What is a reviewer’s job, anyway?
I am angry. Like, really angry. Week after week, I read the Saturday morning newspaper and turn up in a foul mood at work. No, I am not here to teach any film critic what his job is. I am not here to say XYZ is good and XYZ is bad. I am confused. Genuinely. What is the job of a film critic supposed to be, anyway?
Last year, when I was at the FTII doing my Film Appreciation course, we had a class on Film Criticism. And this was the very question that I asked. The answer I got was “It is to inform”.. Alright. Whom? What? “It is to inform the audience about how to see the film” Really now. Is it?
OK. I would like to grant it to the critic who was my teacher that day in class. He was a film critic with a leading national daily. I am sure he knows his job. Maybe a critic is supposed to know more than an average movie goer, about camera angles, screenplays, performances and music. So this more informed guy goes and sees a film, puts some light on it with his perspective, adds some funny one liners and presents a fully palatable ‘film review’.
But what I see in my morning newspaper is anything but that. There are multiple questions, observations and grievances that I have. These reviews have a synopsis of the film, sometimes even with spoilers. I totally hate that! Why spoil the fun? Also, there are comments on what the reviewer thought of the screenplay and camera. This is obviously always subjective. Is it really necessary that I would agree with the reviewer? What if I think otherwise? Maybe the reviewer thinks the camera was shoddy and maybe I thought it rocked! My opinion on the film has already been colored because I go for the film tonight and I read the review in the morning! How about just informing me about the context in which the film was made and leaving the opinion to me? How about simply putting things in perspective, adding some knowledge that I wouldn’t otherwise have, and letting me make my own decision on what I think of the film?
Now, you may say, how many of us really want to know the real context in which the film was made? Many of us just want to know if we should go for the film or not! For many people, that is the sole purpose of reading a review. Now again, is that fair? And why should a journalist decide for me, what I should be doing this weekend? Does this remain a ‘film review’ or it becomes a ‘Dear Diana’ column where I get told by someone who doesn’t even know me, what I should do with myself and my time?!
Each review that I read, serves a different purpose. Some are trade guesstimates, some are merely entertaining pieces of writing and some are extended synopsis. I mean offense to no one, but I beg to know: Why do we review films? I really really need to know. And if this guy is supposed to be an informed guy, then newspapers/websites/magazines need to have some high benchmarks that need to be met with before they select this very important guy. Because his/her one whim, one mistake, one personal grudge, one move can cause losses of crores to the Producers. Not to mention the heavy face loss to the filmmaker. Because in our country, I fear, reviews are fast becoming a meter that either indicates a “Yes” or a “No” for the audiences. I hate it when people ask me which film I am going for. And when I don’t take a popular name, they say, “Arre! Usko toh sirf ek hi star milaa hai! Why are you wasting your money?” It is so annoying! And then they see four stars for an “X” movie and they come back disappointed. “Itni bhi achhi nahi thi. Bore ho gaye”. You see what I mean? I don’t know what purpose these reviews are supposed to serve. People just read the last sentence and count the stars. To hell with the para’s in between!
Like they say, with great power comes great responsibility. Are our reviewers always conscious of that?
It is not that I am being unfair to the reviewers. This is no mud slinging write up. I really do not understand their role. I totally am aware of their job pressures. The heaps of bad films they might have to go through, week after week, the deadlines they have to meet, the word limits.. I know all of that. But if it does get so stressful, in a nation where at least 2-3 films release every Friday, why not consider having multiple reviewers? Many newspapers are already doing that.
Also, if there is a reviewer reading this, I have often wondered.. Have you ever thought of changing a review you have written? Often, reviews are written within hours of having seen the film. Would you have written it differently after a day? After you have clicked “Send”, have you said, “Shit! I want to take that back!”? Of course, you cannot change it. But has that feeling ever come? Opinion on a film depends heavily on where you see it, with whom you see it, in what mood you see it. So, you may have given a family drama 2 stars because you thought it sucked when you saw it with 10 other reviews in a special screening and empty theatre, and then you saw it with your mom. House full on a Sunday evening. And you notice a tear trickling down your cheek in an emotional scene. You realize with a scare, “Damn! I am crying!” Too bad, your 2 stars have already deterred 5,000 people from buying tickets.
Honestly, I have often had a change of opinion on a film after a day or two. There are times I have come out all excited after a film, in the kind of mood that I would have given it 4 stars. The next morning when I wake up, I feel like changing it to 2.5. Other times, I have thought that the film was all crap, and I would give it 2 stars. And then when I realize that the film has lingered in my head for more than 3 days, I know I want to change it to 3.5.
I don’t think it would be a bad idea to have reviews that don’t have stars. Just a fair presentation of facts. Not opinions. Or are the reviewers being paid for their opinions, like we pay counselors, consultants and lawyers? I really don’t know. If so, then my suggestion stands rejected. But if no, then maybe we can have starless reviews. Maybe then, many of us will learn to make our own decisions. And not rush to simply count the stars. And look for words like “Go for it!” and “Stay away!”
Till then, I wish someone can help me with my basic question. What is a reviewer’s job, anyway? And more importantly, is it any different in India?
Tags: criticism, Film Critics, Movie Critic
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
Agree on many points. Eveyrone’s a reviewer today not long before Channels like Astha and others start too!
IndiaFM guys (Tuteja) reviews ‘ROCK ON’ ka music and rated it as bad, and when he saw the movie, he was impressed and later changed it to 3 or more starts! Crazy…
For me, Reviews are ONLY OPINIONS of AN ‘individual’ and I even heard producers PAY these ‘influential’ reviews to write good opinions about the movie.
I though agree with Rajeev Masand on most occassion. He’s someone who reviews a movie perfectly without givng away much of the story.
In a review, I look for comments on the technical aspects, production value, casting, directorial features (screenplay, editing, music, choreography if it’s flooded with dance sequences like Sargam or Taal or Dil to Pagal Hai) of the movie, basically anything but the story, that tells me what the movie offers (it’s mere entertainment value or critically acclaimed or both, etc).
I feel strongly that reviews that give away the story line and the plot details (sometimes the climax!) should be cast away and be totally unacceptable! The point of a review is to convey how good or bad the movie is or rate it on different levels and not to translate the movie in a transcript!
