Reviewing the Reviewers
Lately there’s been a lot of talk on PFC about film reviewers. Most of it is not so nice, which is fine I suppose. If you’re willing to dish out criticism you should be ready to take it. Right?
Whenever iffy about watching a film, most of us head online and read a few reviews. I know I do. Of course it’s always good to read a few reviews after you watch a film to see what others thought of it and if your thoughts agree with theirs.
There are 3 in particular whose views, though diametrically different from each other, I’ll read even if they don’t tend to coincide with the reasons I personally go to watch a film:
The Rediff Team:
I especially like Raja Sen as I love his style of writing and even if I don’t agree with him, I’m quite entertained. If he doesn’t like a film, he’s pretty creative in telling us why. But at least he tries to say a few good things about the not-so-critically acclaimed films and what he did like about it.
His thoughts on Dus: “…I put my feet up and completely grooved to Anubhav Sinha’s last effort, Dus. Sure, it’s a loopy ride, but we aren’t looking for logic if the rollercoaster’s fast enough. It’s a genre Bollywood largely overlooks, and if it doesn’t make sense, who cares? Neither does Die Hard.”
Like him or not, can’t deny he’s got a passion for films and for writing about them.
I find Syed Firdaus Ashraf to be either wickedly cynical (read his Kaafila review, its hilarious… sorry Sunny paaji) or providing insightful analysis. Always a good read.
I also like Sukanya Verma as most of the time she’s not overly critical and tries to be optimistic, looking for the good in a film. She writes from a film fanatic’s point of view, and whether you agree with her or not one must say her optimism is refreshing.
Rajeev Masand:
What can you say, this man is blunt as a sledgehammer and can be just as ruthless. Though I find his reviews to be an entertaining read, often times they tend to be overly critical & negative. Sure he writes good reviews for the really good films. But even when the films not all that bad, I find that he tends to point out the bad over the good.
For example, his take on Namaste London: “…certainly has its heart in the right place. But sadly it goes about making its point in the stupidest manner” and then he goes on to say “Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not a cynic, I’m just saying this film is so caught up being self-congratulatory that it doesn’t even realize where its slipping up…”. I just read the enitre review and am still unsure if he actually liked anything about the film…
You know what, I think he’s a cynic. The real kicker is if he doesn’t, cuz he doesn’t exactly sugarcoat his opinion. You’d be hard-pressed to find a reviewer who’s got more quotable put-downs that Mr. Masand…
For Fool N’ Final, which he sums up as “asinine”: “Believe me, it’s easier to solve a Rubik’s cube than it is to understand what exactly is going on in this film. If you ask me to be entirely honest, I think it’s just a bunch of songs and action scenes that are strung together and passed off as a film.”
If your thinking “that’s not too bad”, read what he wrote about Jhoom Barabar Jhoom: “I’d have no problem at all if Jhoom Barabar Jhoom was merely a mad film. Mad can be entertaining if it’s done intelligently. But the problem with Jhoom Barabar Jhoom is that it’s stupid. And stupid is different from mad. Stupid suggests that the director isn’t in control of the film, and that’s absolutely true in the case of this film, which is really all over the place, it’s scattered because the script is so weak.”
That’s classic ?
I do read Rajeev Masand from time to time, but it’s usually when I’ve hated a film or I avoid it thinking I’m going to hate it and just want my negative opinion validated.
Taran Adarsh
Possibly the most criticized (thought “hated” was a bit too strong) man on PFC next to the infamous Subhash K. Jha.
Personally speaking I like to read Mr. Adarsh’s opinions. In fact I’ll go as far as admitting that of all the reviews I read, I find his to match my personal tastes of what I like watching… most of the time. Then again, I’m all for entertaining, commercial cinema, as is he.
In a recent post-comment, Shawshank wrote: “I have seen Taran to be bang on target with his reviews on how well the film does. Not to say he is great reviewer but I would say he is a great box office pundit…”
I agree. He is not a filmmaker, scriptwriter or actor, nor does he claim to look at films from that perspective. He reviews films from the audience perspective, and his ratings on based on how they might receive a film. Most of the time his box office predictions are accurate to the sentiments of the given strata of audience (the masses/classes/overseas).
