you gotta know when to fold 'em

Though I'm new to the Vinod Khanna fan club, am I still allowed to say that this is perhaps not the ultimate comeback look?*

It's not horrible - though I have made my feelings about facial hair abundantly clear, and clean-shaven-ness is one of Akshaye's (and others') most endearing qualities - but the dark hair and white beard thing has already been done, and since you forfeitted your shot at being a bigger star than Amitabh decades ago, just let it go and do your own thing. Or Kenny Rogers's thing, whatever.

* To be fair, he did say it was for a specific role in his new movie Risk, and in this interview, at least, he seems to look like a very normal man in a shirt and ambervisions.

Thanks to Babasko for the tip.

Bollywood Fugly lesson #4: do rock the trademarks of the times

(I wrote this completely independently of Babasko's post on "Retro or Fugly," I swear!)

Hey Hercules, what time is it?


According to my watch, it's pushing a quarter past poncho.

(Amar Akbar Anthony, 1977)

Can it count as "fugly" if it's quintessential? This is really only outrageous from our smug 2006 standpoint (from which we will choose to overlook the brief return of the poncho two years ago, blip that it was, even among those of us who knit and secretly wanted to make one). It's interesting how some trademarks of certain eras hold up as "classic" and others just look dated. I don't know what the difference is, but I know it when I see it. And even if the poncho isn't inherently fugly, it's still funny, especially because here it's being worn by a tough guy/bodygaurd/spurned lover, so here you go.*

Contrast with Shabana Azmi's floral blouse, which is also really 70s to me, especially with the knot in front, but here it just looks fun and flirty, somehow "classic" rather than hopelessly lost.


And the sunny yellow pants are a great complement, although probably I should point out here that if your pants are more bell-bottomed than Vinod Khanna's, future generations may giggle.

Although their laughter is hollow, because they're jealous they doesn't get to romp about with Vinod and, thirty years later, still totally rock the screen.

* Plus I was hoping to do some fancy linguistic tie-in if "poncho," like "punch," derives from "paanch." Sadly, according to the OED, it doesn't.

the shoes make the man

(Parvarish, 1977)
I don't know if these qualify as full-on fugly, but they did make me pause the DVD, rewind, and giggle. It's conceivable that real peole did at one point in time wear shoes like this, although the last time I remember seeing similar footwear was in the Yellow Submarine movie. Based on the two movies I've seen him in, Vinod Khanna tends to rock the 1970s, and costume designers put him in clothes that are clearly of that era but do not tend to offend otherwise - sure, the pants are pretty tight and flared, and you can feel the polyester coming through the screen, but overall, the clothes are normal-ish. I can remember grown-ups in my hometown wearing not dissimilar things when I was young (hey, it's the small-town midwest, we're a bit behind the times). But what's weird about these shoes is that they veer towards the granny - as though they should be worn by the little old lady who owns Tweety Bird and thwaks Sylvester with a broom.

Also, this wig/beard getup is funny.


I won't bother to fug her clothes, because I think she's supposed to be in disguise as a hotel maid, but still. She's also wearing black sling-backs with white kneesocks. It's awful. The scene is like a Mel Brooks take on "Yeh Mera Dil" (although mysteriously released a year earlier).