I believe a professional reviewer has the responsibility of providing a rational opinion on the movie. But of course, if every other person writes reviews (which is increasingly happening these days), the quality is not going to stay and it becomes more of a hearsay than a quality discussion. I prefer, then going by the promos, cast, and my own instinct rather than read such reviews. I see the plot dished out in mostly Indian reviews (rediff!) and not in others so much. That also mostly comes off as a venting channel right after the “reviewer” has watched the movie.
Spot on..In India as you said correctly the sole purpose of “most” of the reviews is to tell the audience whether to go for a movie or whether the film will be a hit or not!!Sometimes the reviewer says that even though the film is good it will not do well commercially.Is’nt it biased then?Ok then how do we review a film like Welcome or Singh is King?What will the reviewer say about the story and acting?
Completely agree with you. I share the same thoughts. Most of the reviewers take their job for granted and not as a responsibility. even i hate it when ppl say that movie got just 2 stars so i am not going for it and then they would some day watch it on pirated print and say they loved it. i believe the job of reviewer should be to first understand the target audience of the film, the different perspectives it can have and then write about it that to whom the film is aimed at. some reviewrs have their biases for actors, filmmakers, genres, issues etc which is really uncalled for. A misleading review in a national daily can make a difference of crores specially when many people do not have time to read about a film except for their newspaper. i believe its better to believe the word of mouth than some reviews because atleast u know the person and his preferences unlike reviewers whom many people think know better. one more problem with film critics is that they tend to know too much and cant think like a general audience.
Good article Aarti…hope you’ve started watching more Korean films by now:)
Indian Express seems to be the only discerning newspaper I can find these days, and their reviews don’t carry any stars, just fair opinions. Other newspapers resort to puns as headlines, masala news on the front pages, and gossip mongering more than real news. Not to mention photoshopped photos, ads and bought columns masquarading as news.
@Arati Raval,
Very Good Post I totally agree with you.I have had similar feeling many a times. Personally although I go through the reviews but always I watch it and try to have my own stand on it. I use this search engine WWW.mrqe.com for International Cinema and for our own Desi cinema I just surf through some reviews online and I believe after some point of time you can gauge how a specific reviewer is going to write a review.
Hindu also publishes good reviews… major problem is with the websites and tv channels with all the crappy reviewers…
Anton ego spoketh thus in Ratatouille(2007)
“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 probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.”
Thanks IMDB for the quote – but the point is that an artist – no matter how bad is always supeior to the critic who slams him/her. So what is the point of having a critic – but to inform – and just ‘inform’ they fail to do these critics with halo. Save for Baradwaj Rangan, none of the online reviewers carry the humility that they should, before any work of art and that is where they fail – miserably.
Movie reviews should carry a disclaimer – This was the personal opinion of the reviewer and readers are advised not to let this review influence their decision about watching this movie.
Thank you all!
@Sriram: I agree on the Rajeev Masand bit! His are the only reviews that I seriously follow. And even I have heard about some of these guys getting paid to write. But I guess, like many other things, we will never know the truth! I didnt know about Joginder Tuteja changing his review! Ha ha! That is ridiculous!
*
@AVD: Exactly what I also look for – comments on cinematorgraphy and all that. But in our reviews, I really have a tough time looking for that! I also see movies based on my instincts, but the problem is, many people do not. They look for stars. And it is just so unfair! And yeah, most reviews seem like they are venting out of frustrations rather than an honest fact sheet.
@Anindya: Reviewing any film, like Apan here says, needs to be done in perspective. Like while reviewing SiK or Welcome, the reviewer needs to know he is seeing no Ray film. He / She needs to know why the film was made. These are not supposed to be thought provoking films on subjects that matter, and these aren’t logic based films. So you know a reviewer has got it all wrong when he says “How can they all be in one house on the tip of a mountain, in the climax? It is impossible!” I guess all films need to be viewed in the perspective of why this story is being told. That may be the only way to review SiK and Welcomes, which we make in plenty!
*
@Apan: I completely agree with you! Most reviewers, IMHO, are not able to put films in perspective. So for many of them, general mass entertainment = not intelligent. I honestly think it takes a lot of intelligence to make a Hera Pheri or an Andaz Apna Apna. Which reminds me, I never got to read any reviews of AAA? Anyone has any idea on how it was rated back then?
@Shiv: Thanks! Ha ha ha! You and your Korean films! I hope you have moved to other parts of the world, too! Good films get made everywhere!
How are things?
*
@Nitin: I havent read The Indian Express in a very long time. I guess I need to! Thanks!
*
Nosinz: Thanks a lot! I need to check www.mrge.com! Yeah I agree on the knowing who will write how bit. The minute I see an XYZ film, I know Mayank will give it 3, Rajeev will give it 2, and that Nikhat will give it 4.5! :D
@Cherish: Yup I like The Hindu’s rviews too. Very rarely have I seen any bias there. Most channels and newspapers can definitely get better reviewers. I am hoping one of the Ronins makes it there!
*
@VP Jaiganesh: I remember that quote from Ratatouille. It was brilliant and so spot on! Bharadwaj Rangan is quite a star! I love to read those reviews!
@Arun Prakash: I agree. Sadly, most people will STILL count the stars! This review thing is getting increasingly annoying and damaging! So I just had to vent it out, like the reviewers ;)
Totally agree to this… The ratings or rather the stars given do play a role in deciding whether one wants to see the movie or not… i don’t read reviews in detail but the stars do decide whether i shud consider watching the movie or shud just give it a miss…And like you said reviews are subjective..so i think we can just have them minus the stars…just a plain representation of facts..and NO SPOILERS please.
OMG, Arati, whatte post this was! Awesome! What the hell is the job of a film critic supposed to be, anyway? This is one question that has hassled me for a long time now…
.
Does this remain a ‘film review’ or it becomes a ‘Dear Diana’ column where I get told by someone who doesn’t even know me, what I should do with myself and my time?!
.
WHAMMY!!! am rollin onda floor laughin my head off!!!
.
U have made many valid points here and each one carries enough wait to be fairly discussed / debated. But my lena-dena with film critics began with his review of Satya, for which i respect him and ended with his review of no smoking, for which i hate him. That apart i m a regular reader of bhradwaj rangan’s reviews but that is only for the fact that they are but ‘entertaining & informative pieces of writing’.
.
So to make my life easier what do i do? i skip the reviews. for me the only few grounds why i watch a film is a) the non-star cast a la kay kay, irrfan khan and the likes b) the promos. it shouldnt insult my intelliegence or lack of it c) the music d) if its strongly reccoed by friends who know my taste far too well. thats about it.
