Film stars have always held a central allure for the general populace. The craze to catch a fleeting glimpse of these luminaries, coupled with an insatiable curiosity about their personal lives, has been a societal norm.
In days gone by, it was common for enthusiasts to patiently wait for long periods at the gates of the Bangladesh Film Development Corporation (BFDC) to catch a glimpse of their favourite stars up close.
But times have changed, ushering in an era of easy technological access, and as a consequence, even the aura surrounding film stars has undergone a transformation.
Certain celebrities have chosen to expose themselves in a manner akin to readily available store products, seeking inexpensive popularity. The notion of exclusivity has diminished, as now anyone can easily gain access to them.
The question that arises is: where does the problem lie? Undoubtedly, there are challenges. When something becomes easily accessible, there is a risk of diminishing interest.
If a star is omnipresent, why would individuals expend their discretionary income to catch a glimpse of them? Mystery serves as the lifeblood of the entertainment world. If all the luminaries in the realm are laid bare, what incentive would the general populace have to remain engaged?
For example, let's take the cases of the current popular Dhallywood actors Shabnam Bubli, Apu Biswas and Zayed Khan.
Apu and Bubli found themselves entangled in the complexities of the marriage and subsequent separation of Dhallywood superstar, Sakib Khan.
Within a short span, their public discourse took a negative turn, marked by disparaging comments about one another. Incidents, such as the leakage of call records, have further exacerbated the situation.
Numerous other stars can also be cited who have transcended conventional boundaries, making their personal affairs accessible to the general public.
The recent altercation among stars during the Celebrity Cricket League serves as another illustrative example.
During a match, an unexpected brawl ensued, leading to open and acrimonious comments between the involved parties. This incident sparked negative reactions among the general public, further highlighting the potential consequences of stars airing their disputes in a public arena.
This scenario is epitomized by Zayed Khan, who stands out as an exemplary case. At present, Zayed Khan has become more "viral" in the online realm than any other Bangladeshi star. He has transcended the confines of being solely an artist and assumed the role of a prominent leader within the artistic community of the country. Consequently, Zayed Khan shoulders a heightened level of accountability.
In the age of content circulation for views, any video featuring Zayed Khan garners millions of views, making him the talk of the town. He is engulfed in the current of this widespread attention, and a penchant for exaggeration and bombast has become a habitual part of his persona. Consequently, YouTubers and content creators actively seek out his involvement, anticipating increased viewership.
Do more views or going viral mean popularity?
Of course not. In the current social media landscape, numerous individuals have gained viral attention through actions such as using profanity, singing or acting with unconventional styles, and freely experimenting with rhythms.
While their content may attract high view counts, the question of whether they genuinely enjoy widespread popularity remains debatable. Often, these instances merely offer fleeting amusement to the audience without establishing a lasting and meaningful connection.
Certainly, the role of movie stars extends beyond eliciting cheap laughs. The art of making people laugh is not inherently challenging; almost anything incongruous can provoke laughter. Yet, the true measure of a star's prowess lies in his or her ability to elicit profound emotional responses.
When a star's performance resonates to the point of hushing the cinema hall, when patrons exit with tears in their eyes, or when the audience relishes a subtle and sophisticated comedy, it signifies a profound impact. The real self-interest of stars lies in crafting performances that linger in people's minds long after the curtains close—an enduring imprint that transcends the transient allure of momentary amusement.
One might question the success trajectory of figures like Zayed Khan, Apu or Bubli in this context. It is not to undermine their abilities, as they have undoubtedly earned their place in the Dhallywood industry through merit, eventually ascending to leadership positions within a significant film artists' organization.
However, the intriguing aspect is the evolution observed in Zayed Khan's approach. Despite possessing commendable qualities and qualifications, there seems to be a shift towards embracing the allure of cheap "viral" trends.
The question arises: why has Zayed Khan veered towards this trajectory? Is he gradually positioning himself more as a "comedian" than a traditional hero figure?
Indeed, all individuals have the right to personal freedom and autonomy in how they choose to present themselves, and Zayed Khan is no exception to this principle. However, it is crucial to recognize that when a person assumes a role representing a specific group, there comes a responsibility to exercise certain constraints.
In Zayed Khan's case, as a leader within the artiste society in Bangladesh, his actions and public image carry weight beyond individual repercussions. The potential negative perception of a star can influence public attitudes toward the entire artist community.
Zayed Khan can tell if someone is in love with him, but why should he say the same thing again and again in public? Why would he repeatedly name the prices of his attires? Why should he perform a somersault in public places? Why does he need to be taught how to kiss? Why should he publicly make negative comments about a female artiste in his own community? Why does he always sing his own praise?
True success lies in garnering admiration from others, not merely from oneself. The distinction between being the subject of laughter and earning genuine admiration is paramount. Why does Zayed Khan fail to understand that?
The restoration of the golden era of Bangladeshi cinema is a shared responsibility for all stakeholders. Zayed Khan, having served as general secretary of the Film Artists Association, has a significant role in this effort.
Rather than being mired in negative discussions, Zayed Khan has the opportunity to elevate himself to extraordinary heights by focusing on his original craft—an expectation held by every film enthusiast.
Zayed Khan's responsibility extends beyond reacting to provocations aimed at garnering views. It is crucial for him to exercise discernment and recognize the limits he should impose on himself.
Ultimately, he alone can determine when to draw the line. Zayed Khan must grasp that the transient nature of viral culture does not confer lasting significance. What attains classic status, however, etches itself into the annals of history, and this is a distinction worth pursuing for the enduring legacy of Bangladeshi films.
Zayed Khan should neither be a viral content creator nor a comedian. He should become an actor. A timeless film star. That is the wish of his fans and well-wishers.
Not only Zayed Khan, but all the stars of the silver screen should be more careful in speaking in public. It will benefit the Bangladeshi film industry as a whole.