For anyone who read his review of Chak De India, despite the much talked about 2-star rating, he also made positive comments like “…execution of the subject material succeeds in making you find purpose and meaning and also arouses patriotic sentiments…“ & “Shimit Amin’s choice of the subject as also the execution deserves to be lauded”. Providing the reasons for his box office prediction of the film, he wrote “…as mentioned at the outset, it’s not a film that would find universal patronage”.
For the reverse read his review of Jhoom Barabar Jhoom, where he trashes the film “…writer Habib Faisal’s screenplay is as taxing as driving in monsoons on a road full of potholes. When you realize the film offers no story, you sit motionless…” & “The film is all gloss, no substance. Body beautiful, minus soul” but ends off with his prediction “…proving that sometimes, a bad film also makes money” despite his not-so-glowing review.
I like the structure of his reviews: opening insights, general story, followed by a breakdown of screenplay, direction, music, cinematography, and performances and then closing with his prediction of audience acceptance and box office. For me, it’s an indication that he reviews within set parameters & criteria and there’s certain things he looks for while watching a film. Regular readers know what to expect and thus have a basis to judge the film via his reviews.
Contrary to popular belief, he doesn’t always favor the stars; Marigold’s review is the most recent example, but I’ve read several others where he trashes performances of top stars. I’ve also read several examples of how he praises performances of underdogs.
From his review of Pinjar: “Priyanshu is first-rate, making you realize that here’s a reservoir of talent that needs to be tapped. Sanjay Suri is excellent, controlled, subdued and likeable. Here’s an actor who deserves to be picked up by qualitative film-makers.”
Not trying to defend the guy, just trying to show that maybe he’s not as completely biased and star-struck as we make him out to be.
Conclusion:
Reviews can be as subjective as the films they’re written about. Everyone’s got different tastes, and of course an opinion to go with it. We can’t deny the value of a review to an average moviegoer who, before spending his/her time & money on a film, just wants an educated opinion and breakdown of how good or bad a film is.
In the end, its not so much what the reviewers say but rather what the intended audiences thinks of a film that ultimately matters.
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
Tony some I agree on Taran, some disagree. Firstly, there is NO DOUBT in my mind, as figured out by you, the guy knows his fundas. Long before he became the “glamorous” Taran Adarsh, he used, for a number of years, run a “quazi Variety” trade newspaper in Mumbai,called Screen. This was the one guy, amongst all the Startdust, Filmfare, etc, which, even as kids we used to read, because they gave cold, hard facts…no sugar coating…gues that is why I became an Accountant…I like to see the real deal…For a number of years he was the one saving grace….but then India FM happened..suddenly your reviewer, was also your PR person, was also your Box Office numbers person….in corporate lingo that was the ultimate crime…NO SEGGREGATION OF DUTIES…affects Independece, affects who you are…so of late the films that India FM does the PR for, almost sees a different tone, as opposed to the one’s they don’t do PR for. It’s almost like if in the Oscar’s, the results envelope is always CALCULATED (not opened) by the accounting firm of Price Waterhouse Coopers (my former employers in Toronto), now assume the PwC also had to decide who the Oscars would go to, along with representing actors and crew (as their clients)….then from mere calcualting genuises, they could become demi gods…that is actually true of most of the reviewers I think…the world of PR and review is becoming very “linked” as opposed to being “independent of each other” like the “chinese wall” syndrome of the Investment Banks. But good analysis overall, am glad “reviewers” are also subject to an audit and accountability.
You know what Vivek, I used to go to this Paanwaala located at the other end of Surrey from where I live… it wasn’t for the Paan. It was because his was one of the only shops which carried Screen Weekly. Used to read it end-to-end religiously.