.
I am glad u made the effort to talk about this issue that has nagged many of us here. thanks. :-)
“But my lena-dena with film critics began with his review of Satya, for which i respect him and ended with his review of no smoking, for which i hate him.” here i was referring to khalid mohammed.
@Magik: Thanks! I guessed the Khalid Mohammed part ;) I try to skip reviews too. I maintain an Excel Sheet of the main reviews for the major releases every year as a hobby. Just to know how films fared and how many ‘trade guesstimates’ went right. My fear is that as more people have less time, they just count the stars and decide to go / not go. Bahot Producers ko din mein taare dikh jaate hai iski vajah se! :D And that sucks! In that case, the man who holds the pen, has no clue the responsibility he has on his shoulders. But before that, is he even aware of what to do with his 1,000 words?
Arati, nice writeup! I am a common man with no knowledge of the intriciacies of filmmaking like most of you’ll here. I have a job to go to and time for one film a month. In these reviews, I think I find an expert opinion. After reading your article, I got to know for the first time that these reviews can be bad too! I guess I am ignorant! I think the stars are a quick way to to know about the movie! I guess from now on, I will ask people rather than just read reviews! Thanks!
I have often heard people say that how can this film be a hit, it got just 1 and a half star. For most of the public films are just a source of weekend entertainment and most of them do not have any idea of what the film is about or the director etc. we cant expect them to thoroughly enquire about a film from different sources. i believe that in private and individual blogs one has the right to put his own thoughts about the movie but if the reviewer is reviewing the movie for a popular daily then the reviewer must realise its not his/her name that the reader care for but its because of the popularity of the daily people care about the stars therefore they have far greater responsibility. I have seen so many people who not attribute a review to the reviewer name but the name of the newspaper or the website. so even the newspaper/website editors should also ensure that the reviewers working for them do not take their duty as a right.
and i completely agree with the stupidity of the rating system. I dont think art should be unqantified by any means. rather they can end their review with the kind of audience that the film would work with. even otherwise u cannot compare films just on the basis of a number because different films are made with different intentions in mind.
“Bahot Producers ko din mein taare dikh jaate hai iski vajah se!”
.
very true. but idunno, if its jus ppl around me or generally the guy in the other cubicle pretty much knows in his head, what movie he has to watch and what to avoid. so the role of the critic is diminishing alarmingly. ur ‘dear diana’ analogy was the baap of all analogies. do write often! :-)
@Apan: True, films generally for the nation is for popcorn and pepsi. And which is what makes these guys job even more important. And of course, the newspapers better choose their reviewers carefully! I pay money to read them! I hope someday some good star-less reviews begin soon!
*
@Magik: :D :D Thanks! Lots of people already know what they want to see. Like many people dont care if an SRK film gets 2 stars, they will do their advance booking way before that Friday review. But it’s the smaller guys who take a beating – the smaller Producers, Actors, Directors.. And by smaller, you know what I mean. Not to demean anyone, just to indicate the non-blockbuster kinds. That’s about the entire industry minus 10 people. ;)
@Magik: Yeah! I will write more often
Bharadwaj Rangan is the only reviewer worth reading. He NEVER gives out the plot…and he never tries to force his views/opinions on the reader. In fact, he always mentions the salient features of EVERY movie..so that we can be a judge of whether we want to go for it or not.
I have watched movies only after his reviews…and though most of the ones i’ve watched are not 3+ stars, they are worth their price of ticket.
Well written and detailed, i also liked very much you never attacked anyone personally but focused on the the topic.
Apart from various paybacks, i think there is also Star-Journo relationship, which we can find if we analyse a critic’s review in movie starring a particular star.
I also agree with the critic should not reveal the endings especailly in thriller moives.E.g.Raja Sen wrote the whole story of Race in his first para of the article, he may not have liked the film, but writing whole story and climax was in bad taste.
Here’s the link to Ramu’s Take on our film critics.
http://rgvarma.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!5187B91811914FB4!546.entry
http://rgvarma.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!5187B91811914FB4!546.entry
good post…valid points raised and answered.
.
i read reviews only to know what x,y,z thinks about it. but i never take a decision based on reviews. i watch the movie and decide for myself whether its good or not.
.
‘aks’ had received poor reviews, but i wanted to see the chemistry between manoj bajpai and bigB. so, i watched the movie. this was just one of the many movies that i watched despited bad reviews. and i have skipped many movies inspite of good reviews.
.
talking about ‘popcorn’ and ‘pepsi’ audience, all i can say is that these people are entertainment hungry. after a tiring work schedule, personal and professional problems etc, they would rather watch ‘bachan ae haseeno’ than a ‘black friday’. they would eventually watchy ‘black friday’ but on tv/cd/dvd but not on the big screen.
.
when we shell out Rs.200/- per ticket, we deserve wholesome entertainment. and i am not talking about movies like SiK and Welcome, these are just money-making ventures.
.
just about 5% of the people watch a movie for cinematography, lighting etc. 95% watch it for timepass and fun, not even for songs else 1942ALS and Dil Se would have been hit
.
finally, we should learn to make our own call about a movie and not depend on misleading reviews and reviewers. by the way, rajiv masand is one of the best we have right now
@Cinemausher: Thanks. Yes I intentionally didnt take names because I didnt want to analyze our reviewers intentionally. I genuinely wanted to re-visit the basic reason why we review films. I guess we are missing the point somewhere which is why all these reviews serve no single purpose. Thanks for that RGV’s blog’s link. I really liked it. Just read it. He also seems pretty miffed and obviously.
*
I also didnt like Race but really, what Raja Sen gave away was so unfair! And yup, the star-journo relationship is perhaps stronger than job responsibilities too ;)
@Crazyrals: You speak my words! That is exactly my point. You and I take our own decisions based on our own instincts. I also saw Aks, never read any review for it. I saw many other 1 star films and skipped many 4 star films. The point being, we are 2 out of 10. I am just hoping the other 8 guys begin taking their own calls too!
*
And I dont blame the popcorn pepsi audience. Of course they want their money’s worth! If only they begin relying more on themselves too, rather than Mr. XYZ or Paper ABC. But with so many reviews going against public verdict, I guess more people are beginning to stay away from these reviews and depend more on what their neighbour tells them! :D
Arati, i guess a Rotten Tomatoes kind of system, where multiple reviews of the same movie appear would be give a more accurate picture. Again critics and audiences are always poles apart, not just in India but anywhere else. Transformers-2, was torn apart by critics, but is ending up as the biggest hit this summer. Similiarly while critics appreciated Ang Lee’s Hulk, audiences did not like it much.
