Karthik explains that Bollywood villains and temptresses are auspiciously named:
… [Saul] Bellow famously gave his characters physical traits that seemed to describe their characters… Indian movies, on the other hand, turned names into characterological maps. Pauls and Peters always had ill-fitting goatees, and took orders from their boss to do bad things, while Ritas and Sonas wore glittering, pointy boobed costumes that showed off a lot of thigh (and there was a lot of thigh to show off) and danced badly.
The Bollywood conception of the bad girl, the westernized one with a kicky English name, bobbed hair and go-go boots, always tickled me. And villains got the best names.
Sith, they’re no worse than ‘Bail Organa‘ — felonious prick? And ‘General Grievous’ has no pretensions above pulp. You’d expect General-ji in the WWE.
I don’t know if this is relevant, but in Bengal, dogs are traditionally given English names, most of them ending with the letter ‘y’. Examples: Johnny, Tommy, Micky, Ricky, Billy… etc.
A Indian Catholic teacher of mine had a pet peeve about second-tier villains and drunks in Hindi films having Christian names. Personally, I think cultural stereotyping is the least of Bollywood’s problems, coming behind production standards, casting, editing, writing, taste, etc.
Yeah why were all the villains named Raabert, Albert or Peter etc..it was ridiculous.. this cultural stereotyping is insidious … I am a teetotaler…but in Bombay, when i went to bars , pubs etc for other reasons ..(ok to meet chicks) ,I was always subjected to reactions ranging from surprise to disbelief to psychoananalysis when I refuse alcohol. People say stuff like: But u r a Catholic!! Why aren’t u drinking? one chick actually actually tried to psychoanalyse me ..assuming that only some extreme childhood trauma could have made a Catholic stop drinking…. this pisses me off..i m goin to drown my sorrows in some nestle chocolate milk..