I never knew Taran Adarsh was associated with Screen at all, until today. That’s crazy… and here I thought I only started following his reviews & box-office analysis since I discovered IndiaFM online…
I’ve also downloaded a some episodes of his TV show… was it Bollywood Bazaar? Something to that effect… Must say I enjoy reading his views more than watching him… even now I can’t watch those video reviews he does…
I’ve also seen a few old episodes of Kunal Kohli’s film review shows… those were ok…
Between Kunal and Taran, hands down Taran is way more analytical and logical (when he is at his best). Kunal I went to college with in HR for 5 years, unless he has changed…and he could have, he was more into emotional energy as opposed to logical thinking…..despite assisting Barot then (Barot had made Don and then was making Boss..never completed). Almost like using a Canadian term here, comparing the Toronto Maple Leafs of the mid 90’s, which were depending more on the emotional support to carry Doug Gilmor and Dave Andrewchuk (since they were aging) to the Pittsburg Penguins (where Jagr and Lemiuex were logically and coldly analyzing and disseminating the game of ice hockey and their opponents).
Why do most Indian movie reviewers give away entire plots? I’m used to American reviewers writing about a movie’s key messages and the actors and directors’ contributions, instead. They might provide hints about the plot, but not enough to reveal the turning points and ending. That to me is not reviewing; it’s writing a synopsis. Reviewing is adding your own informed reactions to the conversation.
How can you miss Baradwaj Rangan, who won the just-announced National Awards as a film critic?
http://desipundit.com/baradwajrangan/
now Tony cover all pfc reviewers ;)
Vivek, Taran was not running Screen, he was the editor of Trade guide
:((:(
Just one comment on Taran…
Look at his review of Chak De and then go to the YRF site for the movie synopsis…its same word for word…his review also talks abt the girls being good…and picks out Vidya among them…why…she was the only known girl before the movie…it does not ak abt any scenes nor abt the other girls…i have a sneaking feeling that he wrote the review without watchin the movie…
Also look at his review of Fanaa and KANK…the performances of AAmir and SRK have been described in the exact same terms…and i mean EXACTLY
And of course the clincher is his review of Buddha Mar Gaya…
I do not think Taran is the sort of reviewer who can separate his personal agenda from his movie review…he seeks to further his personal likes and dislikes through his movie reviews…i mean it is no secret that since TRPP YRF have kept him at a distance…
Let me give a shot at reviewing the pfc reviewers.
We sometimes end up reviewing the film critics/reviewers rather than the film. We are more interested in how many stars has this film got compare to that… And when the film is so crap you guys end up bringing out your own dream world… So I do not think we can call those articles as reviews… some of those articles are good laugh, though.
however, full2faltu, RK, VIjay are very good film reviewers, imo. they all stick to the point, which is reviewing the movie.
:-?
I like Rajeev Masand’s reviews I think he has immense knowledge of world cinema, and accurately analyses the barometer of Indian cinema. In fact his one liners are hilarious, like for aap ka suroor he commented about the leading actress looking like ‘dalda ka dabba’… ha ha .. I couldn’t stop laughing . P.S no offence to anyone, but am just talking about his humour
Years ago in Kolkata at the BDHC Library, I used to read a mag called Premiere. One should read the reviews there. For a technically adept reader, those reviews were god sent!!
But, yes, B Rangan is good. Then there are people like Shoma, Mayank, Raja and Anupama who sometimes do a good job.
But where are the good movies…don’t expect them to write great reviews on movies like Fool n final and Shivaji. C’mon give them a break!!!
Yep my bad, confused Trade Guide, with Screen, TG was the one which has all the facts and figures, much like part of Variety have now. Taran used to provide the box office analysis on Screen, hence the confusion on my part. But TG was the one which I was referrng to, generally was read by only the industry wallah’s back then, not that I was one, but found the whole number crunching and analysis pretty fascinating
Nice piece. Though I am not sure whether I’d take a Taran Adarsh review seriously at all. I don’t like reviews that classify a movie as “class” or “mass” and Taran seems to thrive at thinking for his readers and making this classification for them.
But on the question of reviews and reviewers, I saw Ratatouille (the animated Pixar movie) last night for the second time and this line from the movie immediately stuck a chord.
In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.
It was as rightly pointed out, the ultimate relationship is between the film and the audience, the critics and the media have the “auxiliary” relationship, where they do sometimes matter, but if the primary relationship between the audience and the film/actors/crew, has been established….all else is immaterial….and almost a “who cares.”