..
But one thing irks me about most of our cinema “reviewers” and critics is their lack of knowledge. I had one critic giving a low rating to Batman Begins, saying it was too dark. WTF. Batman is The Dark Knight, and most of the Batman stories have a dark tone in nature. Just makes me wonder how many of our critics seriously do their homework, before reviewing a movie.
..
For me a movie review is not just about the plot line or performances or cinematography, but something called context. The least i feel any movie reviewer or critic must do, is have a basic idea about what the theme and context is. Trying to do a review of Munich without having no knowledge about the real life incidents, or the Arab-Israeli conflict, would be a futile task. At the same time focussing too much on the technicalities without having the personal touch, would make it a dry scholarly analysis. So i guess the key is to balance both these issues.
@Ratnakar: I agree entirely! Which is why I wrote that maybe the critics should consider simply putting things in perspective for us readers and leave the verdict to us, instead of telling us what they think! And, like you said, reviewers and the general people are generally poles apart. Yes, I also think a rotten tomatoes would be a great idea!
*
@Crazyrals: I agree with you on Masand being amongst the best we have!
My favorite reviewers would be Roger Ebert, James Berardinelli, and in India, Rajeev Masand. Some how never like Rangan much, he has a tendency to indulge in verbal jugglery a lot.
..
BTW there is one Srinivas Kanchibotla, who is not a regular reviewer per se. But his essays on movies are really good. He writes at a site called idlebrain.com
http://idlebrain.com/research/ramblings/index.html
In the name of so called popcorn pepsi audience lot of trash comes out which I think should be discouraged and this where reviewers should help. But sadly the opposite happens. Even the so called intelligent audience will want to see entertainment movies like a 99 (or may be a sankat city) but not a SIK or Welcome (or Kambakht Ishq).
“Even the so called intelligent audience will want to see entertainment movies like a 99 (or may be a sankat city) but not a SIK or Welcome (or Kambakht Ishq).”
Or is it the other way around?
And also all the producers should fight/ appeal to all the critics to go away with the star (rating) system which again shows the escapist nature of audience. As you said let them put in their after thoughts and perspectives and let the audience decide.
I meant movies like 99 are also entertaining movies, but dont show trash in the name of entertainment
@Arisha (16): I know.. Which is so damaging to the people in the film. What if the reviewer screws up, which they often do?
*
@Cherish and Ratnakar: I guess it works both ways, and nowadays thankfully, the guy who likes a SiK is also willing to give 99 a shot. Hope this moves to many other non-urban places too, from our big cities.
*
@Cherish: I wish some Producer is reading this and is willing to give a star less review system a chance!
Good One…
Among critics “Roger Ebert” remains the fav.
@Scarpmanic: Thanks
Reviews in national dailies and web portals should be compulsorily delayed by a week or two. That way, a reviewer will not have any influence on the film’s box office result, exactly how it should be. Wondering why it was not done so far! A new car gone flop, a new product gone flop still have many tangible assets to salvage. A film producer has nothing if the film flops. Least of all a reviewer should not be allowed to play spoilsport. The producers deserves to salvage whatever he can from the box office prior to the reviews.
@Vinay: You think newspapers will really agree to do that? I am not too sure. Although I think that there is one newpaper from Kolkata, I guess it’s the ABP, that prints reviews a week after the film’s release. But I don’t know how many readers would still be interested in reading it.. Maybe someone can try it out?
That way movies with heavy publicity will have unfair advantage over smaller ones. Delaying, I think, is not a solution.
What about standardizing the reporting format.
Like Acting, Music, Editing, Screenplay? And give whatever marks to each. That way atleast people will know what to expect (and also finding faults will be easy).
@Cherish: Yeah, The Telegraph does that. They have, I think, 4-5 parameters, each evaluated seperately. It has its own advantages and disadvantages. Again, it’s subjective and it is the opinion of the reviewer. But probably better than an overall 3 stars. Honestly, I dont know which one works!
I respect Tuteja that he dared to change his review. How many people have the guts to take back their words in front of the whole wide web?
@Jitesh: Thanks! But it’s not about guts. What does it mean when a reviewer changes his review after the success / failure of an album / film? Is it that he didnt get it right the first time or is it that it looks bad if he didn’t like something that is now-popular? Either way, it doesn’t reflect well. One review per reviewer is anyway tough to handle, imagine if we begin getting multiple reviews from one person! It can get maddening!!
Accept that it’s difficult to tell which ones make sense. But, honestly our filmmakers (especially the ones who make good films) are also at fault. They don’t even understand that the fate of their movies is decided by these so called intellectuals. And probably they are the ones who should sit and decide (along with the reviewers and newspapers) on whats the best way forward. I have seen many cases when Taran Adarsh says lots of good about a movie, but at the end he gives 2 stars saying it wont work for masses. How lame can it get?
@Cherish (45): Taran merely gives trade guesstimates, or so it seems. So I think, even if he likes a film and feels that the people won’t lap it up, he will give it less stars. I say so because I have observed that he always talks trade, never talks creative. Maybe he cannot. I am not trying to justify what he does, for I am no fan of his. In fact, I dont follow his reviews too much. I am only guessing what he tries to do on bollywoodhungama!
pretty good post!!
a reviewer’s job is to share what he/she felt(not neccessarily cinematically) while watching a movie!! and nothing else!!
if a movie is bad, why bother writing a review.
if a movie is good, really good, then u can’t assimilate all that goodness in one viewing!!
the first time i saw memento i was bowled over by the narrative,secong viewing was all abt how the camera follows him, third one was abt dialogues…
u can’t possibly review a movie like that after watching it once…
a review should serve the purpose of giving insights about a film like an idea sharing platform, some things clicked you, others clicked with me…
Good post! You said something that everyone wanted to say but didn’t…
But next time, please do mention the names – it will be more fun
ha ha ha ha ha ha……..Reviews sucks everytime…u can just ignore them…infact many of our releases sucks…whom to complaint….I am so dad and frustated with the kind of movies released..and now this frustation is so natural..i am very much comfortable with it..its become part of my body…..ha ha ha
@Ahmad: Thanks
I agree that one viewing might not be enough to review a film. Which is why I have written that I wonder if reviewers ever felt like changing their reviews.. I hope some reviewer reads this and answers.
