Director Anubhav Sinha relays the events of the workers migration during the 2020 lockdown and compares it to the Partition in 1947, to which film critic Sumit Kadel further added remarks, calling the teaser ‘Absolutely Ridiculous’ and that “It Put India In Bad Light”
In the world of cinema, the role of film critics has always been significant. They offer their insights and opinions about movies, helping the audience to decide whether or not to watch a particular film. However, sometimes, these critiques can spark controversy, as seen in the recent incident involving Anubhav Sinha’s “Bheed” and film critic’s condemnation of it.
Anubhav Sinha’s latest project, “Bheed,” is a movie that depicts the horrors of mob mentality and the dangers of following the crowd blindly. However, one prominent film critic, who remains unnamed, wrote a scathing review of the movie, claiming that it was an “overly simplistic” and “one-dimensional” take on a complex subject. The critic also criticized the performances of the lead actors and the overall direction of the film.
But the critique did not go unnoticed by the director Anubhav Sinha, who took to Twitter to respond to the critic’s review. He accused the critic of being a “shallow and unimaginative” writer, who failed to understand the depth and complexity of his movie. Sinha also claimed that the critic’s review was a result of personal vendetta and that the critic had no right to condemn his movie.
However, things took an unexpected turn when another prominent filmmaker, Hansal Mehta, came to the defense of the unnamed critic. In a series of tweets, Mehta condemned Anubhav Sinha’s “childish” behavior and called him out for attacking a critic for expressing his opinion. Mehta also accused Sinha of being intolerant of criticism and of resorting to personal attacks when someone disagrees with him.
The spat between the two filmmakers soon became the talk of the town, with many in the film industry taking sides. While some supported Anubhav Sinha’s right to defend his work, others criticized his behavior towards the critic. Meanwhile, Hansal Mehta’s intervention was praised by many, who saw it as a much-needed reminder of the importance of constructive criticism in the world of cinema.
The incident has once again brought to the fore the role of film critics in shaping public opinion about movies. While it is essential to have a healthy debate and exchange of opinions about films, it is equally important to remember that everyone is entitled to their views. Filmmakers should be open to constructive criticism, and critics should be mindful of the impact their words can have on a film’s success.
In conclusion, the spat between Anubhav Sinha and the unnamed critic, and subsequent intervention by Hansal Mehta, highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to film criticism. While filmmakers have the right to defend their work, they must also be open to feedback and criticism. Similarly, critics should remember that their reviews can have a significant impact on a film’s success and be mindful of the language and tone they use. Ultimately, the goal should be to create a more vibrant and diverse film industry, where the exchange of ideas and opinions is encouraged, and everyone’s voices are heard.
