Sponsor PFCOne
(2 votes, average: 4 out of 5)
Loading ...
Bad Film? Whats that?
A Bad film.
How many times have we heard that phrase?
Countless number of times.
A majority of us use that phrase for almost every second film we hear about.
Do we even see all the films we call crap? We often reach a decision and form a judgement about what is a bad film before seeing it. For eg, if it is a Karan Johar-Yashraj kind of a film, then its probably a bad film and not worth seeing. I remember that even before KANK came out, there were people, articles and ‘previews’ which had run down the film. I am no Karan Johar fan(havent liked his films except Kal Ho Na Ho(before climax)) but I dont think I have any right to say that his film is crap and not worth seeing(it might be..but..thats not the point).But really, have we thought what exactly is a bad film? Before that, what exactly is a purpose of a movie?
For some, it is just pure entertainment. And if possible, with all logic thrown to the winds. For some other people, it could be to show a mirror to society and tell us what is wrong with the society. For others, it could be realism and our normal lives onscreen which is what they are looking for. And there are others, who believe that more escapist the film, the better they are. After all, they are supposed to be about dreams and fantasies to provide us an escape from our normal stressful lives and not make us feel more bad about our lives.
For me personally, the movies are supposed to be entertainment, something which provides us with good time by telling us a good story. And entertainment with realism makes it even better. Since in our country, movies are such a big passion and get so much coverage, I believe it is one of the best platform from which to provide a social message. For all their lack of logic and oversight, I still think David Dhawan/Priyadarshan films are damn good because mostly I end up having a good laugh and for sure a good time while watching their films. I am an even bigger Mani Ratnam fan, because of the realism plus social message present in the stories he tells. That they are different and good stories goes without saying.
So coming back to the original question, what exactly is a bad film?Is it escapist cinema? Is it lack of logic and realism? Is it those commercially successful films with stars in them? These commercially successful films are commercially successful for a reason. They are commercially successful because people have gone into the theatres to watch them. Which means, people liked something about the movie when they decided to go, whether it is the hype or the stars. I have often seen passionate views proclaiming such films are bad. Proclaiming, is the important word here. Most of us actually proclaim that how good or bad a film is. More so, with our ‘esteemed’ critics. What everyone forgets, is that these our personal views and it is not necessary that other people also hold the same view about that film. Maybe as a recent post mentioned here, the film is just not made keeping us in mind, but someone of different sensitivities, someone who can identify with that film. Its time we stop taking ourselves too serious as critics and filmmakers. We are also just the general audience.Taking some examples, K3G, KKHH: I know people who liked this film and they were big hits. I personally thought these movies were average but that doesnt mean they were bad films. It is just that someone out there likes these films and it is one out of those people who has made this film. And it so happens that there is this difference, this gap between our likes and dislikes. Ok, I know filmmaking but that doesnt make my view any more stronger than theirs, as after all films are made for the audience and not specially for filmmakers. Phir Hera Pheri: It was criticized by most of the reviewers(especially the online blogging reviews) yet I thought it was a good film. I came out of the hall laughing and for me that is entertainment.Dansh: One of those good but unnoticed film. I thought this was a film which should be seen because of the powerful performance by the entire cast and a strong story. Yet, when I referred this film to my friends, they were abusing me hours later for wasting their time. Popcorn Khao Mast Ho Jao: Another film which flopped. People thought that this story was just Kuch Kuch Hota Hai repeated. I beg to differ. I saw a uniqueness in the storytelling style. Right from the narration to the fresh performances.(Yash Tonk simply rocked in the film). I felt that there was a freshness in the scenes, dialogues and the music. Not too many people agreed with me, which again tells me what I think is a good movie is not what others think as a good movie.
