Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Do Movie Critics Deserve Criticism?

They say it is easy to become a critic, but difficult to become a director. Judging a film is not bad, but the way the critics throw their opinions, had forced me to write something on the topic. There are two kinds of criticism - Constructive criticism and destructive criticism. However, it seems that Indian movie critics prefer the latter one mostly, following in the footsteps of western movie critics. People can argue that in a democratic country every one has to accept criticism. I agree. But, do we ever contemplate that the criticism could spoil the business of an entire movie? Producers invest whopping amount of money in making a movie, but these critics destroy the fate of a movie by giving poor ratings. Now, what if a critic makes a movie? Take the instance of Khalid Mohammed - widely regarded as one of the finest movie critics of India. He directed four movies - Silsiilay (2005). Tehzeeb (2003), Tareekh (2003) and Fiza (2000). All these four movies bombed at the box office and than Mohammed saab disappeared from movie making and preferred to continue his career as a journalist. There is absolutely no problem if a movie journo tries his hand in movie making, but he must have to face the criticism, the way he has been criticizing other movies. I strongly believe that many journalists from electronic media contribute a lot in giving negative remarks (by taking sound bytes of few people) as soon as a movie hits theatres, without possessing sufficient knowledge. Thus, the audience blindly follows their verdicts and avoids hitting the theatres. So who suffers? Everyone including actors, producers and director. It is often said that the fate of cinema in Hollywood is sealed in the hands of critics, who are mostly fastidious. Are our critics following in their footsteps? Perhaps the time has come to curb the hands of these critics, who in the name of freedom of expression are killing the fate of a movie with their opinions.

3 comments:

vrittant said...

very true deepak..these days, films rely majorly on first week collections..n a thumbs down from critics really mars a film's performance in the crucial first week..being a deep believer in democracy ideals, i can not support the notion of curbing the voices of these critics, but they must be appealed to act in a more responsible manner.

another side of the picture is to examine how qualified our critics are..i feel that taran adarsh n rajiv masand, for example, are the most over-rated ones..often they give good ratings to an absolutely unbearable movie, which leads one to ponder how seriously should they really be taken..

Tanweer said...

Actually i did not understand what pointu wanted to raise in it...Criticism is necessary..ofcorse.constructive one..my point is that a film critic writes his/her own view about a particular movie..so it wud be really really tough to draw a line..suppose i liked OSO a lot..but thr r poeple who find it trash..this is true for umpteen number of movies..it must be true with u also..ur favorite movie could be a flop movie for others..then again..lemme tell u in our country we do not go by critics view only...a fan will always go and watch the movie..no matter what a certain khaled..nikhat or taran says about a movie..n above all they r not GOD their review is no gospel...its a individual's choice..n then again how many filmgoers in our country really take reviews seriously..i guess very few...i guess its d standard of film and the piracy menace which is affecting the industry..but still...our BOLLYWOOD is growing..so whr is d question of loss..we r in a win-win situation..so dont loose ur sleep..Njoy all d movies..Go watch Ajooba..jaddugar..Mrityudaata..coz Amitabh rocks..

Anoil said...

i believe these critics while giving their opinion also settle personal scores. i dont personally base my movie viewing on the critics it's more on personal choice.... i guess one needs to apply their own judgment rather than depending on these so called critics! after all the critics said sarkar raj was better than the first part but then why is it that it has bombed at the box officer and Aamir is doing just fine.... The question is are critics reliable or they just underestimate the audience by their too personalised bird's view?