@Shuhbo: Names are fun sure.. But there is anyway too much name calling happening around us everyday.. I thought why not question the basic purpose? Maybe that’s what is lost and not the reviewr’s minds!
*
@Deepak: I know.. Many people have lost faith in reviewers.. Which is not such a good thing. That’s why I seek answers
Fantastic Arati… i don’t understand too much of films / film-making / reviews, etc etc… but after reading what u’ve written; i’m surely not going by any of these reviews ever!!!! and i really wish they scrap this entire process of giving stars *** to films….
@Diana: Thanks! They really need to scrap this star system! It is just so misleading man!
@ Arati: u have touched a soft spot of all us filmi keedas! am so happy we are having such a healthy discussion here… way to go!
@Magik: Thanks man! You bet!! We all feel so terrible when we see injustice being meted out to filmmakers. But this article was to genuinely revisit the basic purpose of reviewing films. I am glad we are
Great post Arati ! You are bang on target ; I loved the idea of Star-less reviews but I guess that would leave the reader pretty much confused most of the times that how does the writer exactly feels … I like the idea of ROTTEN TOMATOES where they count the overall ratings based on several reviews which I think is a good parameter to judge a film; after all a reviewer is also a part of the Public … Reviews are something that have also benefited several small films but I guess that just not justifies the harm they can do … btw I’ve written several of these reviews on my blog and I prefer to think of Review as more of an OPINION of the writer and they should not be considered as general opinion .
@Saurabh: Thanks a ton! Yes I agree the reviews we read are opinions. But I question that: Are they supposed to be? I really don’t know if they are meant to be opinions. Since the time I am reading reviews, I don’t know if I am reading an opinion or a presentation of facts. And today, my question remains the same. Because now I am reading opinions, vendettas, witty write ups, trade analysis.. Everything!
The fact is, “real” film criticism, spoken in film _language_ is a different deal altogether. A film review could consist of many things. I have heard many hotshot (and good) directors saying that there are no real film critics in India. Fact is, we also have an audience who would like to know what the “movie is all about” and hence giving them such kind of reviews isnt exactly being off the element. If you were to notice, there are so many elements involved in a film that it would be virtually impossible to link all of them and put them on a platter for an audience thats actually only looking for the “plot/story”. A movie reviewer actually has a bigger role in film language. Given that a reviewer’s job is to “inform” people about what a movie is all about would also contain the fact that they need to rate it. Now, of course, this is their personal opinion, and we as an audience are trusting of this since most Indians would like to watch a movie that’s a “hit” with the BO and/or stars their fave stars and/or etc etc. It is to be considered then that 1.5 or 2 stars mean not so good, whereas 3 or 4 stars would mean decently good. This is the reviewer’s opinion, of course. As a smart audience, we can only leave it to ourselves to decipher a movie and think things about it after watching it, however, these reviews form guidelines “to watch a movie”. They may not be entirely “incorrect” but then they aren’t the Bible to go by either. A serious film watcher will always look for a “guideline” on the internet which may not necessarily be a “review”. However, it is upto him at the end of the movie to form his opinion and judgement about the film, imho.
=)
Cheers!
J
i think we need to separate the ‘reviewer’ from the ‘critic’. technically, a critic is one who is looking for whats wrong; while a reviewer is supposed to voice his opinion on whats right.
a critic should not review and a reviewer should not criticise, hope i am making sense
so, while we can have loads to reviewers…we shall have just a handful of critics who know the art inside-out. rajeev masand is a good reviewer, but i would like to see shyam benegal or adoor gopalkrishnan or hrishikesh mukherjee as a critic.
.
critics are the ones who can show the way forward by pointing out whats gone wrong and where
.
reviewers should just review the movie and move on. not try to enforce their views and opinions and not try to speak for a vast audience out there by declaring ‘this movie sucks…dont watch’ or ‘this movie is great…go watch’. always leave the choice with the readers, do not judge for them…let readers make their owbn judgements
great post Arati…way to go!!!
@crazyrals: Yes! I know.. So our guys then need to know if they are reviewers or critics! I guess, going by human nature, we are ALL critics.. You, me, and everyone around! We always know of a better way of doing things! :D But yes, I agree that they should probably refrain from telling us whether to go for a film or not.. I suddenly feel like a 5 year old when I read instructions! Ha ha!
*
@judgegag: Thanks
hay one solution for sure….why dont we appoint someone to reveiw a review…..then lemme see how all revieres will hide their faces….cool na
@Deepak: LoL! And what should we call him? Big Daddy?! ;)
Armond White is the best reviewer out there. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/author/author-2725/)
You have to see it to believe it.
well i dont think you should depend so much on the reviewers in the first place..
Its not that different from your friends opinion of a movie. If he/she is someone with whom your taste matches, you can tell from their opinion if you will like the film or not
So very often I have gone and watched movies with extremely bad reviews because I wanted to watch them. I would say a review is a opinion and something that may point out things for you to watch out for when you watch the movie.
Why you should be upset by reviews I know not. I think very rarely do the crowds have anything do with that. They mostly have to do with the trailers and the star cast.
In fact, the reviewers may help bring some not so noticed movies to your notice.. Really its your choice how you want to perceive it. And pick a reviewer whose reviews you like !
love the way you right… straight there!
well, i guess we go through same experiences.what i follow now is if i have to read a review, i read it after i see a film…though can never like newspaper so try to read online…
some time back i wanted to read about Slumdog M., where most of the articles that i searched were all synopsis… i was dying to read more about the individual smaller story segments within the film, the characters, and other things, trying to dig in deeper… a film that made such a publicity … still so less written… did find few bit stuff.. although not satisfying :(
- Prarthana
Great post! I really enjoyed your thoughtful and thought-provoking ideas. In my own ‘review of critics’ I wasn’t as kind, basically calling them all middle-aged and failed filmmakers… Anyway, I think a critics job is not to criticize by to critique, to nourish. That is the correct root of the word anyway…
continuing from cmnt#59: a critic should be a man of progressive thoughts. apart from names mentioned above, another good example would be gulzar saab, because he is a man with immense knowledge of films and human emotions. while he has made movies like ‘masoom’, he has also made ‘machis’; he has written lyrics for ‘bandini’ and ’satya’, ‘no smoking’ and ‘chachi 420′. so, he is in a position to play a fair critic and show us the way forward.
