Reviewers Review – The Hindu
i amIndian cinema’s battle with censorship is long and storied. Film journalism, for the most part, is sympathetic to his struggles. Restrictions on artistic and intellectual freedom are undesirable in any democracy. Regimes that inhibit or regulate industry are equally inexorable to the free flow of information. In such a climate, it is conceivable that, at least in spirit, the creators and commentators of culture stand together. However, this is increasingly not the case.
Filmmakers and producers expect tolerance, transparency and nuance from administrative authorities, yet they are often reluctant to extend this to the press. A series of recent developments illustrate this rift. From a major Bollywood studio canceling an advance press screening to YouTubers facing copyright strikes for publishing negative reviews, film critics, journalists and content creators are losing ground in an already chaotic mediascape. It is becoming surprisingly difficult to report honestly and consistently on Indian films; The scaffolding of good-faith disagreement, however fierce, threatens to crumble.
There must be some basis for the confused attitude of the industry towards newspapers. The digital age has made it difficult to sort out genuine criticism from hate and vandalism. In social media, everyone is a critic or trade analyst. ‘Paid reviews’, welcome when they are favorable, can become a nuisance when profited by rival camps or stars. We also live in an age of boycott calls and engineered controversy: A passing comment by an actor can be taken out of context and circulated online, damaging the prospect of redemption. So, then, it’s much easier to limit interaction altogether, favoring harmful city tours and fan meetings instead.
Both Bollywood and the regional industry are censoring the media in subtle and subtle ways. Press conferences and promotional interviews are conducted in near-laboratory conditions — praise and banter are encouraged, as are all ‘film-related questions’; However, ask anything topical or political and you’ll likely get criticism from five different PR teams involved. Streaming platforms prefer to record interviews at their end; This gives them the advantage of shutting down anything inconvenient or controversial during the editing stage. Actors are unabashedly ‘apolitical’, even when appearing in decidedly political films.
There are certainly problems with the entertainment media ecosystem at large. “Many reviews outside India are often political and paid,” actor Abhay Deol told Gulf News in 2021. “Reviewers and critics have lost their credibility.” Money need not always be involved; Granting access to film stars is considered a currency in itself. Exciting, provocative activities on the Internet overwhelm more subtle responses. It’s telling – and vaguely amusing – that award shows televised in India have a separate ‘critics’ section, meaning that the main jury is bound by commercial constraints.
So, do filmmakers, production banners and streaming platforms have the right to protect their interests in such a volatile environment? of course But in short restricting the media is not the solution to their problems. A tent-pole release, riding on the hype and star power, will still attract audiences regardless of reviews. However, it is the smaller, ‘Indian’ titles that will suffer, depending as they rely on positive critical buzz prior to release. Well-rounded, meaningful writing on movies takes time and effort. Reviews that fall into the frenzied Friday rush will lose quality and insight (or, at the very least, suffer horrible typos).
Also Read | Film reviews are intended to inform and enlighten, not destroy and extort: HC
Great art, it is said, inspires great commentary. If the film industry is indeed going through a “crisis of credibility,” as has been suggested in recent weeks, it may start by keeping its side of the bargain.
shilajit.mitra@thehindu.co.in
has been published – October 25, 2024 02:10 am IST