Are critics (even the genuine ones) unintentionally biased?

So I watched Newton today. The movie hall was completely sold out.

Exactly. I felt the same after watching Shraddha in some of the trailers of Haseena. Her improvement in acting can be seen very clearly. Its visible. She has done a good job imo. In fact, you can check out some of the public reaction videos on YouTube, She's getting fabulous positive response from general public!

Every critic is biased even KRK

Critics are worthless specially in today's time when there are whole SM where you can actually get WOM which actually matters !


I watched this highly rated Death In a Gunj crap and honestly until last 15 mins I didnt even know it's some kind of thriller. Bored the hell out of me !! Didnt like it at all. And same with few other movies like Shahid !


My friend's watching Newton too and he isnt really impressed till now. Waiting for full review !!

We know not to trust people like Taran Adarsh and also that people like KRK speak crap about every other film and some industry folks pay them too.

I think it all comes down to personal opinion. You may not have liked Newton, but the movie has became an official entry to Oscars. So the movie must had something which Haseena didn't.

As for Critics being biased, definitely they are. But I think they are more biased towards genres and not actors. Behen Hogi Teri also starring Rajkumar Rao didn't got any great reviews from critics. Anupama and Masand are more strict than biased IMO. They don't give high ratings easily to even the art films.

But at the end of the day critics are only giving their personal opinion. Their reviews shouldn't be taken as Universal truth. Box office too isn't a right parameter to judge whether a movie is good or bad. Because audience is also biased towards popular actors and certain genres. What matters most I'll say is the WOM of the"target audience". A movie like Trapped or A Death In Gunj isn't going to bring any record breaking collections. Critics are often criticised that they favor these type of films which aren't liked by the audience. They are actually liked by it's target audience, but the audience is so small that it doesn't reflects at the box office.
What critics need to do is stop being biased towards genres and try to rate the film for what it is trying to be, not what they want it to be.

Aren't we all biased in some form or another? Let's not pretend otherwise. Movies are a form of art and frankly, there's no hard and fast rules for judging art. At least journalists and professional critics have some sort of obligation to stay authentic and credible. They actually explain why they liked/disliked a certain movie/performance with reason and rationale. I find it laughable that people cite SM as authentic in order to debase critics. Who would rather you believe : someone who actually cares to explain the shortcomings and upsides? Or someone who writes a simple one word "LOL bakwaas" as a review and provides no proof of actually seeing the movie?

Everyone is biased. What you said here is your personal preference also. Shraddha has bad critical reputation because she has been terrible in most films. Rajkummar has built his positive critical reputation with years of good work. Also, that terrorist-glorifying film deserves no praise but I am "biased" as you say. I'd actually rather believe critics than fans who are only biased and have no neutrality whatsoever.

Originally posted by: JackSparrowcraz

lmao.Rajeev and Anupama are biased to Ranbir than Rajkummar Rao.His average act is hailed as best.His recent flick JJ is a shinning example.