This post is essentially a rant against a review of Gabbar Singh posted by Y Sunita Chowdary on Cinegoer. So read the review here for the context –http://www.cinegoer.com/telugu-cinema/sunitas-reviews/gabbar-singh-movie-review-110512.html It is meant to be an assessment of the English language skills that Ms Sunita possesses. Mostly, I have done this by picking out offensive sentences from the review. The process is merely indicative as there is more incredibly bad grammar lurking in that review which I did not bother about. Also, the piece is supposed to be a general reflection on the horrible state of affairs in the field of Telugu Film critiquing.
I suggest that Sunita Chowdary be sent to school first so that her grammar and sentence construction skills can set right. This review is an unending string of horrendous grammatical errors. However, you would be mistaken if you thought the problem was only restricted to that. Her descriptions are simply pathetic with no tonal consistency whatsoever. I am sorry but if this review was meant to be sarcastic, I wonder who the joke is on right now. Also pray tell me, who in their right mind writes a movie review in past tense? Take the second sentence in the first paragraph itself. “It is neither a popular story nor a timeless one but what acquires..which is quite an achievement.” Ms Sunita, you cannot just keep adding connectors and extend sentences as much as you want to. There is something known as a full stop which should be used as much as possible to make sentences intelligible. “…the rest the entire credit goes to Harish” Seriously? First decide for yourself how much credit you want to give to Harish? The rest. Or the entire credit. “The director remains close and faithful to Dabangg…without too many risks or going overboard.” So is it a good thing or a bad thing that there are not too many vulgar pelvic thrusts and over the top moments? I think its a good thing. Why do you make it sound bad? And what are these “risks” that you wanted the director to take in an out and out commercial movie? ” ….the two numbers that follow successively does get a notice.” “Do” get a notice, you mean? But even that is incorrect English madam. After all how can songs get a notice? For non payment of electricity bills or what? After some more shocking sentences you suddenly decide to analyse a dialogue from the movie to suggest that it did not have the requisite impact. Any particular reason you chose only that dialogue? Because for me there are many dialogues that work and many that don’t. So what is the point of picking out one dialogue and saying that it did not work. “…panegyric goes utter waste.” It should be – panegyric goes “in” utter waste. “….his jerseys show that he is trapped in youth though the spring in his walk is a delight to watch.” I am quite sure that, in fourth or fifth standard, when your teacher taught you how to use the word “though” she must have told you that it must be used to qualify what has been said before. Therefore your use of it is simply befuddling. Next comes one of the best lines ever – “Ajay is vulnerable.” Vulnerable to whom? The goons, the hero or cancer? Or is it viral cold? Also decide for yourself whether you want to praise a performance or describe it. You should not ideally do one for an actor and another for another. “Abhimanyu Singh has matured as an actor.” This is the only time I’m tempted to make a qualitative assessment. I am sorry but after superlatives performances in Gulaal and I Am, Gabbar Singh can only be a regression. Or do you think it is better than those performances? In which case I not only doubt your English language skills but also your ability to critically appreciate a performance.
I was obligated to write this because these are the film critics that are widely venerated and feted. Writing in proper grammar is the first sign of credibility and unfortunately we have critics who can’t even string a sentence together.