Just as Tessa Perkins articulated in her essay The Myth of Stereotypes (1979) that stereotypes are not necessarily negative, false, or harmful, it is essential to recognize that criticism in any artistic domain—particularly cinema—serves a much more profound purpose than merely pointing out deficiencies. When done with discernment and acuity, film criticism functions as an essential analytical apparatus that enriches the viewer’s understanding and propels filmmakers toward innovation, refinement, and the pursuit of excellence. Criticism, then, is not adversarial by nature; rather, it is a constructive dialogue that, at its finest, fosters the evolution of the work, enhancing its quality and depth.
In the cinematic world, critics bear responsibilities that extend beyond simply advising audiences whether a film is worth their time. Their task is to deconstruct the many layers of a film—narrative structures, shot compositions, sound design, and the symbolic intricacies within the mise-en-scène. This nuanced dissection not only offers audiences a richer understanding of the film but also provides filmmakers with valuable reflections on their strengths and weaknesses. Through such critical engagement, directors, writers, and producers are encouraged to sharpen their skills, which, in turn, elevates the overall cinematic landscape.
Consider the recent selection of Kiran Rao’s Laapataa Ladies as India’s official entry for the 2025 Oscars in the Best International Feature Film category. This prestigious recognition naturally evokes discussions regarding the status of regional Indian cinemas, particularly Manipuri cinema. While filmmakers like Aribam Syam Sharma and Haobam Paban Kumar have achieved significant acclaim, Manipuri cinema remains largely underrepresented on global platforms. This glaring disparity raises an essential question: why aren’t more films from Manipur making it to such illustrious forums? The answer, it seems, lies not only in the undeniable talent of its filmmakers but also in the absence of a robust critical ecosystem—one capable of challenging, nurturing, and elevating their work to meet global standards.
Manipur is home to some of India’s most resilient and powerful storytellers, particularly with women frequently taking central roles in both reality and fiction. However, the region’s film industry suffers from a critical deficit. Instead of flourishing as a creative hub for films that delve into universal themes such as identity, agency, and resilience, it remains stifled by an excessive focus on commercial success at the expense of artistic growth. The lack of incisive and rigorous criticism has created an environment where mediocrity often goes unchecked, and where filmmakers, rather than being pushed to innovate, become complacent in the pursuit of profit.
The role of cinema in society is at stake here. Like literature and visual art, films mirror societal values, ideologies, and the challenges of the times. In a place as culturally rich and diverse as Manipur, cinema should serve both as a reflection of society and as a catalyst for social change. Films have the power to narrate stories of women’s empowerment, political upheaval, social justice, and ecological crises—stories that resonate not just locally but globally. However, without a strong and informed critical community to engage with these narratives, filmmakers miss out on the constructive feedback necessary to produce films that are not only commercially viable but also artistically and culturally impactful.
The current situation is troubling. Manipur has seen a decline in film production and cinema halls, which are being repurposed for other business ventures. While technological advancements have made filmmaking tools more accessible, the quality and substance of films have not improved in tandem. Here, the role of film critics becomes pivotal. Critics, with their deep understanding of cinematic language and their ability to discern both technical and narrative excellence, serve as mediators between filmmakers and audiences. They highlight the cinematic triumphs as well as the shortcomings, educating viewers on what constitutes good cinema and creating an informed audience that can demand better-quality films.
In a small state like Manipur, however, the challenge is exacerbated by the close-knit nature of its film community. Critics and filmmakers are often part of the same social circles, which makes it difficult for critics to provide unbiased and honest feedback. Some critics, fearing the strain on personal relationships, may shy away from delivering the tough critique necessary for artistic growth. This lack of honest and rigorous criticism fosters a culture of mediocrity, where films that could be improved are left unchallenged. In contrast, a strong critical framework would encourage filmmakers to take risks, innovate, and continually grow.
André Bazin, the illustrious French film theorist and critic of the mid-20th century, provides a historical example of the transformative power of criticism. Bazin’s writings in the 1940s and 1950s were instrumental in shaping the discourse of French cinema and inspiring the French New Wave, a movement that revolutionized global filmmaking. Filmmakers like François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, and Éric Rohmer were deeply influenced by Bazin’s advocacy for realism, his defense of auteur theory, and his philosophical reflections on the nature of cinema. Bazin’s legacy shows that criticism is not merely about passing judgment on a film’s quality—it is about fostering a broader conversation that expands the possibilities of cinema itself.
Bazin’s intellectual debates with figures like Soviet filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein exemplify how such discourse can shape cinema’s evolution. While Eisenstein championed montage, emphasizing rapid editing to create meaning through the juxtaposition of images, Bazin believed in the power of mise-en-scène, where meaning emerges from the careful arrangement of elements within a single shot. Such debates between differing cinematic philosophies have been crucial to the growth of global cinema. Similarly, if such intellectual discussions were fostered in Manipur, filmmakers would be encouraged to explore diverse stylistic approaches, challenge conventional narratives, and push the creative boundaries of what cinema can achieve.
Film education, too, plays an integral role in this dynamic. Countries like France, Sweden, and the UK have long recognized the importance of integrating film studies into their school curricula, teaching children how to engage critically with media and understand the nuances of storytelling and visual aesthetics. This type of education fosters a generation of both creators and viewers who are attuned to the complexities of cinematic expression. Unfortunately, in Manipur, film is still often regarded primarily as entertainment rather than as a legitimate art form worthy of serious study.
Here, film critics can step in to bridge the gap. Through reviews, essays, and public discussions, critics can educate the audience and foster a deeper appreciation for filmmaking. By nurturing a more discerning and intellectually engaged audience, critics indirectly push filmmakers to raise the quality of their work. In this way, the relationship between critics and filmmakers becomes symbiotic: better criticism leads to better films, which in turn cultivates a more informed and engaged audience.
However, critics must strike a delicate balance. Their role is not to demoralize or dissuade filmmakers from creating but to offer thoughtful and constructive criticism that fuels artistic growth. Criticism should be an invitation to dialogue, a process that encourages filmmakers to refine their craft and challenge themselves. When done right, it becomes a tool for guiding filmmakers toward greater achievements, much like how Bazin’s critiques inspired the French New Wave to break new ground in cinematic storytelling.
Ultimately, for Manipuri cinema to thrive, it requires a vibrant critical culture that both nurtures and challenges its filmmakers. The true purpose of film criticism is not to tear down, but to elevate, encouraging filmmakers to reach new creative heights while empowering the public to engage with films on a deeper level. Critics should offer constructive guidance that inspires growth, much like Rumi’s words: “Raise your words, not voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder.”
The writer is a media scholar and professional
