I’ve been reading movie reviews for a long time. I also blog about movies which I find interesting. There is no better method of practising one’s writings than to write about something which one sees and experiences.

This reading of movies and writing on them presents one with an interesting insight. I can claim that most movie reviews in India – particularly in Hindi movies – are ‘stage managed.’ And they have to be, for most of the magazines which carry movie reviews also carry movie advertisements. So, a magazine cannot run down a movie and expects businesses to pay for advertisement space. It’s that simple.

Besides, most movie reviewers live inside the movie ecosystem. They have to meet and greet the same people to who they have to reach out to get tidbits of news they need to fill up their magazine space and sell to the people and advertisers. To expect a realistic analysis of any Hindi movies (I’ll restrict myself to what I see and know) by any reviewers will be unexpected.

Amid these, there thrives (until yesterday) a Hindi movie reviewer who gave a damn to the establishment. Kamal R Khan is famous because he is famous. He produced and acted in a movie, which is a ‘masterclass’ on how not to make a movie. So he knows how. At least he is correct in most of his reviews. His reviews are on YouTube.

Kamal R Khan is famous because he is famous.

But his words are not apt. Most of them are ‘beepable.’ The flip side of his reviews is – he runs down, almost contemptuously, the actors along with the movies. Had he concentrated only on movies, his analysis is very near correct. But his use of words and phrases against people of show business reduces the quality of conversation. It entertains – but I won’t second his opinions on people.

There is a story of one Angulimal who used to loot people in a forest. One day he trapped a person who, before being looted and killed, put down a strange proposition – Anguli should go back home and ask his family if they subscribe to his trade. If they agree, then Anguli can have all the loot (and his life). Anguli returns from home disappointed. For everyone did agree to partake in his earnings but none were ready to back his trade, and thus face the fate that awaited such enterprise. The person emerged to be a great saint, Buddha and later made Anguli also a great saint.

The above story is famous and retold, yet they point to one moral thought: Are you willing to back someone, irrespective? Your friends and colleagues could be entertaining, and they also have ethical issues. You would choose to take only the ‘entertainment’ and leave out the ‘unethical.’

Choose to take only the ‘entertainment’ and leave out the ‘unethical.’

The virtual absence of the KRK issue in the media and ‘trending’ shows that people loved to listen to his rundown on other stars and movies, but the majority do not subscribe to his demeaning use of words. KRK is right and has a right to his opinions on movies, but he is not right to be defamatory to people.

KRK is right and has a right to his opinions on movies, but he is not right to be defamatory to people.

KRK could have used his popularity and resources to get better drafters to his comments on YouTube. After all, better words and better vocabulary affect better. KRK is commenting on YouTube for many years. Had he used his opportunity to improve himself, as he has improved his own channel and personal presentations, his content would have matured and aged better.

I hope, and we should all too, that he gets back revived and improved and we don’t miss the truth about Hindi movies. After all, he saves lots of our money (and time). He can do the same with a better vocabulary. Now.