The 1980s in Bollywood: Sridevi at one end of the spectrum, Smita Patil in the other

The 1980s in Bollywood: Sridevi at one end of the spectrum, Smita Patil in the other. 

The two acted in a film together - Nazrana - and got along fine. Despite what the net has dug up from magazine archives from the tabloids of the 1980s - without context. A pull quote is not a conclusive argument. 

If cinema was meh that decade, Indian film journalism in the 1980s was at the bottom of the pile. Made up quotes, historical inaccuracies, no fact checking, no context, no nuance, no critical thinking - just high school gossip published in the guise of a magazine feature. 

Here's my take on both actresses, Sridevi and Smita Patil. Incredible performers with infinite talent,... However, Sridevi could do what Smita could, but Smita couldn't do what Sridevi did. 

There's an article somewhere in the film magazine archive about how much Smita Patil hated dancing in rain songs (even the fun Aaj Rapat Jayein), a staple in Hindi movies, esp the big dance numbers expected in commercial cinema. She said she could never pull off something absurd convincingly. Meanwhile, young Sridevi at age 20, went full force in the pots and pans included dancing numbers. Hiding any discomfort and masking it with a multitude of expressions and a smile. She convinced the audience, that yep, this is logical to dance in the heat of Madras (pre Chennai!) on the beach with a kilo of jewellery and makeup. And she did it exceedingly well. 

Furthermore, give Sridevi a serious role - pick any from her Tamil cinema oeuvre - Sridevi was genuinely great, if not incredible. Her precocious and stellar performances (remember she was just a teen when she did most of her Tamil films) are now vintage, classic Tamil cinema. 

Hence my lofty theory; Sridevi can do whatever Smita can, but Smita couldn't do what Sri did. 

Argue away on Reddit! OR see my point...