.
more than reviewers, we need good critics
And your points about spoilers and how our film experience is affected deeply by the company, place and even food experiences are brilliant!
No one is forcing anyone to read any reviews. Just don’t read them. In case you don’t know there is a thing called preview and you can only read previews. It just gives you the synopsis and then you can make up your mind whether to watch a movie or not.
According to Webster’s dictionary Review is critical evaluation and that’s what reviews should be. The review should tell whether the movie, performances, cinematography, music and so on are good. Every reviewer in the world does that even Robert Ebert. There’s nothing wrong with giving stars but most of the time the stars don’t tally with the review like in the case of Rajeev Masand.
Most of the critics in India are a joke. How can anyone take Taran Adarsh seriously when he gave Karzzz and Dostana 4 star and Gajini 4.5 How can anyone take Rajeev Masand seriously when he gave JA, the saas bahu fantasy 4 star and Raja Sen gave that horrible Tashan 3 star.
Even critics in Hollywood have their prejudices. They rate the movie depending on the starcast and the director. They trashed Butterfly Effect because it had Ashton Kutcher. If it had Brad Pitt/Leonardo it would have been hailed as a masterpiece.
A comic movie cannot be reviewed with the same parameters as a serious movie but the jokes have to be funny. SIK (only Yashpal Sharma was funny) and Dostana are crap movies no matter what the yardstick. AAA, Golmaal (old), Chupke Chupke and JBDY, Munnabhai MBBS, LRM are all comic movies but they are smart and funny.
whatever…… aarti you really made my day..coz I llok for and now find reason to abuse these dirt and i got chance ..i might sound jokey at the places but the truth is ..it is very sad to have our cinema’standards so low, except few…..all the best and keep posting….
I think two things are most important
a)Lets replace journalist and help film criticism talk about films, review them..
b.Second replace the starring system, it should be banned
In my view point:
> You want to go for a film in the evening, there are a few films running. You are confused, then rely on reviews.
> There are a few films running. You like only comedies; which film carries more comedy in it? Rely on reviews.
> Anyway, films are not just an art-form; it is also business. Is a film worth the amount I spend? As there is no money back guarantee, and if you want to make sure it is worth your money (at least in some aspects), rely on reviews.
> You are out with your family and you are having a joyful mood. You plan to watch a movie, but you don’t want to spoil the mood. (there’s nothing like a bad movie to spoil the mood.) If you are in this situation, rely on reviews.
When I say, RELY on reviews, it is NOT just reading it and believing it blindly;
> The site XYZ carries Mr. A’s review. Read some other reviews from him, on films that you have watched and make yourself an idea about the reviewer. If you think, your view-points go along with his reviews, then you can rely on him. If not try some other review site or another reviewer. (If you cant find any, start reviewing. :-)
> If you just want to know the cast and crew and a few lines on a film, read Previews instead of Reviews. Choice is yours!
> If you are comfortable with watching any movie, and if you have time/money/energy for it; then it is always better to watch a movie than reading it’s review and deciding whether it is good or bad.
So, reviews are only a guide-line. Why viewers need a guideline? It is to help them to choose. And reviews are reviewers are surviving because there are enough readers, means there is such a need in the society. People do not want to spend time and money on all those movies, releasing every week.
A good reviewer is also somebody who has got more understanding on the medium. So his/her views are good for the film makers as well. Not only for the crew behind one particular film, but also for the whole people in the industry.
Nice thoughts anyway. Enjoyed reading it. :-)
–
@Tejas: Thanks! I wil definitely check it out!
*
@ligne: I totally agree with what you say. I also do not base my decision based on the reviewers. But the reason I get so upset is that I have seen people base their movie viewing decisions on the stars that they see. And trust me, there are a lot of them. In this light, reviewers are fast becoming opinion leaders. And opinion leaders come with a lot of responsibility! Also, I am merely questioning the role of the reviewer, asking us and them to revisit the basic purpose of why we write the reviews in the first place. Am not name calling, I hold no grudges. I simply question
*
@Prarthana: Thanks! I also have burnt my fingers on occasions, by reading the review before seeing the film. Now, I try to hold my reading till after I have seen the film! And yeah, I agree with the SM reviews. Many of them were synopsis and value jidgements.
*
@Nina: Thanks so much! I also believe that unless a review has something constructive written,, it becomes a piece of personal writing. Which I do not think reviewes are meant to be.
Very well intended article indeed!!!! The best thing about it is not naming anyone at all & yet making them feel the pinch!!! Great!!! I agree to most of the points that u mention here. Just that i believe that with money flowing in like anything & with so many media houses popping around, like most of the things even the Reviewers’ job is undergoing a major transition & i am sure as the ship gets settled, only the better of the lot shall survive!!! Sheer optimism….Right??? : )
And, another thing…even the readers shall start not taking them that seriously……Anyways, its just an individuals’ opinion & is biased most of the times, right??? With time, i think even this realization would take place in peoples’ minds & that would also help in elimination of people who do not deserve to be there… But all this takes its own sweet time…..Wait & watch….
My Favourite reviewers – Rajeev Masand & Jai Prakash Chowksey (Dainik Bhaskar)
And yes……you should write more often!!!!! Your selection of subjects is always spot-on!!! Cheers!!!!
@crazyrals (70): Oh Gulzar saab! Of course! He would be super to review films! And yes, we need critics, specially ones who can write with bias for / against no one. Too much to ask? ;)
*
@sputnik: Of course, no one is forced to read any reviews! And yes, I do know about previews. Like I have mentioned earlier too, most of us reading this post here, take our own calls on what to see and what not to see. But my fear is that our reviewers are fast becoming people who are allowed by the general public to decide for them, what to see and what not. Maybe you and I dont take a Taran Adarsh seriously, but I know of a LOT of people who do. They check bollywoodhungama before they book their tickets! And I say not that reviewers should not evaluate the screenplay et al. I began my article with that. I only question their primary function, which you have rightly mentioned in your comment. I simply ask to revisit why we write reviews and hope that all our reviewers keep that in mind while they write..
@Deepak: Thanks
It hurts me too, hence I write.. And hope to get heard! But I am sure things can get better for all of us! We just need to be honest to ourselves and our jobs! (Ours = Reviewers)
So, our reviewers need to constantly know WHY they are writing. That’s all, but it’s a tough benchmark to keep up to, week after week!
