input: After 12th-century, Odia temples, monasteries and nearby institutions such as the Nalanda in eastern Indian subcontinent came under waves of attacks and ransacking by Muslim armies, a turmoil that impacted all arts and eroded the freedoms previously enjoyed by performance artists. The official records of Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq's invasion in Odisha (1360-1361 CE), for example, describe the destruction of the Jagannath temple as well as numerous other temples, defacing of dancing statues, and ruining of dance halls. This led to a broad decline in Odissi and other religious arts, but there were some benevolent rulers in this period who supported arts particularly through performances at courts. During the Sultanate and Mughal era of India, the temple dancers were moved to entertain the Sultan's family and courts. They became associated with concubinage to the nobility. The Odissi dance likely expanded in the 17th century, states Alexandra Carter, under King Ramachandradeva's patronage. This expansion integrated martial arts (akhanda) and athletics into Odissi dance, by engaging boys and youth called Gotipuas, as a means to physically train the young for the military and to resist foreign invasions. According to Ragini Devi, historical evidence suggests that the Gotipuas tradition was known and nurtured in the 14th century, by Raja of Khurda. During the British Raj, the officials of the colonial government ridiculed the temple traditions, while Christian missionaries launched a sustained attack on the moral outrage of sensuousness of Odissi and other Hindu temple dance arts. In 1872, a British civil servant named William Hunter watched a performance at the Jagannath temple in Puri, then wrote, "Indecent ceremonies disgraced the ritual, and dancing girls with rolling eyes put the modest worshipper to the blush...", and then attacked them as idol-worshipping prostitutes who expressed their devotion with "airy gyrations". Christian missionaries launched the "anti-dance movement" in 1892, to ban all such dance forms. The dancers were dehumanized and stigmatized as prostitutes during the British period. In 1910, the British colonial government in India banned temple dancing, and the dance artists were reduced to abject poverty from the lack of any financial support for performance arts, combined with stereotyping stigma.

Answer this question "Did both males and females perform the dance?"
output: patronage. This expansion integrated martial arts (akhanda) and athletics into Odissi dance, by engaging boys and youth called Gotipuas,

Question: Shahid Kapoor was born in New Delhi on 25 February 1981 to actor Pankaj Kapur and actor-dancer Neelima Azeem. His parents divorced when he was three years old; his father shifted to Mumbai (and married the actress Supriya Pathak) and Kapoor continued living in Delhi with his mother and maternal grandparents. His grandparents were journalists for the Russian magazine Sputnik, and Kapoor was particularly fond of his grandfather: "He would walk me to school every single day. He would talk to me about dad, with whom he shared a great relationship, and read out his letters to me."

Having noticed Kapoor in the Aryans' music video "Aankhon Mein", the producer Ramesh Taurani was keen to cast him in a film. However, upon meeting him, Taurani thought Kapoor, who was 20 years old at the time, to be too young and underweight to become an actor, and encouraged him to wait for a few years. Kapoor, meanwhile, turned down a lead role in N. Chandra's sex comedy Style in hopes of working with Taurani. Taurani found a suitable project for Kapoor in the teenage romance Ishq Vishk (2003), which Ken Ghosh was directing for his company. Kapoor, who trained extensively for a bulkier physical build, was eventually hired. Before beginning work on the film, he attended acting workshops with Naseeruddin Shah and Satyadev Dubey. Ishq Vishk tells the story of Rajiv Mathur (Kapoor), a high-school student who engages in a romantic affair with two classmates of contrasting personalities (played by Amrita Rao and Shenaz Treasurywala). Kapoor was attracted to the idea of playing an unlikable lead since it was a departure from the traditional portrayal of teenage heroes in Indian films. Writing for The Hindu, the critic Ziya Us Salam did not find him to be "hero material", adding that "boyhood seems to have overstayed on his face - but he is not necessarily bad in the acting department." The film, however, proved to be a sleeper hit at the box office and won Kapoor the Filmfare Award for Best Male Debut. Following his debut, Kapoor reunited with Ghosh in a film he considered to be drastically different from Ishq Vishk. The thriller Fida (2004) featured him as a love-struck student who is manipulated by a woman (Kareena Kapoor) and her lover (Fardeen Khan) to rob a bank. Despite criticising the film, Rama Sharma of The Tribune wrote that Kapoor "shines in his role. He looks fresh. As an impulsive emotional and innocent guy, who is sucked into crime because of these very qualities, he manages to evoke your sympathies." Later that year, Kapoor appeared in the romantic comedy Dil Maange More in which he was paired opposite three women: Soha Ali Khan, Tulip Joshi, and Ayesha Takia. Patcy N of Rediff.com praised his dancing skills but was wary of his imitation of Shah Rukh Khan's acting style. Both his 2004 releases were commercially unsuccessful. The series of poorly received films continued in 2005, when all three of Kapoor's films failed at the box office. His first two releases that year were the comedies Deewane Huye Paagal and Vaah! Life Ho Toh Aisi!, both of which were largely panned. The former was plagiarised from the Hollywood film There's Something About Mary in which Kapoor played one of Rimi Sen's love interests; the critic Khalid Mohamed found Kapoor to be "the only likeable element in this travesty" but Namrata Joshi of Outlook labelled him "colourless" and criticised his pairing with Sen. His final role was that of a righteous teenager drawn towards a life of indulgence in John Matthew Matthan's drama Shikhar, co-starring Ajay Devgan, Bipasha Basu and Amrita Rao. The critic Sukanya Verma found Kapoor to be miscast as a village boy in the film, but noted that he was "never short of spontaneity and youthful exuberance".

Using a quote from the above article, answer the following question: Did this movie have good reviews?
HHHHHH
Answer:
Both his 2004 releases were commercially unsuccessful.