Rajinikanth was 65 years old and Sonakshi Sinha was around 27. Thats 38 years. She was younger than Rajinis daughters who were 33 and 29.
Most of the audience in TN.did not find it bizzare. Yes the movie was awful but i didnt actually even think about the age gap.
Rajini could play 35–40 even at 65
Ajith was 47 years old. Kajal was 31 years old. The difference was 16 years. Less than.half of the difference between Rajini and Sonakshi. Yet i remember thinking - Ajith looks like her father in the scenes.
Ajith looks 47 and is 47
Its called perception.
Not everyone knows how old the actors are. On.the Screen, the Actor is a character and the actress is a character. Its the characters whose chemistry is crucial, not the actors.
Ajith (41) and Trisha (28) clicked in this movie. Their characters were apt. It was Vinayak and not Ajith people saw. Vinayak was apt for Trisha.
Ajith plays 37–40 at 41 but the story creates a believable pairing as the age gap.fits.
Kamal was 53 -54 yrs and Trisha 26 - Yet Major Mannar (Character) looks perfectly apt with Ambujakshi (Character).
He plays 38–42 though he is 53–54.
Here Andrea is 29 and Kamal is 60. Nearly the same age difference but here he looks like an Old Lecher seducing a young girl.
Here Kamal looks 60 and plays 60.
Prabhu was 44 and Ramya Krishna 29 at the time of this movie. Yet Prabhu played 32–35 and somehow managed to achieve it. The pairing was believable.
So in the end:
Its the Character and not the Acto. If the Characters are apt, nothing looks weird. If the Characters are not apt, everything looks weird.
Actors like Rajkumar played romantic roles with heroines half his age yet nobody realized this as the characters were apt and his charcter could play 35–40 even though he was himself 65.
Meanwhile Sivaji played romantic roles aged 50 but looked 55 and so looked like the heroines father.
I have used Tamil Cinema because the age differences are much more in Tamil Cinema than Bollywood.