Local hero, Netflix star
If there is any showbiz star who knows a thing or two about representing Pakistan internationally through his line of work, it is Humayun Saeed. Or, as viewers abroad may call him, Dr Hasnat in Season 5 of Netflix royal drama The Crown.
But although his reputation as an A-lister is cemented in his home country, Humayun stressed in an interview on YouTube channel Filme Shilmy that during his time on The Crown, he felt the weight of representing Pakistan before the eyes of the rest of the world.
"Representation is so important whenever we have to go outside our country," mused the star, who made his post-Crown comeback last year with a lead role in Gentleman after having been away from screens for nearly two years. "Take The Crown. That character was an important one, and I gave it my all. I took a lot of time with it, and it was at the forefront of my mind that the whole world would be watching this."
Despite the pressure of global expectations and the eyes of the world, however, the actor praised the work environment and the professionalism of his colleagues, whom he credited for going the extra mile to ensure his comfort.
"There was pressure, but I'm glad that the people who worked with me were very good," noted Humayun. They knew I had come from another country and was working in another language."
Humayun went on to hint, however, that professionalism is a two-way street. "I gave it my all, and this is where our respect comes from – the work ethic we have when we go elsewhere," he pointed out. Lauding, in turn, the work ethic of those on set, the actor continued, "I saw that everything was happening on time, everyone was punctual and working quietly, and everyone's priority was to complete the work every day."
Stopping just short of commenting on punctuality and efficiency on sets in Pakistan, Humayun went on to concede, "Of course, we have that here as well, but maybe we make some mistakes. But the thing is, they do not make those mistakes."
What's in a name?
Alongside his Bin Roye co-star, Mahira Khan, Humayun is currently in the throes of promoting his upcoming Eidul Azha romantic comedy Love Guru. In the same interview, Humayun recalled that he had been warned to refrain from being in any sort of offering going by that particular name, at the risk of being tainted by association after a previous film also called Love Guru had flopped.
"There used to be a film that wasn't very good called Love Guru, and someone told me I shouldn't take on this particular film – but our film is good!" he insisted with conviction. Brushing aside the importance of the name of a production, Humayun maintained, "People are interested in films. If you make a good movie, and if people like it, then they start to like the name as well!"
And of course, the star also has the evidence to back up his beliefs about films and their respective names. "I made a movie called Punjab Nahi Jaungi, and everyone said, 'What kind of name is this? This is not a good name for a film!' But then when that film became a hit, everyone would say that it was because it had a catchy name!"
In other words: any title is only as good as the film itself. "When a film is good, the name is also a hit," concluded Humayun firmly.
Delving deeper into the film itself and giving insight into his performance, the star discussed the art of delivering his lines when the viewers are in on a secret, but the characters are in the dark.
"The shades of this character – sometimes I don't always understand how to talk like him, because I myself don't talk like that," he admitted. "But I would go to [director Nadeem Baig] and he would guide me and advise me about the timing. So I would copy Nadeem! The thing is, this film doesn't have that much comedy. I needed to add a few nuances so that the characters can't tell that he is lying, but the audience can."
Mahira's personal touch
Sitting alongside Humayun, fellow A-lister and Love Guru leading lady Mahira, known for picking up non-conformist roles, had her own thoughts on what makes her character tick and how she brought shades of herself to the part.
"The first time you read a script, you read it as you," began Mahira. "And then you pick on things in the script. And the director says, 'This is not you, this is a character!'"
Admitting that it isn't always practical to view a character through one's own lens, Mahira added "Sometimes it's not needed, sometimes it's not the character, and you have to surrender to it."
When it comes to Love Guru itself, however, Mahira is adamant that this her onscreen persona is one that audiences can get behind and fall in love with – and yes, this time, she was able to convince director Nadeem to view the role through her own lens to add richness and subtlety to her character.
"In this film, she is a girl of today," explained Mahira. "She is a true blue feminist and someone who is always on the right side of the spectrum. I would go to Nadeem and say, 'She wouldn't say this about another girl!' And he would agree and say, 'You're right, let's change it.' So yes, I do bring this to the table."
Looking back on her former roles, Mahira mused that she is now in a place where she does not feel she owes it to herself to take on characters carrying an important message, as opposed to the relatively "easy-breezy" lighter character she has taken on board in Love Guru.
"When I was younger, I was so hell bent on just doing that," she recalled. "I remember I had a few choices and I went for Verna, because I felt the subject was so important and I needed to be a part of it. At that time, even though I was offered roles that were easy breezy, I thought, 'No, I have to do this first.'"
Now, however, Mahira feels unshackled from her own expectations. "I've had a kind of switch," she affirmed. "If I don't do it now, then when will I do it? But I don't look at it that way. if you know what I mean. I don't think, 'Oh this is easy breezy, and this is heavy'. Now it's just about what attracts me and what is offered to me."