Evelyn good observation on our reviews, we do give the entire plot and story away….sometimes I am like :-?, rate it, trash it, like it, but don’t take away that opportunity for the story to unfold visually in front of me, as opposed to verbally, long before I even enter the hall/tv room.
Does any one remember Manmohan Talkh’s reviews in Dharmyug? and Dinesh Thakut in NBT? Today’s generation of reviewers are not even close to their standards and writing style.. and may even be not honest..
pavan,
you must read reviews and previews written by ajay brahmatmaj in dainik jagran.he writes very well in limited words.
his reviews are available on jagran.com…
http://ind.jagran.com/cinemazaa/review.aspx
Vivek, I get what ur sayin in cmt 1… its tough to know when he’s giving an honest review and when he’s just part of the big-bad-hype machine… blurry lines… somehow I still find him to be pretty consistant… he’s got a reputation afterall and that’s got to count for something…
Oh and really nice hockey throwback dude.. made me sidetrack to passionforhockey.com…
Oz bhai aapne to meri waat nikhal di… just imagine a post “Analyzing RK’s Analysees”… lol … funnily enough Honhaar Goonda bailed me out.. lol
Evelyn, I know what u mean and it sucks… you’ve got to think that there’s been a bunch of films that could’ve done better at the box office had their entire plots not been revealed…
This is why I like the promos for some upcoming films like Johnny Gaddar and Manorama… they evoke curiousity and promise thrills… u know that you’re in for a ride when u go watch these films… if we knew the plotlines, what would draw us in?
Karthik I’ve actually never read a review by Baradwaj Rangan before… I basically just go 2 a site like Allbollywood.com to read alternate reviews (aside from those mentioned)… I’ll have to check Mr. Rangan out, thanks…
Ajay bhai, maafi chahata hoon lekin mujhe hindi padhni nahin aati… aur aapka link mere liye kaam nahin karta kyun kii mere paas woh hindi ke akshar waali font nahin hai… haan, yahan PFC mein jab aap likhte ho woh zaroor padh leta hoon…
Shantanu, yeah I’ve noticed that he uses the plot summaries from press releases and all as well.. cut and paste with minimal edits… and yeah, also noticed he’s got his standard descriptions for performances, even box office predictions… no one ever called the guy a wordsmith, he’s not the most creative for sure…
were u expecting a but? lol
Suchita, yeah like I said I especially enjoy it when Rajeev Masand reviews horrible films… he’s the best at coming up with new ways to express just how bad things get… but then I find he can go overboard…
I thought “APNE” was an alright film, not great but not horrible either… the first half was pretty good until Bobby’s miraculous recovery and the boxing angle took over… anyhow, Mr. Masand wrote it off giving it 1-star… fine, he didn’t like it.. but don’t put in the league of FoolnFinal and all those films… at least acknowledge what the film did do well and give credit where its due..
Don’t sit there and ignore the fact that Dharmendra, at age 70 plus and after being written off as a B-C grade has-been, came back to give a magnificantly natural performance… I for one was totally captivated, especially watching how he underplayed his bitterness when making sarcastic remarks like “Aaj khush ho? Chalo, koi to khush hai”… that performance lifted the films level and Mr. Masand was the only reviewer I read who chose not to give the man any credit…
Ananthanarayanan, thanks… on the matter of “class” vs. “mass” I think he’s just recognizing that there is market distinction in todays audience… that’s just educating the reader (like myself who’s sitting in Canada wouldn’t necessarily know that the multiplex going audience tend to prefer different films then the audience at single screens within the same cities).
Great quote btw…
Nope I don’t agree with your assesment of Taran Adrsh. He has improved now but earlier he used to just favour stars and big banners. He had given a big thumbs up to yaddein expecting it to be a big hit. Ditto for Main Prem Ki diwani which he thought was veryy good and was on its way to becoming a success. Both films bombed but more importantly both films were a disaster in terms of filmmaking. Only a truly blind person would have thought those films to be great. Oh yeah He initially found Lagaan not that impressive and was unsure about its box office performance it was only later that he thought Lagaan was a good film . So there.
