(1) The film Critic and the Film Director
The director’s job is to make the movie, give it an imprint distinctly
his own. He is in his element while he is working, and later on, when producing
the final print which is released to the public. The critic’s job is to
carefully analyze the film, in the context of the movie, as well as that of the
director (for, most valuable critics have made a thorough study of the director
in question), and point out the different finer points which the one-time
viewer (who comprise the majority of the viewership) is likely to miss. A critic
is also the gatekeeper to the interaction of two entirely different media: film
and print. The director is subject to a lot many stresses, besides his own artistic
and other doubts ad certainties which finally find expression in the finished
movie, whereas a critic hones his skill with each movie he critiques. He
creates nothing, except a subjective mass of information which is valuable and
often, novel.
What we have is production, and appreciation; not production and
consumption, which closes out the product cycle (considering cinema as a
product). The critic is a stand-in, more or less; he is not indispensable but
he adds value. The critic was, in the 90s, so institutionalized (no reputable
newspaper or weekly would be without one) that it is quite safe to say that the
critic had a role, albeit insubstantial, in the fate of a movie in the market,
at least in western societies.
A director’s medium is film: the movie. What the movie tells is the
director, frozen in a particular timeframe, or for all eternity, depending on
the philosophical resonances he succeeds in putting across. The critic’s medium
is print. The common thing is the movie; but it becomes almost transparent, for
the critic assumes that it is life he is talking about.
Is it any wonder, then, that when a great director talks, it is about
abstract things which seemingly bear no resemblance to his work at all (Robert
Bresson is but one example), and, when some directors ‘crack’ when put under
pressure to speak about their ‘work’, they come up with nothing but banalities
(Adoor Gopalakrishnan). The true film buff, however, knows what to appreciate:
he loves the movie or hates it, according to merit, loves the director
nevertheless, and also takes the critique well—often with a pinch of salt.