Will viewers find Mahira's easy-breezy character as palatable as the woman bringing her to life? There is not long to go before we find out.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
David Beckham's garden carrot leaves Victoria ‘embarrassed' in funny home video
Sir David Beckham left his wife Victoria in fits of laughter after sharing a light-hearted video from their Cotswolds garden. The 50-year-old former England captain filmed himself harvesting a carrot from his home vegetable patch while being filmed by Victoria. 'I really hope it's good,' David said as he crouched beside the garden bed, clearing away soil with anticipation. But the excitement quickly turned to humour as he pulled up a small carrot with twisted roots. Victoria, filming the moment, burst into laughter, exclaiming, 'That's so disappointing,' and added, 'Omg that's embarrassing.' Posting the moment on Instagram, David captioned the video: 'Exciting day today in my veggie garden, CARROTS, but not exactly what I expected.' Fans reacted warmly in the comments. The Beckhams have gradually transformed their £12 million Cotswolds estate into a rural retreat, featuring a lake, bee hives, a greenhouse, an outdoor sauna, and multiple garden patches. David's passion for outdoor living was also noted in his Netflix documentary, where he shared his love for his 'country get-up.'
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
The Titan, the Max, and the cult of the visionary
In June 2023, the world momentarily paused to follow the fate of five men trapped inside a small carbon fibre tube descending into the depths of the Atlantic. Aboard the OceanGate submersible named Titan, their mission was to witness the graveyard of another failed engineering marvel — the Titanic. However, it was barely 90 minutes into their descent that the Titan lost contact with the surface ship. A multinational search effort was launched and for days, headlines speculated the possibility of survival and the fate that met the adventurers on board the submersible. TV new channels ran live updates on the oxygen levels inside the sub. On the surface, this was a story of risk, exploration, and tragedy. But as the dust settled — or rather, as the implosion was confirmed — what emerged was not a simple tale of unfortunate loss but a parable of 21st-century hubris. Just like another disaster that came before it — the crashes of two Boeing 737 Max aircrafts in 2018 and 2019, which claimed 346 lives — the Titan sub tragedy was not an accident. It was the vision of a billionaire who placed profit, reputation, and ego above human life. Netflix's twin documentaries, The Titan: The OceanGate Disaster and Downfall: The Case Against Boeing, are in many ways cinematic mirror images of one another. One probes an elite venture's audacious flirtation with death, and the other, a once-revered aerospace titan's calculated betrayal of its founding values. Together, they offer a chilling study of how capitalist incentives and delusional self-belief have hollowed out the core of safety, accountability, and engineering integrity. What the documentary reveals is that The Titan sub was no sleek marvel of deep-sea engineering. It was a patchwork of consumer-grade parts, including a video game controller used to steer it and experimental carbon fibre technology deemed unsuitable by deep-sea experts. Stockton Rush, OceanGate's founder, persisted in cutting corners and dismissing warnings. He had fired employees who raised safety concerns and sidestepped regulatory classification by labeling his vessel as an "experimental" craft. The Titan: The OceanGate Disaster doesn't just document a submersible's final voyage. It examines the psychology of its maker. Rush was a man who saw regulation as an 'obstacle to innovation' and believed himself uniquely capable of rewriting the rules. His hubris wasn't just personal; it was ideological. He believed in the mythology of the visionary entrepreneur, the kind Silicon Valley hails as disruptive geniuses, too bold for bureaucracies and too fast for rules. This myth, dangerously incubated in the echo chambers of modern capitalism, is what ultimately doomed the Titan. What makes Titan particularly unsettling is its cultural context. As the documentary smartly illustrates, the media spectacle that followed the incident became its own capitalist sideshow — clickbait headlines, Twitter jokes, and livestreamed oxygen countdowns. The actual engineering failure became less important than the cultural symbolism: rich men paying $250,000 to tour the ruins of a sunken ship, only to die en route in an imploding capsule. It was sadder than Daedalus' own son flying too close to the sun on the wings he created. The film subtly points out that the real problem is not that the story distracted us from "more important" news. The tragedy is that our social media-fueled discourse couldn't rise above simplistic binaries: Either mourn the deaths or mock them; there was no nuance to the discussion on wealth inequality and scientific exploration. A corporation falls If Titan is a story of libertarian arrogance run amok, Downfall: The Case Against Boeing is the quiet, damning chronicle of institutional rot. Directed by Rory Kennedy, Downfall traces the corporate unravelling of Boeing from a beacon of engineering excellence to a cautionary tale of financialised capitalism. When Lion Air Flight 610 crashed into the Java Sea in October 2018, and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 fell out of the sky five months later, the world wanted to blame pilot error or poor training. After all, it was unthinkable that Boeing — with its sterling legacy and global dominance — had built a flawed aircraft. 