History, they say, is written by the winners. When I say written, I mean the original writing. I am not talking about the bad rewrite/remix/remake of the original. That is a whole different story (see what I did there?). Rewritten history is like a lazy cash grab revisionist effort on a classic movie (when you combine the two, it's called pulling a Padmavat). Anyway, so History. Winner's perspective. Or at the very least, the survivor's perspective.
While our history is being revised or messed with though, spare a thought for our present. Our present is also a narrative that is being chronicled. And the perspective being given to it matters. A lot of our most historic and landmark judgments are being made, for better or for worse (usually for worse, but depends, as will be highlighted further, on who you ask), by a small group of homogeneous individuals. I am of course, referring to movie reviews. Oh, and I guess it applies to the highest courts of law in all the countries as well.
They bring a certain perspective. A very specific, certain perspective, common to each or most of them. It's like ordering an assorted platter of steamed plain paneer, and steamed plain paneer, with steamed plain paneer and more steamed plain paneer. It's not just about documentation of the present. Most times, they also have future implications. By validating that which is comfortable to them, and often only them, they ensure that more such trends are prevalent. Whether they be actions, laws, or artistic creations.
And so the marginalized come up with their own art forms. Which is often great, as it gives them a speaking voice. But there can often be an exclusion from true inclusion (Yes, I type the way Nolan directs). Meanwhile, the various avenues of propriety and political correctness keep getting narrower, limiting the already narrow perspective that the evaluators (Auto-correct tells me that is not a word) bring (like wearing screen darkening 3D glasses to a shaky cam, low lit movie). A lot of this is known. And so doubts and aspersions are cast on the evaluation itself. These are quite often justified. But a lot of mediocre voices take advantage of this crises, pinning their poor reception and fallacy of the evaluation itself (I say evaluate and voices and art forms - But I'm thinking movies, reviews and Rotten Tomatoes). Mediocrity also creeps into the marginalized art form. But for those starved of seeing their own reflection, they gobble those up. So we end up with massive over-hyped and decidedly mediocre efforts capturing the collective zeitgeist.
This post itself proves the point against limited perspective - I am unable to muster viewpoints across different platforms and am filtering everything through a movies and reviews lens. I guess,the point I am really trying to make is, can we make it so that we have fewer of those horrendous Tyler Perry Madea movies?
While our history is being revised or messed with though, spare a thought for our present. Our present is also a narrative that is being chronicled. And the perspective being given to it matters. A lot of our most historic and landmark judgments are being made, for better or for worse (usually for worse, but depends, as will be highlighted further, on who you ask), by a small group of homogeneous individuals. I am of course, referring to movie reviews. Oh, and I guess it applies to the highest courts of law in all the countries as well.
They bring a certain perspective. A very specific, certain perspective, common to each or most of them. It's like ordering an assorted platter of steamed plain paneer, and steamed plain paneer, with steamed plain paneer and more steamed plain paneer. It's not just about documentation of the present. Most times, they also have future implications. By validating that which is comfortable to them, and often only them, they ensure that more such trends are prevalent. Whether they be actions, laws, or artistic creations.
And so the marginalized come up with their own art forms. Which is often great, as it gives them a speaking voice. But there can often be an exclusion from true inclusion (Yes, I type the way Nolan directs). Meanwhile, the various avenues of propriety and political correctness keep getting narrower, limiting the already narrow perspective that the evaluators (Auto-correct tells me that is not a word) bring (like wearing screen darkening 3D glasses to a shaky cam, low lit movie). A lot of this is known. And so doubts and aspersions are cast on the evaluation itself. These are quite often justified. But a lot of mediocre voices take advantage of this crises, pinning their poor reception and fallacy of the evaluation itself (I say evaluate and voices and art forms - But I'm thinking movies, reviews and Rotten Tomatoes). Mediocrity also creeps into the marginalized art form. But for those starved of seeing their own reflection, they gobble those up. So we end up with massive over-hyped and decidedly mediocre efforts capturing the collective zeitgeist.
This post itself proves the point against limited perspective - I am unable to muster viewpoints across different platforms and am filtering everything through a movies and reviews lens. I guess,the point I am really trying to make is, can we make it so that we have fewer of those horrendous Tyler Perry Madea movies?
