By Ramana Krishnan
On a recent trip to Delhi, I stumbled on a car with a slogan saying: ‘Singh is better than king,’ and as it would happen, a friend wrote an article on a related topic here (NOT a shameless plug for the said friend). It got me thinking on certain things. A movie like Singh is King or even 3 Idiots (yes! The one hailed as the next best thing since Rang De Basanti – another falling into this category that I am talking of) has a certain kind of an impact on the audience.
Now, because we are so jobless – me in writing this article and you in reading it – you might just as well do well to imagine a normal curve. Now imagine one (and only one specific) quality of a film or a film maker which defines the quality of the movie made and assume this quality to be distributed along the normal curve. Now this quality in itself would be a function of a multitude of things including, intelligence, clarity of vision, control over technique, actual knowledge of technique/craft etc. Also, assume that ‘intelligence’ is good enough a term to supersede all of these individual terms and qualities. This basically means that each filmmaker makes a movie that falls somewhere along the normal curve with the position on the curve being a function of the intelligence of the movie-maker.
Now, imagine another normal curve. This time, take the function of that normal curve to be the ability to get (and like) a movie. Even this curve, given a million assumptions and one, can be thought to be a function of intelligence – of the moviegoer this time.
Superimpose the two curves in such a way that the averages of the two curves aren’t the same, but merely parallel and separated by a certain horizontal distance signifying the higher average intelligence of the movie-maker than the movie-goer (fine! I think the average movie-maker is smarter than the average movie-goer. No scientific/logical reason to believe so. Go sue me! :P).