Salman Khan on Padmavati controversy: Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s movies never have vulgar and disgusting content

Tiger Zinda Hai actor Salman Khan, who has earlier worked with Sanjay Leela Bhansali said that he should be trusted for not portraying anyone in a bad light.

By: Express Web Desk | New Delhi | Updated: November 15, 2017 1:34 pm
salman khan supports sanjay leela bhansali on padmavati Salman Khan has turned up in support of Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s next release, Padmavati.

Controversies and Bollywood go hand in hand. The list of movies which have courted controversies in the recent past includes Ae Dil Hai Mushkil and Lipstick Under My Burkhaa. And, the recent entry in the list is Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s next Padmavati starring Deepika Padukone, Shahid Kapoor and Ranveer Singh. The movie is courting controversies for supposedly portraying Rani Padmini in a bad light despite a clarification from the filmmaker that there is no onscreen interaction between Allaudin Khilji (Ranveer Singh) and Padmavati (Deepika Padukone) and the honour of Rajputs have been taken care of in the magnum opus.

There might not be any comment from the government on the threats to the release of the film, but the film fraternity and television associations have come out to extend their support to Bhansali. Tiger Zinda Hai actor Salman Khan, who has worked with the ace-filmmaker in movies like Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam and Khamoshi, has also said that Bhansali should be trusted for not portraying anyone in a bad light. In an interview with News18, he said, “I believe that the censor board should take the decision. Sanjay makes very beautiful and nice films. His heroines are very beautiful. His movies never have vulgar and disgusting content. Keeping in mind his past records one should get a sense that he cannot portray anyone in a bad light.”

Also read | All the controversies Deepika Padukone-Ranveer Singh starrer Padmavati has courted before its release

The Rajput Karni Sena is claiming that Padmavati insults the Rajput community and is a distortion of history, which “hurts their religious sentiments”. In response, the makers of the period drama calling all the controversies “needless” are ready to screen the film for those who have doubts about its content once the film is passed by the Censor Board.

For all the latest Entertainment News, download Indian Express App

  1. S
    Shantanu
    Nov 15, 2017 at 10:16 am
    ------GULSHAN KUMAR MURDER by a muslim singer nadeem of nadeem-shravan fame was done on the orders of underworld, he was murdered becaz he was becoming an obstacle in ISLAMISATION OF BOLLYWOOD, which muslim actors/singers/producers were trying to do with the support of underworld and terrorists.................underworld invested fake indian currency printed in pakistan in bollywood through these muslim agents like nadeem, sharukh, salman, amir, sajid etc etc..................then used this money to kill our people in blasts and running kidnapping and extortion rackets-------------------We HINDUS DUE TO IGNORENCE kept supporting these islamic agents in past, but now we should stop watching their movies and on TV.............muslims again stabbed us in back, we supported those sharukh, salman, amir etc and gave them all the money and fame, but in return only spread islam from behind the curtains and mocked our religion..............
    (2)(2)
    Reply
    1. P
      Prasann Singh
      Nov 14, 2017 at 8:08 pm
      Feeling happy to see below comments, that people are reading there history and telling it to world. Really its foundation of New INDIA. The deeper we go in our history, the more we strengthen our cultural heritage and that is one INDIA for Indian. Mera desh badal raha ha, aage nikal raha ha.
      (5)(3)
      Reply
      1. S
        sd
        Nov 15, 2017 at 9:15 am
        don't go too deep. it smells.
        (0)(1)
        Reply
        1. I
          islamicPhuc
          Nov 15, 2017 at 1:44 pm
          You bet your whiny li'l bottom, you islamic . It reeks of your forefather-converters and how they murdered, p ered, looted destroyed the Hindus
          (1)(0)
      2. D
        Dr Ben Morgan
        Nov 14, 2017 at 7:45 pm
        Hello everyone, is urgently needed A , B , O , blood group donors between the age of 18-65. We give you all the entire best attempt, we will give you honest price and best treatment for your transplant as top best medical treatment it will help your future life, kindly contact us for more information: Best regard Dr Ben Morgan No. 917411951612 WhatsApp number: 91-7411951612 email: shifamedicalhealthcare
        (0)(0)
        Reply
        1. B
          Bhola
          Nov 14, 2017 at 7:13 pm
          Filmy fraternity are bunch of Crookes and they are only interested in money making ,be it Dawood's money ,or money made by insulting country ,Hindu religion ,vulgarising soiciety and womenfolks. This fraternity is bent up to the moral fabrics of the country.It is shameful argument that they will make whatever they like ,that is their freedom of expression. Like Indian media houses ,this film fraternity also are brck deep in corruption and they only obey the wishes of out side master.
          (4)(4)
          Reply
          1. I
            Indian
            Nov 14, 2017 at 7:09 pm
            The HISTORY as told by the VICTOR and VANQUISHED will never be same and so the FILMMAKERs have to be extra careful while making FILMs about VANQUISHED ANCESTORS of INDIANS CITIZENS of present day INDIA especially when VICTORS were CRUEL INVADERS. .......... If Mr BANSALI has an IOTA of COURAGE, let him declare that he his next FILM will be about "INDIAN MUSLIM RULERS INVITING AFGHAN KING, Ahmed Shah Abdali and supporting him to defeat MARATHAS in the THIRD BATTLE OF PANIPAT in 1761 continuing on to "VADDA GHALLUGHARA"- (the Great Massacre), of the Sikhs by the Afghan in 1764. ....................... Most INDIANS CanNOT and WILL NOT allow HINDUS to be used as punching bags by anyone including FILM MAKERS if they dare NOT make FILMS about ATROCITIES of ISLAMIC INVADERS fearing VIOLENT REPRISAL.
            (2)(0)
            Reply
            1. Load More Comments