the author and director overshadowed Ashoka's pious, pitiful, resilient and people friendly trait that was the hallmark of his personality after the bloody battle of Kalinga which was fought during his youth ?There is definitely much more than meets the eye after viewing this picture. A second part of this movie should be made which should elaborate the great achievements of Ashoka in the field of early spread of Bhuddism and his public welfare campaigns and works.

Was this a movie? I have seen a lot if Indian movies (natural being an Indian) but I have rarely come across something as bad as this. Truly speaking, Shahrukh Khan simply didn't have the funds to make this sort of a movie. Asoka, the greatest among the Indian kings is reduced to a dacoit, never he does come across as the Empreror whose kingdom spanned across India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Myanmur. The acting was average to say the least. Don't get me wrong, Shahrukh Khan is a great actor and he may be the king of bollywood but he can not potray some one like Asoka on the screen. His best roles have been in movies like Dil to Pagal hai, Dilwale..... and he should stick to that! This was a mockery!