Is sensible entertainment a myth?

People keep saying there should be quality films (and TV), keep complaining and keep taking digs at nonsense or repetitive stuff and talk a lot about audience intelligence. But is it all a myth?

Ajay Devgan would get two-bit good reviews andd one or two best actor awards when he was doing work like Zakhm, Company, Legend of Bhagat Singh. Today he's stuck to mindless masala cum comedy so his films are seen as guaranteed hits even before release. Salman is criticised but it's a fact that he got astronomical success only when he did mindless masala, with OTT action and suggestive one-liners. An Aamir Khan also had to do a Ghajini and now a Dhoom 3 to get big hits. Many of his better films from 90s are not even hits yet the most inferior of the lot, the loud and regressive Raja Hindustani (rehash of Pyar Jhukta Nahi and Jab Jab Phool Khile) became ATBB! SRK was called OVER whenever his film did a little less than the year's biggest hit, they don't give a damn to attempts like Swades (except few awards), then star is forced to return to romance (may not help him much in India but guarantees biggest gross overseas) or do films like CE.

So called intelligent films like TZP and CDI aren't entirely and actually intelligent either. They have to spoon-feed the issue to audience, rely on overdose of emotion (attachment to maa in one film, attachment to motherland in another), fudge facts (anyone who knows psychology, would tell TZP is not an accurate depiction of dyslexia!), put songs and rely on stereotypes/caricatures to bring the sensible subject down to audiences' level. Little wonder that the commercially successful sensible films are also called pseudo intellectual cinema.

What's an artiste supposed to do then? If he or she doesn't bring in money at ticket counters he's considered finished. For money he has to stick to image or do a silly, formuliac film or use 10 times more brains to simplify a serious issue and make it palatable to audience (even that gets them only a medium gross, no records, just some respect among upper middle class).

On TV also, they mocked Ekta Kapoor's serials but every show copied her style and even audience keeps watching trash, TRPs fall if serious track is on, but shoot up if affairs or polygamy are shown. Audience keeps writing demands to see suhaag raat scenes or same old stupid romantic scenes even in a show on social issue. They're happy with serials fooling them by showing only festival celebrations for weeks and no actual story at all. Do they patronise a sensible show? I don't think so!

Then why complain about falling standards in entertainment? Or claim some film has insulted audiences' intelligence?

They claim to hate dirty jokes at award shows yet all these shows get top TRPs whenever they are telecast. So if you're consuming these shows, giving them hits on Youtube, making them trend on Twitter and TRPs on TV then why complain? And why think organisers would clean up their act or raise their standards if they've sucessfully got attention and eyeballs?!

I think audience intelligence is a myth! The more silly the thing, the more consumption it gets (the most popular cartoon in the world, appealing across age groups is also a stupid Tom And Jerry only which is nothing but cat and mouse thrashing each other and smashing objects).

Aren't we the ones who don't like to use brains and patronise same old stuff (even in name of variety)?!

Well every actor is ttrying something new except Salman so if you ask me he is the one renegade/maverick

A movie cannot be a documentary, at the end of the day it is made to entertain

Edited by Nkapoor3 - 01 February 2013 at 9:14pm

I disliked Vicky donor a lot!

Look it is not my POV. Rather I was trying to see how artistes are treated. TZP, RDB may have succeeded but trade and industry didn't take Aamir Khan seriously as a star with those. He had to give a Ghajini. And when he went that route they alleged he did a dumb film or kicked off a crap trend!

Also, he did not get unanimous appreciation. Lot of people (masses and less educated ones) couldn't connect to a TZP at all and started finding Aamir too serious. Whereas absolute, hardcore intellectuals find him a pseudo and take out dozen plot-holes in his films.

On TV, this Balika Vadhu show claims to be about child marriage but it only sugar-coated and glamourised it, with half the brutal realities of the issue not even shown or mentioned (if they can't picturise scenes on kids). The male lead is no different from an Ekta Kapoor serial - same case of polygamy and several women in and out of his life.

So what intelligent or different entertainment is talked of? And how much does it pay the artiste?

No one considered Ajay of any consequence as a star till he gave his back to back 100 crore hits. So what's the hue and cry over quality then?

Ideally we should not look down upon a film which has medium gross at BO. But that's not how reality is, is it?

But even in entertainment the most mindless and unrealistic content seems to pay more to the creators. A CDI can never be expected to be the biggest hit of the year, can it? Whereas a much inferior film like OSO was biggest hit. So what's the point of comments on good films, quality or insulting/respecting audience intelligence?