Opinion Filmmakers vs Film Critics: Critics don’t need certification from makers. But they do need honesty and reflection
Film criticism suffers in the rush to publish first and fast, resulting in writing that is lazy, over-reliant on templates and hung up on 'political correctness'.
"Like filmmaking, film criticism is also a work of art," writes Rajesh Rajamani. (Photo: Pixabay) 
In a recent interview, filmmaker Anjali Menon talked about the need for film critics to be educated about the various technicalities of filmmaking. Her comments generated a flurry of heated responses on social media and she later clarified in a social media post that professional film reviewing would benefit from a better understanding of the filmmaking process. She added that since the audience themselves are writing detailed and interesting reviews today, professional film reviewers should aim higher. But Menon isn’t the first to make this argument. Several other filmmakers, including Vetrimaaran and Mysskin have talked about the need to have “qualified critics”.
These arguments appear rather strange. First of all, there is no clarity and consensus on what could really make a critic “qualified”. And if there indeed is any merit in the argument, then one should be allowed to turn the same argument against filmmakers too, and demand that only qualified filmmakers should be permitted to make movies. This might then result in a situation where our movie halls hardly see a release.
Like filmmaking, film criticism is also a work of art. Just as a filmmaker responds to an emotion or thought from life and communicates it through their cinema, a critic too responds through their emotion and thought in their articulation. This demands that both filmmakers and film critics approach their art with honesty. As long as film critics are responding to what they watch on the screen with complete honesty, they are doing a good job.
However, this is not to say that the quality of film criticism today is top-notch. The first serious shortcoming lies in the homogeneity of opinions. Since most film critics come from similar socio-economic backgrounds, they all respond similarly to any given film. It is amusing how even their choice of vocabulary is often the same. ‘Deliciously wicked’, ‘Charmingly Delightful’ or ‘Hilarious and Heart-warming’ are some of the phrases that critics across different media houses use for the same film.
While cinema is consumed by the masses, film criticism, particularly in English, has remained a domain of the elite. This extreme lack of diversity among film critics has in fact forced readers to look for newer voices on social media.
The second problem lies in the race to deliver the fastest review. Trying to compete with social media writers and other media houses, critics are in a hurry to put out their review first. Film criticism today is literally written, published and forgotten at breakneck speed. Unfortunately, this has forced critics to rely on easy and dependable review templates which offer very little time or space to reflect and write thoughtful insights about a film. The reviews are superficial because they remain a reaction and not a reflection.
The third issue pertains to how nit-picking a film for political correctness has been presented today as a valid form of film criticism. While this form of outrage did find some readers initially, it has now reached a point of saturation. What readers look for in criticism is political understanding and not a political correctness barometer. A film critic should be able to convert their anger into thoughtful criticism. To just outrage and dismiss films as “toxic” or “problematic” is not criticism — just laziness that masks itself in loudness.
Another problem lies in the complicated relationship that film critics share with filmmakers. In their aspiration to not just review or critique films but also interview filmmakers, actors and other technicians, they are left in a fix. Interviews demand that critics maintain a cordial relationship with filmmakers. And that often influences what they can say or not say about the films.
The work of film critics does not depend on certification from filmmakers. It depends on the trust the readers place in them. We live in the streaming era where the shelf life of a film is much beyond its theatrical run. For film criticism too to have a life beyond the weekend, critics should offer honest, unique and thoughtful writing and not merely focus on pasting their faces on written or video reviews.
The author is a Chennai-based writer and filmmaker
Share