Let me take an extreme example. Films like Pyaasa and Do Beegha Zameen. I recently happened to see these films. These films have always been considered as classics and are said to be inspiration for a lot of current directors. There are people who swear by these films. But when saw these films, I just couldnt relate to them the same way. I thought they were good stories and honestly told but to me they werent the amongst the best films or classics. I thought they were a bit too melodramatic but others think that there wasnt any melodrama in these films. For me Yuva is still a better film than these films. So does that mean I have no idea of a good film or does it mean that these films arent really that good? Neither of the two. Its just that this film was made for a different period when the society was way different from what it is now. They dont mean as much to me because I couldnt identify with them.
So what are bad films? Do copied films mean bad films? There was a time when I used to believe that. I used to hate copied films. I no longer hold that view. I still am more sympathetic towards original films(even if they are bad). There are a lot of films which I have liked have turned out to be copied films. They have taken either a major plot point/idea or the entire storyline. These are films like Kaante, Zinda(Yes, I happen to be a Sanjay Gupta fan or atleast enjoy his films), Bas Ek Pal, Rang De Basanti, Black, Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikandar. Josh, Chachi 420, Munnabhai MBBS(..and many more. go to bollycat.com if interested). I liked all these films and they really were entertaining but not original. Now inspirations can be of different kinds. One can adopt a foriegn storyline because a particular story needs to be told or they can adopt a storyline because it is easier to do that. Sadly, its the second route which a lot of the filmmakers today adopt as there is too much hard work to attempt originality.
There is something else that we have to think about. Did the filmmaker and the entire team, go all out to make a bad film? I would like to believe that the writer or the director or the actors put in their efforts in making a good final product and not just a product. Which leads me to another theory and my final theory at that. Maybe, bad films are those which are not made from the motive of telling a story but instead from the motive of making money. A film which was not honestly made(which often translates into visible/major flaws in the story: huge logical inconsistencies, lack of continuity, cliched and hackneyed plot/treatment*) is probably a bad film. But then, it is just the filmmaker who knows whether the film is an honest and a genuine effort or not.So, I still havent been able to figure out what is a bad film. Incase you guys do, let me know.
Probably the biggest lesson that I have learnt while learning filmmaking @ a film school is that I have realised the amount of hard work that goes into making a movie. Right from the writer to the cinematographer to the editor. After realising this, I have stopped criticizing films for the sake of it. If the director/write/producer isnt honest, that doesnt mean that the rest of the people didnt work hard on the film. Often even in films with poor storylines, you will see good cinematography or innovative editing or brilliant background music. Not that these things can save the film from its fate, but we often overlook these good things in bad films and criticize them just because the film/story is bad. Give me any film and I mean any film and I will show you the positives in that film.
For me its just, good films and not so good films.( and by corollary, good posts and not so good posts. No bad posts)
*Thanks to Ranjit for giving me the particular words which I meant to express.
17 Responses to “Bad Film? Whats that?”
Leave a Reply
Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.
- The Abyss-Close Encounters of the Deep Kind
- Running On Karma
- Khamosh : Once upon a time VVChopra had made this Thriller
- Pusan: Jahar Kanungo on AFC and his Half Truth
- A wednesday - a 90 minute thriller –really.
- A wednesday - a 90 minute thriller –re
- PFCOne 2008 : List of En
- Movie Q
- Khamosh : Once upon a time VVChopra had made this Thr
- Announcing PFCOne 2008 : Call for En
Recent Posts:
Hottest Today:
Because you ask what makes a bad film, you have opened the comments for every critic on this site can go crazy with analysis, theory, speculation, etc.
So, let me start ;)
I am the first to state that a movie sucks and that I don’t like it. I am old enough to look at a trailer and see if it has explosions or cars, I am going to think it sucks, to write off films because they are Hollywood films or this or that or the other.
But, one thing I have learned over the months of reading PFC, is that just because I think it sucks doesn’t mean it is a bad movie (and, those here who know me personally have been known to question the movies that I LOVE).
We analyze. We theorize. We break down every tiny aspect of a film and disucss it to death, both here and elsewhere. But in the end, what makes a bad film has little to do with the film itself, but with whether or not we enjoyed ourselves. If we did, the film was passable to great. If we didn’t, the film was bad. If it moved us, it is brilliant. If it moved us to leave the theater for extended cigarette breaks, it was a failure. Yet, millions of people disagree with us, every time we watch a film.
