Save the time. He won't reply (with or without profanity in the letter). He lives in a
world where anything resembling an art house film deserves to be punished and there is
no greater glory than making an average Masala film that is accepted by the masses.
That's his gold standard, and so be it.

And on he goes:
http://indiafm.com/reviews/04/raincoat/index.shtml
His boss has an e-mail: mailto:saleem@indiafm.com
You can tell him what you think of Mr. Adarsh's 'reviews', if you must.

I'm sure in the next couple of days we will see another letter from Taran


"Dear Rituparno Ghosh..."

Actually in my opinion Taran Adarsh is the perfect person to review Bollywood films. Only one MORON can understand and appreciate the work of all the other morons from Bollywood. Quite honestly only a moron would actually read a Taran Adarsh review and actually take it seriously. Personally I always read only the first two-three lines and then the concluding paragraph of Taran Adarsh's review just to get a good laugh when I finally see the film.

PS: There are a few, albeit a small minority in Bollywood who do not fit the above statement and my sincere apologies to them.

Show me one art(y) film that got more than 2.5 out of 5 stars! He has a strong
anti art house bias. Reviewers that like these films he calls pseudo critics.
Zubeidaa is commercial Bollywood, not art house.

Many western critics will often 'hype' an art-house film (that is not catered to the masses) in an attempt to persuade people to watch/enjoy it. Most Indian critics do the exact opposite and deprecate 'diverse/innovative' cinema because they expect the film to be rejected at the box office.

Adarsh has no credibility at all. Someone who complains about the state of Bollywood
cinema and then trashes every film which is really different for being different is hopeless.
A look at his top rated films versus his ratings for films that are taken seriously outside of
India is evidence enough who the pseudo critic is. His taste is very narrow and his judgement goes as far as if the masses will like it or not. It does not matter how good the actors are or if the technical qualities are first rate. These are mere footnotes. If the film is not made for simple, entertainment only seeking minds Mr. Adarsh will not rate it highly. What kind of critic is this??
I wonder what he has to say about the Apu trilogy. By his usual standards these films are far worse than MHN, K3G or Musafir.
Acutally, I don't wonder. You are right. He should be ignored by people that are serious about cinema as an art form. He has nothing to offer to them.

Either you have a problem comprehending the English language or you just did not bother to read my post carefully, I suggest you read my post again and this time read more carefully. What my post says is that you are a moron if you read his reviews and take them seriously, therefore simply reading his reviews does not make one a moron. I hope what makes one a Moron is now clear, the best example of one, would be Taran Adarsh himself, Moron = Taran Adarsh. As to why I only read two or three lines of the begining and the concluding paragraph of Taran Adarsh's review, it is quite simple, the moron actually gives away the whole story and plot of the film in his so called reviews. I would much rather let the film tell the story rather than read a moron's description of it.

What exactly does that prove? Just because he wa able to predict that Swades would not dso well at the box office does not make his reviews any better. By the way Taran Adarsh had also reviewed Lagaan very poorly and had even predicted that the film would be a disaster at the box office. The best part of Mr. Moron's Lagaan review was that he had a problem with the fact that the direcotr had chosen to use Awadhi, the local language of the area the story is set in, rather than plain Hindi. I guess the meaning of 'authenticity' is totally alien to Mr. Adarsh.

If that's the case, then we're merely expressing our 'good to honest' opinion about Taran. He puts down other people's artistic achievements like he has the authority to do so. Maybe he does - maybe he really does represent the values and intellect of the masses and gives them a voice. As far as I am concerned, that provides all the more reason for a voice from people like us who beg to differ from the masses in India.

The message in Swades was - the world might be a better place if people who are in a position to bring about change, recognised their responsibilities and did what is right.

Taran is in such a position. And he is telling a misguided audience that they are right.

Well, Planet Bollywood reports today that Swades made Rs. 9.3-9.5 cr. in the first week which is far from bad for a film which is supposedly (haven't seen it yet) a little bit more demanding than the usual crowd-pleasers.

Who confirmed that Swades is a washout?! (besides Taran)

No, I meant, BESIDES Taran.

Yahoo India uses, amongst others, the articles of IndiaFM. The one you're quoting was written by Taran.

T.A. wouldn't know a decent film even if it hit him right between his..... i'll leave the blanks for u to fill in

I always seem to overlook the emoticons, have to learn to pay more attention to them in the future. Now I am off to go get some chill pills.

I have been following Taran's so called reviews in print and on television for a long time and I have yet to come accross a single review that one could call a true review. He basically just writes/recites the whole story of the film, including all the 'spoilers' giving away any suspense there is in the film (only a MORON would do that), which is why I never read the middle part of his so called reviews. His opinions about the story, acting, music etc. are all so cliched and trite and primarily based on one and only one thing, his opinion on how the film will fare at the box office. The artistic aspects of film making are totally lost on him and are of no importance to him. The bigger the box office success the greater the film according to him. By the way even if a film is successfull in certain parts of the country and or makes money overall but does does not succeed universally (read the masses) then the film is a failure as per his thinking. He obviously does not understand the simple concept of niche marketing. The Rolls Royce according to him must be a failed brand since only very few people buy a Rolls Royce. It is Taran Adarsh and the likes of him in Bollywood who still judge the success of a film not by its profits or collections but rather by the percentage of tickets sold. By the way the fact is that the future belongs to niche films and the days of universal hits are long over. The secret of hollywood's success/profitability is their ability to amke niche films and market them to their target audience and most importantly budget the films according to the target audience size. Ram Gopal Verma is one film maker who recognized this a long time ago and is therefore one of the more successfull producers in bollywood. His success rate with his so called risky films is far higher than the rate of success of the so called mainstream bollywood films. It is due to people like Taran Adarsh and their thinking which is responsible for an industry that has a failure rate of over 95% Can you imagine any other industry anywhere else in the world that even comes close to Bollywood's failure rate? With bollywood becoming more professional with the new generation of film makers and professional companies, it is only a matter of time before the likes of Taran Adarsh become irrelevant to Bollywood.