A mostly remembered report of a recent conversation:
Him: Of course I know your work. At one point, I used to love your reviews.
Me: [Awkward smile, with the mind furiously latching on to “used to.”] Thanks.
Him: At that time there was no one else writing like you.
Me: [Awkward smile continuing, with the mind now working over “at that time.”] Thanks.
Him: What happened yaar?
Me: What do you mean?
Him: Nowadays I don’t read your reviews. They’re too full of…
Me: [Please, God, please – don't complete that sentence with “yourself.”]
Him: … metaphysical meaning.
Me: [Phew, dodged a bullet there. Awkward smile, needless to say, continues.]
Him: I’m an ordinary guy. I’m a mass reader. If you don’t write for me, you’re dead.
Me: [Awkward smile. A slight pause.] So, you watch a lot of movies?
PS: Names have been changed to protect the privacy of people.
PPS: No animals were harmed during the making of this conversation.
Ramsu
August 17, 2012
See, that’s progress. Earlier, people only used to complain about you not favourably reviewing movies made for the masses. Now your readers themselves have a mass and class distinction.
I think it was Truffaut who said that the best way to critique a movie is to make another one. (Speaking of which, what happened to K2K?) You’ve achieved the next best thing, which is that your reviews are now being judged by the same yardstick as the movies you review. Congratulations. I think.
Next thing you know, you’ll need to add “item paragraphs” by Chetan Bhagat for your mass readers. Yensaai!
Arshia
August 17, 2012
Meh. There are (w)hordes writing for the masses already.
aandthirtyeights
August 17, 2012
I agree with “Him”. I think you should concentrate on physical meaning. Like you did with “Jism-2″.
rameshram
August 17, 2012
This guy sounds like the english speaking elite, though.
you’ll realize something that movie stars know intuitively, from making hit films. the pulse of the masses is far away from the mouth of the masses.
you made your (mass film focused reviewing ) bed , now lie in it.
sachita
August 17, 2012
lol! “If you don’t write for me, you’re dead” – how was this spoken – in goltese masala movie tone?
Gradwolf
August 17, 2012
hahaha..
We usually get a “Do you keep a dictionary next to you when you read his reviews?” “Did you understand his review? Can you tell me if he liked the movie?”
Sreekrishnan
August 17, 2012
ha ha ha ! Can be translated in any language and preserve that … ‘metaphysical’ review of your review
Fatema
August 17, 2012
The difference between reviewer and critic.
Ravi K
August 17, 2012
There are plenty of mokka reviewers who use phrases like “racy screenplay” and “[insert heroine] looks glamourous” in their reviews and leave it at that. You are better than that. Even though I don’t always agree with your reviews and articles or sometimes find them a bit rambling, they are still interesting to read. Keep doing what you’re doing, metaphysical meaning and all.
rameshram
August 17, 2012
“The difference between reviewer and critic.”
ooo don’t go there girlfrien’
The difference between reviewer and writer…maybe….
ravi
August 17, 2012
hey baradwaj. when did you meet me! btw I do watch a lot of films.
KayKay
August 17, 2012
” I’m an ordinary guy. I’m a mass reader. If you don’t write for me, you’re dead.”
So…lemme guess…you bumped into another fucktard who shits his pants at reviews that contain a little subtext and words that force him to turn on the online Thesaurus?
Is it Friday already?
Rohit Ramachandran
August 17, 2012
What does that mean? Best way to critique a movie is to make another one?
Rohit Ramachandran
August 17, 2012
Lol. Do you agree with him? About your reviews having metaphysical meaning?
Rohit Ramachandran
August 17, 2012
Sounds more like movie reporters.
soniajoseph
August 18, 2012
” I’m an ordinary guy. I’m a mass reader. If you don’t write for me, you’re dead.” Dramatic much?
But personally can’t watch a Hindi movie and not check out what you and Jai Arjun have to say about it.
And then watch the movie again.
@Ramsu: love the point about Bhagat “item paragraphs”
brangan
August 18, 2012
Actually, I put this up because he was unusually frank, and I appreciated that. (Usually, in face-to-face conversations, I only get to hear good stuff. For the other kind, I have to return to my blog and wait for rameshram’s comments.)
And the other thing that startled me was his choice of words — “you’re dead.” That’s a fairly strong thing to say, and I thought that maybe the way the internet has freed people up to be their real selves (behind assumed names) has something to do with it.
So that’s the reason I put this up — not because it’s funny or something. Another reason may be my apparently constant craving for self-flagellation. (Gradwolf, that’s your cue to run to the dictionary.)
rameshram
August 18, 2012
my apparently constant craving for self-flagellation.
with good reason too.
rameshram
August 18, 2012
This guy…sounds like AR Rahman
Govardhan Giridass
August 19, 2012
So, is it official? Has Brangan been outed as an Opus Dei member? Or has he been watching too many reruns of the older Amitabh in Mahaan (with apologies to Dr Raj in Shankar Guru)
brangan
August 19, 2012
And another one: “Mr Rangan… I have read your weekly column (as a `student’) in the other daily. I continue to read and enjoy your contribution in your present print media. I, somehow notice you have made your writing to attract only a handful who have some background knowledge in the topic that you write. You plan to make your writing simple for a wider readership?”
Utkal Mohanty
August 19, 2012
” You plan to make your writing simple for a wider readership?” I share his / her concern. Writing without jargons, making the same points, but in simpler language, would do a great service to the spread of a better cinema culture in the country. No point preaching to the choir.
Govardhan Giridass
August 19, 2012
Soopar guess
Govardhan Giridass
August 19, 2012
Utkal uncle, if Brangan does that and caters to the great unwashed, then he’ll be doing exactly what our Bollywood filmmakers are doing…
Adarsh
August 19, 2012
“I, somehow notice you have made your writing to attract only a handful who have some background knowledge in the topic that you write.”
I, on the other hand think that your writing these days is more mass reader oriented than when you were associated with Express
rameshram
August 19, 2012
RIP (or something) VVS Lakshman.
Adarsh
August 19, 2012
“No animals were harmed during the making of this conversation.”
BR, what is this even supposed to mean? :p
Vasisht Das
August 19, 2012
it is our ‘ideal’ compatriots like Adarsh who are giving boost the centuries-old accusation about the average educated Indians’ life-threatening lack of sense of humour.
stand up, scratch your cranium and try harder.
it will come to you sooner or later.
no, we promise it won’t damage your equipment.
really.
please.
(“sob”)
rameshram
August 19, 2012
It’s a well known truth that BR slaughters a living rooster to mariaayi before he writes each post. (He’s apparently afraid of sangilikaruuppu (me) .
Govardhan Giridass
August 21, 2012
Whataay pun on ideal saar. Onga kaal enge? enge? enge?
Govardhan Giridass
August 21, 2012
chee. non veg.
rameshram
August 22, 2012
its a vegetarian kozi.
Fatema
August 23, 2012
“I, on the other hand think that your writing these days is more mass reader oriented than when you were associated with Express”
Me too. BR, has there been a deliberate shift, not necessarily towards a more massy or more accessible style-that’s our perception but in general? Just asking cause I’m interested in knowing how a serious writer guides his own evolution.
Fatema
August 23, 2012
Naah darling, reviewer and critic. Period.
brangan
August 23, 2012
Fatema: I’ve said this earlier. There is not conscious effort on my part to write a particular way — i.e. dumb it down, or make it super-cerebral, or whatever. Maybe it’s just phases that a writer goes through? I really don’t have an answer for this.
rameshram
August 23, 2012
Let’s agree on “limitedly creative writer? ”