I will continue to call movies “bad”, but I am learning that “bad” is in the eyes of the beholder, and that anyone whose opinion differs from mine is not tasteless or clueless, but has different life experiences than I do and is entertained by different things because of those experiences.
Great first post!!!
@Anuj: IMO, bad films are subjective to a very large extent; as you said, there are so many films that I hate, that many others loved. And I don’t completely buy Sudhish’s (who’d posted here earlier) argument that there’s ‘really no bad film, a film only has to appeal to its intended audience’. Partly true, of course, in that a movie has to be judged by the parameters it falls within. However, not completely true ‘coz if that were the case, every single film in the world could defend itself by adopting that argument.
To me, a film is bad if it makes me cringe with … lots of things really - bad acting, huge logical inconsistencies, lack of continuity, cliched and hackneyed plot/treatment, and many more. Also, esp since you mentioned Karan Johar - bad is relative. For instance, all 3 (yeah, he’s made just 3 movies) of his movies are better than most of the tripe that Bollywood churns out (including stuff by so-called eminent directors like Dharmesh & Sunil Darshan and S.Ghai of late, to name just two). If an Abbas-Mustan or an Aneez Bazmee make a thriller like ‘Humraaz’ or ‘Deewangee’, they are patted on the back - while a Karan Johar vehicle like ‘Kaal’ is heavily panned. In my book, all 3 of these movies were closer to bad, than good (’Humraaz’ was slightly better, ‘coz of Akshaye).
And of course, the kind-of-movie it is: you obv can’t compare a David Dhawan with a Mani Ratnam, they are apples and oranges. Like, its not fair to compare a Kamal Hassan movie with a Rajni one, because they are aimed at different sections of the audiences. It’s another matter that I couldn’t stand ‘Chandramukhi’ (and I did tremendously enjoy other Rajni movies like ‘Baasha’ and ‘Padaiyappa’). IMO, ‘Chandramukhi’ was a bad movie (not by applying the ‘intelligence’ I apply when viewing an ‘Anbe Sivam’ or a ‘Parzania’, but because it takes its audience for for granted just ‘coz it has Rajni in it), but then obv I’m outvoted ‘coz the movie is one of the biggest hits in the history of TN.
Like I said, bad’s relative :) !
Bad Film = Absurdist Theatre.
excellent post this, for me honesty of film-maker is what count. are you honest about what you are doing, i have seen films where it was so hard to figure out what the fellow is trying to say. now my persective is purely from viewers point of view as i am not releated to the industry.
the latest example i can take is Salaam-a-ishq, where director seems to have lost it big time. KHNH was also not a original, but director certainly had a vision in his mind and it came out. i personally thing today when so much of money is involved its about the right balance.
how much of his own vision and though is coming out and how much is the compromise factor. those who can stick to their beliefs will come out with better films
any film that takes its audience for granted, in my view, is a bad film… like… I don’t know… happy feet, for example. or indra (telugu), or new (tamil).
i would rate movies as good, not-so-good, and bad ones as well.
commerce and economics has nothing to do with it. it’s all about the passion, and, as others said, honesty.
YAWwwwwnn…ZZZzzzzz
Sorry but couldnt help it…so what is the point?
ahh BAD films…hmmmm
BAD films are bad…
n….
Good films are the films that are not BAD
yawwn…oops didn’t i just make some sense?
Anuj, brother,
Sorry,but whats your point?
I think T! sums it up fairly accurately for me
Once i was interviewed by a big Director for a job of an Assistant Director. He asked me the kind of films I would like to make. My answer was; Films that entertain the general public. The film should have a story. A story cannot be complete without a conflict, because the conflict creates drama and emotion. So I guess if any movie cannot capture these fine nuances in its story than it can be termed as a bad film. Filmmaking is about telling a story visually and a movie should be made keeping in mind the climax. Each and every scene in the film should have a direct link with the climax of the film. I personally feel that a good film is such that even if you turn off the audio, you should be able to follow the story.I guess a Good film could be of any genre; it could be either a Karan,Yashraj or a Ramgopal,Gulzar; the film should have a story and characters well dedined. Entertainment is not genre specific. You would always find an audience for good films irrespective of the genre.
amit:
You summarised well.
did you find job of AD with that Big Director?