'If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going' was the tagline bandied about, such was the faith in this aerospace engineering marvel. However, Downfall strips away that illusion with surgical precision. It reveals how the 737 Max, Boeing's bestselling plane, had been designed with a secret: a deadly anti-stall system (MCAS) that pilots weren't told about, not even in manuals or simulators. The documentary makes it clear that the crashes weren't engineering mistakes — they were business decisions. Boeing had faced stiff competition from Airbus, which launched a more fuel-efficient model. Instead of designing a new aircraft from scratch, Boeing retooled the ageing 737 to save billions and rushed the Max to market. The company lobbied the FAA to forgo extensive pilot retraining, fearing it would cost sales. They won. The regulators rolled over. And 346 people died. The most powerful aspect of Downfall is its use of voices we rarely hear — the families of victims, the disillusioned engineers, the whistleblowers. One bereaved father becomes a searing voice of grief-fueled advocacy, and a former Boeing employee recalls the moment he realised the company had 'lost its soul.' These testimonies, paired with internal Boeing emails mocking regulators and boasting about 'Jedi mind tricks,' expose not just negligence but cruelty. When safety became optional at Boeing, accountability became negotiable. Capitalism with a death wish While the disasters chronicled in Titan and Downfall seem wildly different — one a private undersea expedition, the other a mass-market airliner — they are united by a deeper critique. Both documentaries argue that today's capitalism is no longer about innovation or production. It's about optics, speed, and shareholder value. Rush brashly ignored deep-sea experts because he needed hype. Boeing callously sidelined engineers because Wall Street needed dividends. In both cases, the system rewarded shortcuts and punished caution. Rush was a media darling until his hubris killed him. Boeing's CEO was paid $23 million in 2018, even as the company laid off thousands and falsified safety data. The firm spent $43 billion on stock buybacks while its planes were crashing. And when finally fined, Boeing paid $2.5 billion — less than 4% of its 2021 revenue. The pattern is unmistakable: destruction follows when corporations prioritise speed, cost-cutting, and PR over design, safety, and truth. This is not just unfair. As one analyst in Downfall puts it, 'It's not that capitalism isn't working. It's that it's no longer capable of delivering products that work.' Both films are also meditations on distraction — how capitalism commodifies even its failures. Titan became a Twitter meme faster than it became a tragedy. Downfall shows how Boeing's PR machine spun its way out of accountability, while most media outlets dropped the story once the planes were grounded. The documentaries themselves stand almost as acts of resistance: attempts to force attention back onto the lives lost, the systems failed, and the accountability evaded. The deeper tragedy is not just that people died, but that we may already be forgetting why. In our hyper-speed information In Titan, we witness the literal implosion of a vessel designed with fatal flaws by a man who believed he could bend physics to his will. In Downfall, we watch a metaphorical implosion — a company once synonymous with trust and safety reduced to an emblem of regulatory capture and corporate decay. What kind of society rewards recklessness with wealth? How did we allow institutions meant to protect us to become tools of political influence and market domination? Both are American stories. Both are capitalist stories. And both leave us with the same message: when profit becomes the only metric of success, we all become collateral damage. These documentaries are not just post-mortems; they are warnings. The sea and sky are unforgiving environments. So is reality. No matter how much money you throw at it, how many rules you bypass, or how compelling your origin myth is, eventually, the truth will catch up — with a stall, a crash, or an implosion. And when it does, it won't care how good your stock looked.
Express Tribune
14 hours ago
- Express Tribune
MrBeast faces backlash over AI YouTube thumbnail tool, promises major changes
YouTube star MrBeast has announced upcoming changes to his AI-powered thumbnail tool following criticism from fellow creators who claim the technology threatens creative integrity on the platform. Developed in partnership with Viewstats, the tool allows users to generate AI-based thumbnails by referencing thumbnails from existing YouTube channels, including their own. Designed to improve engagement and accessibility for smaller creators, the platform charges a monthly fee of $80 — far less than hiring a thumbnail artist. However, backlash erupted after creators like JackSepticEye and PointCrow criticized the tool. JackSepticEye expressed outrage over the unauthorized use of his branding in promotional material, stating on X (formerly Twitter): 'What the actual fk… and he used my logo… Fk AI.' PointCrow added that the tool enables the replication of artists' work without permission. 'You've made something that can steal my (and my artists') hard work without a thought,' he said, noting that MrBeast's model appeared trained on creator content. The backlash prompted a direct conversation between MrBeast and PointCrow, after which MrBeast acknowledged the concerns and pledged to revise the tool. 'Faceswap should only be used to swap your face on YOUR thumbnail, obviously not others,' MrBeast clarified. 'My goal is to build tools to level the playing field… not to replace artists.' Though tensions between MrBeast and critics like JackSepticEye have previously eased, this latest clash suggests renewed friction in the ongoing debate over AI's role in content creation. As of now, Viewstats remains active, but updates are underway to address ethical concerns raised by the creator community.
