Why it takes balls to be in film…

I blogged the other day about how a majority of movie critiquing these days is now so vitriolic, it can make anyone with any semblance of a conscience cringe. Tom Cruise’s entire existence is being called to question due to the fate of his latest, ‘The Mummy’. How can you attempt to wipe away his cinematic legacy like that?

Imagine how harrowing it must be for anyone, let alone a actor or director for his/her work to be ripped to shreds with such vengeance. Don’t critics exist because of films and not necessarily vice-versa? Or are they trying to prove the counterargument by wielding their pen as swords? Is everyone with access to a publishing platform now a critic, without any repercussions or accountability to self?

Imagine the variables such as script, timing, budget, talent, location, marketing and even politics that go into deciding the fate of the film. How thick-skinned do you have to be to be the public face of failure just as well as the success? The same people who put you on a pedestal pull you down. What if the offers stop? What if you are  reduced to an object and commodity with an army of younger, fitter and agreeable talent waiting in the offing to replace you? How do you hold fort? Even if you have just done one film, the fame or infamy doesn’t escape you. You are expected to look and live a certain way. Have you seen the ageist and degrading posts celebrity websites churn out in the name of content?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s