Movie Reviewers vs Filmmakers: Why Mollywood’s happy about Kerala High Court’s recent intervention

The recent intervention by the Kerala High Court in the case of vloggers who post negative movie reviews with vested interests has been a sigh of relief for the film industry. With a surge in the number of YouTubers sharing candid opinions on films, the Malayalam film industry, already grappling with a scarcity of hits, was feeling the strain. The High Court’s directive to the police to investigate and take action against vloggers posting derogatory and calculated movie reviews has brought some respite.

Vishnu Mohan, the director of ‘Meppadiyan’, a film that fell victim to review bombing last year, alleged that many vloggers post negative reviews when filmmakers don’t agree to pay a premium for positive reviews. “Paid reviews have become a trend in the industry. Producers are now compelled to pay a substantial amount to reviewers because the online medium is vital for movie promotion. If producers refuse to meet the price demanded for reviews, vloggers turn against them, ensuring only negative reviews on the film’s release day,” he stated.

Mohan further pointed out that some reviewers opt for negativity to stand out. “Being different is the trend. Some reviewers choose to swim against the tide and post negative reviews to gain more attention. As their unique approach gets recognized, they become successful, leading them to approach filmmakers for paid reviews. Not all vloggers take money for every film,” he added.

Recently, Santhosh T Kuruvilla, the producer of ‘Marakkar: Arabikadalinte Simham,’ claimed that the film faced significant criticism from individuals with vested interests. Saji Nanthiyattu, a producer and the secretary of the Kerala Film Chamber, believes that while people have the right to express their opinions, it should not come at the cost of destroying a work of art that requires immense effort.
“We wholeheartedly support the High Court’s intervention, which is the need of the hour. We recently came across a reviewer who posted a review in the afternoon when the movie had only a matinee release. Regulating such actions would benefit the movie industry,” he said. Nanthiyattu also believes that people should have the freedom to form their own opinions about a film. “When an influencer shares their views on a public platform, it takes away the viewer’s choice of whether to watch the film or not. People can express their opinions, but not on a public platform with a wide reach,” he added.

Rosshan Anddrews, director of ‘Saturday Night,’ emphasizes that individual viewers and professional reviewers should refrain from making derogatory remarks about an individual or their body of work. “How can that be considered constructive criticism? This has always been my stance,” he said.

Former RJ and YouTube vlogger Unni, known for his channel Unni Vlogs, points the finger at filmmakers for starting the trend of paid reviews in the film industry. “They initiated the practice of paying for film reviews. Now, it has become a double-edged sword for them. I can honestly say that I have never accepted money for my reviews on my vlog. Many of us earned our subscribers through hard work. However, some reviewers do accept payment and create issues for production houses when they don’t get the expected amount,” Unni mentioned. While he welcomes the High Court and state government’s intervention against those with vested interests, he stresses that law enforcement and filmmakers should ensure that innocent vloggers’ careers are not negatively impacted in the process.

Another YouTuber, Kiran Deepu of NikkisCafe, believes that it might be challenging for the police to take action against those with vested interests unless they have solid evidence. “This will be the biggest challenge for law enforcement,” he said. 
Abhilash Joshiy, director of ‘King of Kotha’ says not all vloggers have vested interests, but adds there are some who make personal attacks and mock a film just to get more shares and views. “I feel any movie,may have a certain section of takers and influencing those people to not go to a theater by spreading negative campaigns and personal attacks against individuals should stop. If the first few days of a movie are spared from reviews, like the court adjudicated, then I feel it gives an equal chance for people to judge for themselves if they like it or not, rather than go to a movie with a prejudice based on certain reviews,” he said.