The worth of a film critic

Thank God it’s Friday or, TGIF, is a sigh, let out by work-weary professionals. The film fraternity, however, holds its breath on this day of reckoning. The judgement often comes from seemingly ordinary individuals on other days, but suddenly acquire demi-god status on a Friday – the film critic. I often wonder about the need for critics, especially the ones who have never been in the shoes of the hapless souls whose labour of love, they seem to be judging. It pains me all the more when some critics take sadistic pleasure in tearing apart the film in a matter of two minutes, a film which might have taken years to produce. However bad the film is! How fair is it that an individual, who has never directed a scene or written a script, gets to judge the talent of people, or decide for millions whether they should watch the film or spend the weekend doing better things. The dizzying multiplex rates and the crores charged by the stars might be one plausible reason why critics should step in to advise whether the performances are worth the viewer’s expensive buck. But I have felt that word of mouth, rather than a critic’s pen, is more effective in this case. So, if the movie is worth getting trashed, it will eventually meet its fate. But why does one person have to decide or preempt that eventuality? A movie is made for the viewer, not for the critic. So let the viewer wield that sacred power. If the television channel or the newspaper needs such reviews to fill its space, they better fill it with the reactions of the audience, rather than the critic. It’s not that critics are unimportant. Some of the reviews are well worth it, and an industry does need a watchdog. It keeps the directors, script writers, actors and the creative geniuses on their toes, and brings out the best in them. But the critic should ideally be the person who knows where the shoe pinches, rather than someone who decides its worth without stepping into it.