*
@Ms. Wong: Both valid points. Just that there is no way a star system can be banned. These people all need each other.
*
@Haree: Thanks! ALL valid points! And in all these scenarios, there are hundreds of people who reply on reading reviews. In India, that means lacs of people. Hence, I feel, reviewers are becoming more and more important as more and more films release. One cant possible see 3 new films a weekend for 200 bucks a ticket. So arrives the need to choose. And how do most people choose? Either gut feel, a friends’ opinion or a review. There we go, a review again!
@Abhishek: Thanks a lot! Yes I agree that the reviewer’s job maybe undergoing an administrative change, a routine change. But not a principle change. Why they write cannot be dependant on how often they write. And I hope more people begin to take decisions on their gut, promos, word of mouth and other such things and don’t let a stranger decide for them.
I have seen so many people who not attribute a review to the reviewer name but the name of the newspaper or the website. so even the newspaper/website editors should also ensure that the reviewers working for them do not take their duty as a right.
Apan Singhal
The fact is, “real” film criticism, spoken in film _language_ is a different deal altogether. A film review could consist of many things. I have heard many hotshot (and good) directors saying that there are no real film critics in India.
June
i think we need to separate the ‘reviewer’ from the ‘critic’. technically, a critic is one who is looking for whats wrong; while a reviewer is supposed to voice his opinion on whats right.
Crazyrals
Well, your explained what goes inside our human head. I’ll tell you what I do:
1.I don’t read reviews of new films or of filmmakers that I feel won’t disappoint me.
2.I read reviews/criticisms only after watching a film. Only after forming my own thought. Each time I’ve read a review before watching a film, I’ve been unable to forget the reviewer/critic’s comment. I can’t let them debauch my joy of viewing experience.
3.I read a lot, and mostly very ‘academic’/scholarly reviews/criticisms, and not look for a particular critic but publications/websites like The New Yorker, The Guardian, The Hindu, Criterion, NYTimes, etc. They have a standard to maintain. And I’ve learnt the hard way from my starting years in journalism that it’s very important to make a stance and stick to it – which as humans we tend to ignore since we tend to make compromises and undergo emotional and other changes, etc.
4.Ultimately, at the end, it’s ME who has a say in whatever I like or dislike. And I don’t bother what others have to say. I may feel guilt about my liking a stupid scene, but I’m also human, no?
@Salik: Yes I do the same. Not the New Yorker, Guardian bit, but the reading the review after seeing the film bit. I guess that works very well for me. About film directors commenting on there being no ‘real’ film critics in India, I don’t blame them! If I get angry at times, maybe these guys have faced bigger problems! And yes, of course, ultimately it is the individual who decides. It’s just that everyone decides based on different parameters. And many general public’s parameter is, sadly, these stars.
hmm …. most of what i would wanna say has already been said …. but still i’ll try. Dev D got 5 stars by TOI and that made it famous …. so famous that people who hate topics like drugs and sex and who care only for the movies of superstars wanted to bother their routine to go and watch this movie. As magik said “people watch what they wanna watch” ….. review dont bother them much these days ….. but how does a person decide what he wants to watch …. here comes the publicity part and i think reviews play a big part in it. Reviews help in setting expectations ….. most of us dont read them though and just check how many stars the film got …. but still they prepare the audience. But does anyone of us simply watches or skips a movie because of the reviews ???? Cinema lovers make it a point to read them and thus can easily decide which reviewer to detest and which one to follow ….. those who dont love cinema dnt bother so much and their decision to watch or skip depends more on friends opinions and star cast.
Reading reviews of all kinds gives me hope and faith in my tatse and choice.
@Shatik: Yes, true! Nikhat’s 5 stars for Dev D made it famous. But it also raised the expectations IMMENSELY. I met people who said they expected a masterpiece, but were terribly disappointed. Another way to look at it, is that had the film not got 5 stars, would some people have liked it better? Of course, there are chances that they wouldnt have seen it at all had it been 3 stars.. Man, this is a vicious circle ;)
I also read reviews just for tracking who says what. Not for any help in decision making. But you will be surprised to know how many people base their decisions on the opinions on the reviewers.
It did raise the expectations immensely …. and most of my friends asked me to justify the 5 stars after watching the movie …. but they also said the movie was good though it didn deserve 5 stars but it was really good. And i agree that MANY people base their decisions on the opinions of the reviewers ….. but i think they trust the opinion of people around them more.
“”had the film not got 5 stars, would some people have liked it better?”" …… y do u want people like these to like the movie less/more ….. i think its better if the black sheeps stay out of the fence.
@Shatik: Granted. The stars worked for Dev D. But I would not call the people who didn’t like the film ‘black sheep’.. Even I didnt like it ;) LoL!
lol …. i wasnt being specific about this movie. Shit ! …. now that u have mentioned u didn like the movie, i may become a bit biased towrds u ….
.
….. they read the reviews and would skip a lot of movies that are not appreciated by the reviewers but still went to watch CC2C and they actually liked it.
Reviewers received a lot of flak in december and january …. not by intellectuals like u but by general public ….. many criticised RNBDJ’s reviews and that it didnt deserve the stars it got ….. same happened for ghajini ….. but what surprised me most were people criticising the reviewers for not appreciating CC2C …. CC2C was unanimously unaccepted but people just criticised them and said it deserved more …. people like these are “black sheep” for me
I m totally jobless and its better u dnt waste time replying to my comments. lol
@Shatik: Ha ha! It’s ok.. I can handle bias!
But yes, what you say is true. Reviewers did receive flak. And rightly so! About being jobless, between 2-3 PM is my fighting-against-post-lunch-sleep time! I’d rather reply to your posts!!
@ Arati- great topic to write on.I’m joining the discussion late but nevertheless feel that you & a lot of the others in the discussion here have touched several points.In fact Rediff has even started multiple reviews for a lot of their films
( of course things can further improve ).In fact its irritating to see people just open up a newspaper like TOI in the weekend or listen to Rajeev Masand or read a a review by TA or anyone else online and determine their views based on the stars mentioned in the reviews.
As a habit I go through reviews not for gaining any gyan but because I find them entertaining to read ( quite a lot of them can be really funny @ times ).Unless there is really a unanimous acceptance or rejection of any film, it would be difficult to accept these reviews just like that.
@Sethu: Thanks a lot!