Among the crop of reviewers you have mentioned, I like Raja Sen (he is really really good) and Masand. The rest are average to bad.
Your views on Khalid Mohd, Nikhat Qazmi and Zia-us-Salaam?
i think everyone has their own biases. read almost all of them but dont trust anyone. trust only one name..pfc!!! ha ha ha. but there is a big reason. bcz in india, nobody is full time reviwer. either they r journos or editors or entertainemnt heads who need the stars/directrs/producers for something or other. so they cant be fair n honest most of the time.
on Khalid, all I can say…never met the guy..so nothing personal…although know lot of people who know him and he is probably a nice guy…..but if I am going to release a film, I hope and pray that two things happen
a) Khalid gives it a bad review (…whew!!! now there is a chance for hit to be a hit
:)) It is almost growing up in Mumbai,I used to wait for the Times of India and wait for Khalid to pan a film, sure enough those were the films which would be the most entertaining and fun to watch.
b) The festival circuit dislikes my film….(whoosh….even better chance that the investors will get their money back now:d:d). In fact I will feel personally insulted if either one of a) or b) happen, that means I have lost in touch of the most important ingrediant in MASS COMMUNICATIONS aka the Masses!!!
Like I said, I’m not about Cannes and Oscar’s, Versova and Burbank is my Cannes…give me Akki and Jackie any day!!!
Tony,
Sorry for this late comment, I cud not check PFC for past three days. And I think this one will be counted as irrelevant now as life and the web server have moved on. Still, it opens a box full of questions that’s haunted me since I came to know that Govinda’s dance in “Raja Babu” was not exactly modelled after “Seregina’s” in “eight and half”.
Have you ever tried Richard Corliss? He writes for ‘TIME’ and any given Sunday, Corliss can give Big Ol’ Hollywood’s any damn director a run for his money.(Not to forget that he is not afraid of trashing Warner bros’s movies which is parent body of TIME) So profound is his knowledge bout movie making. Of the art and of the science of it.
It amazes me to see that in India we really lack critics who has at least a basic education in movies which goes beyond giving us a synopsis of the story and his personal(or biased depending on whether he got that ‘call’ from KJ or YRF last night or not) feeling about it. They will always tell you that “the actor is top-class” but will never give you the parameter to measure the ‘top’ness. They lack the art and science of …sadly not only of moviemaking but also of making a reader feel that the review came out of a professional having enuf passion for…what else..cinema.
Regards,
Cubicle Bound Misfit
p.s.: here is COrliss’ latest offerring. Feel the difference.
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1653918,00.html
Guys, i think they should stop calling it reviews. i view a film and then i share my thoughts on the film with freinds through sms bu i hate being called a critic. a quote comes to my mind “a critic is the one who knows the way but dont know to drive”
Khalid’s problem is that he trashes almost every movie, without appreciating anything at all :((. And then, he is also biased .. heavily. He gave Karan Johar’s “Kabhi Khushi Kabhi gham” 5 stars ! For god’s sake. I read his reviews religiously, though .. because they are a lot of fun.
And I partially agree with your assessment of Taran Adarsh. His trade predictions for a movie are bang-on … but the stupidest part is that his reviews are full of spoilers.
I also agree with your assessment of the rediff team.
Have you guys ever read the greatbong’s reviews ? Check this out .. www.greatbong.net .He writes on everything under the sun, but his movie reviews are especially good. He even reviews movies like ‘Goonda’, ‘Loha’, etc.
And if you get time .. check this review that I wrote for the movie ‘Partner’ (Self promotion \:d/) .. http://turrtle.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/08/review-partner.htm
Now let me search for this Masand guy .. is there a column he writes, or for a specific website .. ?
Karthik bhai, I just read a few of Baradwaj Rangan’s reviews… In particular his review of Aag (http://www.desipundit.com/baradwajrangan/category/hindi-film-review/page/2/) & Heyy Babyy (http://www.desipundit.com/baradwajrangan/category/hindi-film-review/page/3/)
Both great reads, very insightful, and yes I’m now hooked! Thanks man!