Hey RK, Thanks for your comment. The director asked me to join his team although I’ve never had any feature film experience. So far I have only worked in AD-films, TV shows and Short films. However unfortunately the film I was supposed to be working on has got delayed due to star dates.
So I am still waiting to start working on a feature for the last 3 months.
@t!, Sangeeta : Thanks. Exactly, Bad is in the eye of the beholder. There is no bad really. Its more about our preconcieved notions and prejudices. Enjoyment is the only purpose. Also, we anaylze..theorize..but are films really meant to be theorized? Lets leave that for some other day….
Btw…My friends always question the movies I love and I wonder why…. :-?
@Ranjit: Totally agree with you. With regards, to a Sudhish’s argument, I believe a good story is intended for everyone and will be appreciated by everyone, if it reaches everyone. What I meant by that point about his post is in the broader terms, that there are people who like serious movies and then there are who only like fun movies, not serious movies. So, you are right, that argument is partly true. Movies which take the audience for granted are not really genuine efforts.
And..I have to update myself on Tamil Cinema..beyond Nayakan.
@ Honhaar Gooda: …but what really is ur definition of absurd films? (lack of logic or ‘deep’, ‘art’ films?)
@wb: agreed!
@chandan sharma: I totally agree with you. Infact, the viewers perspective is the right perspective to have, coz that who we are. Havent seen SEI yet, but I liked KHNK except for the treatment of the end.
@amit chakravarty, RK: I am not too big a fan of the climax/conflict story. I have seen people trying to write keeping that in mind and really the scenes and the flow seems forced. I believe that one should just write the story as he would like to see it. And a conflict and connection with climax will emerge on their own.
Just curious, who was that big director and why dint u join him? Good luck for the upcoming feature.
@ Orange: Point of the post.
1. A Rant and an observation.
2. Trying to understand why people call some films bad.
3. Expressing my viewpoint about how people proclaim some films as bad(here and elsewhere) and at times without even seeing the film. How people just call a bad film(almost all the reviewers) only because of their prejudices and preconcieved notions. How people dont listen to anyone else’s viewpoint and likings when they start criticizing the film.
Still thinking of more points…
Hope my next post makes more sense :)
@ Phoenix: I think of entertaining and engaging as the same thing.If something entertains me, it keeps me engaged and if something engages me, that means it has kept me entertained. For some reason, entertainment has developed some negative connations, which I dont think is correct.
About the efforts into filmmaking, I still expect the viewer to see the final product and decide. I was just relating my experience, once I started filmmaking.
@Dpac: There is probably more debates on films, coz it is the most noticed artform after music. Havent seen Guru yet, so cant comment on it. Really want to see it though. When you say, good entertainer or ” entertainment being the sole successfully accomplised ‘objective’ here”. Isnt entertainment the primary objective and motive of every storyteller? Or are you also referring to entertainment with the negative connotations?
Thanks to all of you for your comments.
is there a moderator for comments to posts here? or does the posts get deleted cuz of something else?
i posted a comment to this post (around 15 lines of painstakingly written lines)
wonder wonder!!! its not to be seen here
@Dpac : There was a server problem which hit PFC a few days back and many of the posts and comments got wiped off. Maybe your comment was a part of that.:((
Hi Anuj, liked your comment…thanks for wishing me luck….! I am not sure if it would be aprropriate to name the director without his knowledge. He is associted with Yashraj films. He has done 4 films till now and out of them 2 were huge blockbusters….no I am not throwing a filmy puzzle on you! Anyway like I said. the film got delayed…couldn’t wait for so long and have taken up an editing project now.