Yes these reviews often get very entertaining. But also damaging to Producers/Directors and everyone involved with a film. I also read them for fun at times.. Just for the heck of it! And yes, rediff has been doing multiple reviewers thing for quite some time now.. They SURE can improve.. And they can begin with not giving away spoilers ;)
Hi Arati….I totally level with you on this one…I personally feel that film reviewers can be biased towards a certain production house or an unusually themed movie, for a reason which can go unexplained….but they do not get it, that their reviews impede audacious film makers from making a movie which may have a new outlook and freshness which Bollywood needs desperately….in his/her review may lie the future of a new budding Bollywood, which may go unexplored by the gen-next cinema lovers….the absurd era of Ratings and Opinions must come to an end…..Jai Ho Bollywood!!
I read the article two days ago but now, after watching Kambakht Ishq, I can say they do a great service to the mankind. I went to watch the movie after having read the reviews, thinking the same thing u’ve written about, that one shd form one’s own opinion after watching the movie n stuff. i wish I had listened to the reviewers.
@ Author
Liking a film is very subjective. The job of a reviewer to write about the technical details, storyline, music and all that.
If you are mad about people going with the “star system” of newspapers then what’s the fault of critics in it? Why are you targetting them? Go ahead and write about the public. Public is responsible for everything. They make the stars, opinion leaders.
If you don’t like the reviews then don’t read them. Who forced you anyway? If people like to go by the reviews then what’s your problem? To each his own.
If you are the one who changes his mind every other day about a movie then don’t think that others do that, too. You’re one confused person yourself. The real feeling is the one which you feels for the first time. Be it bad or good. The second time, you won’t feel the same thing, no matter how hard you try to feel that.
Read the reviews of Kambhakt Ishq. Did they write anything wrong? They were bang on target about everything. In fact, people didn’t go by the reviews. If they would have, film wouldn’t have taken such a big opening.
@Rajesh: Thanks a lot! That was precisely the point I was trying to make!
It will do a lot of us a lot of good if our reviewers up the standards of their jobs!
@Bonzer: Am glad
@Navinder: Gosh, you sound angry. I think you have totally missed the point of the article, at every single level. Anything said in anger means nothing to me. Your understanding of my write up is so wrong, that I cant even begin explaining. I have clearly written “This is no critic bashin”. If you still think so, well, I am sorry. Nothing I can do about it. I love reading reviews and it angered me to see the standards dropping so I wrote. If you think they are doing a good job, then good for you!! Nopes, I am not a confused person. I know my mind pretty well. And if I have doubts, I speak them. To clear the muck. I see no weakness in that. If you never have doubts, that is super good for you! And yes, chill! It is just my opinion. Like you said, you are entitled to yours. So thanks for writing!
Very well written article for the people who review film or want to give opinion. My intent to write a review is clear, we are not here to force someone in anyway, but to put light on the facts that are objective. I know ‘Entertainment’ is subjective matter and should be left on audience itself, but what when ‘Entertainment’ is nothing but cheap and sleazy showcase of bikinis or profanities or just double meaning, we just mention it and give our opinion on this.
Great power Carry Great responsibilities, true, but what is the responsibility? isn’t that responsibility to show audience a way, just to show them the worth or the product they are going to purchase? If it’s not, ‘Critics’ and ‘Criticism’ has no meaning left? or it still ?
Know what, This is the very Question that has been haunting me day and night from a week or two!
And the conclusion I’ve managed to reach (if et al) is – A reviewer’s job is to tell what is there that a common man from the audience may or may not like.
Film reviews are not meant to exhibit their wonderful writing skills. They should not be based on personal opinion either. They should be written in the context of how audience will most probably like it…
But alas… Our film reviewers hardly understand that!:)
Thanx for such a great and honest write-up…. In a way, my thoughts found a voice
@Manzoor: Thanks! What you say is very true. Entertainment does hold different meanings for everyone. Indian cinema is very different from the cinema across the world. Which is why I raised the question if the reviewer’s job is any different in India. And yes, I agree that reviewer’s job is to show the way and not pass verdicts.
@B.H. Harsh: Thank you for writing in! I agree that reviewers are not here to exhibit their vocabuloary and word prowess. It’s ok if it ALSO becomes a good write up. But first of all, it has to be a productive and informative write up. Which sadly, many arent. Hence, it would do all of us a lot of good if our reviewers keep asking themselves why are they writing in the first place. Glad you liked the article!
Exactly!
If our Reviewers try to understand ‘WHY’ they are asked to review a film… it’d be so great!
I hope someone brings a change soon.
mahaan critic roger ebert retorts
.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/07/i_am_a_brainiac.html
.
century poori! congrats arati!!!!!!
@B.H. Harsh: Yeah, I hope so too!
Am reading Roger Ebert’s link!
*
@Magik: Thank you
Hey Arati…Congrats..Now that you have surpassed the century mark..hope ur on the way to making a double century…As always, all the very BEST!!!!!!!!
@Arisha: Thank you
*
@Magik: That was super! It is the best that I have read in a long, long time.. Amazing precision! Almost like an answer to all the questions I posed here. Thank you sooooo much!
Magik. That retort by Ebert is just the kind of attitude that a reviwer or a critic should have. Though I do have a problem with Ebert proclaiming Transformers was a bad movie. Good or bad remains subjective, even when Ebert says that audience climbs their evolving ladder film by film. Even then good or bad remains subjective. Maybe such “enlightened observing” might help in identifying performances for awards. But there is no reason why a reviewer or a critic or anyone else should be allowed to decide a film’s fate or proclaim that it was good or bad. Which is the reason why I stated earlier that reviews should be allowed to be broadcasted a week or two after a film’s release.
And Arati, newspapers would definitely have a problem with that. But why should they protest? They arent involved in the making of the film. They are gonna make their usual noises about freedom of expression and blah blah. What about freedom of entrepreneurs (producers) to “let” them make their money!
@Vinay: True! I second you on that one!
Does anyone here read Opinion pieces? Or the Op-Ed? How do you approach those? Am very curious now after reading the piece and the responses here…
And btw, Arati – Ebert uses the star system. In every single review. He also passes verdict (which you say you disagree with)…
@Shripriya: I havent read any opinion pieces. Shall try doing so. About the star system, I agree that it is extremely popular. I was only trying to explore an option that is not widely tried yet. But yes, I do have issues with the passing verdict bit. I personally think it is unfair. But like Ebert says, that is supposed to be his job.
Then again, I would like to question what is supposed to be their job, which might be different from what is happening right now! 