Sandeep Reddy Vanga Vs. Critics | Animal | The Good, Bad & The Ugly
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ธ.ค. 2023
- More than just the film, interviews with #sandeepreddyvanga really stir social media like no one's business. His defence of #animal is one thing but this has also opened a can of worms regarding criticism and creators. Is he in the right about film reviews. Could he really defend everything about the #bollywood project starring #ranbirkapoor . Is the #telugu creator going to get it right the fourth time too? I hope you like the Sandeep Reddy Vanga Interview Review | Discussion On Animal & Film Criticism
Intro Track:
Music Provided by: NoCopyrightSounds
Watch: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1ULJ...
Free Download & Stream: ncs.io/feelgood
What did you think of the VIDEO?
Dont forget to smash the like button and Subscribe to the Channel for Weekly Content!
Stay tuned for more ahead!
Follow me on instagram:-
Anmol Jamwal: / jammypants4
Like our Facebook Page:-
/ trp100 - บันเทิง
The SALAAR review goes live tomorrow!
Stuck at a wedding (not mine) in a remote place!
I was actually waiting for it😢
😅😅
Please check latest Bardwaj Rangan take on the Critics- What is problematic in SVR films is ok in RKH films like Dunki. How come? SVR is right is saying that reviewers need to get their act together.
Great now Tom I have to decide if i should go or not the salaar
Not mine had me rolling 😂😂😅😅
For one time i want the critics to make a movie that is perfect in their eyes and let people criticize it. Sandeep has more spine and is man enough to talk his mind without fearing judgement. Also these two interviews are straight up director commentary and we need more stuff like that
Fiza😂😂😂😂😂
Watch galata plus review of dunki... He exposed the feminist review... A fat women joke perfectly... When a director like hirani makes fun of obesity of women it's funny... But if south director does it, it's male masculinity..
@@THUGPUTIN it's Bollywood insider vs outsider.
Kashmir files,Animal, Sushant, Kerala Story all make Bollywood gang uncomfortable
Exactly
That's the worst take on art, you don't know how to cook, but you can criticise the food. Similarly, you can criticise a film without knowing how to make a good film yourself. It's all subjective.
Anupama chopra who is considered to be a top most critic asked the Russo brothers during the promotion of infinity war about how did they conceive or think about a purple Alien character named Thanos. This sort of questioning truly shows her understanding of comic book movies and world cinema in general. Sandeep reddy vanga is right about the so called critics in the country. They have absolutely no idea or clue about the subtleties of filmmaking .
All that's saying is shes not familiar with comic books, which you can't really falt given her demographic.
Even if she is not familiar with "Thanos" she should have done her research before a big interview don't you think?
I mean most of the indian audiences didn't know thanos but they found out via memes and stuff
She also in many interviews has said that her Hindi is weak , she avoids m speaking Hindi . But reviews Hindi films is hypocrisy
@@sahityabk all she praise is yrf film, she liked Dhoom 3 and Befikre.
She is supposed to be a film reviewer not a comic book expert..
This movie has showed where Indians currently stand. Long road ahead..
Long road ahead towards what? Matriarchal/toxic feminine movies like Barbie? No thanks. We're fine with Animal.
Okay Incel@@Naveen_Joshi95
So if not feminist movies, just make crap childish story like animal with rowdy masculine character...lol
These type of movies goes nowhere, that's y Rajamouli films r regarded
@@Naveen_Joshi95
@@Naveen_Joshi95Toxic feminine is bad as well as toxic masculinity
@@Naveen_Joshi95 Your comment shows your standard and upbringing...wow ! ☠️
My favourite thing is when people say “Look at the craft and wow the music.” and these are the same people who will say ‘Barbie’ is not good just because I’m gushing over the costumes and production design. (This is not a personal attack on anyone, just my observation)
Hypocrisy of society.
frr
But didnt Barbie have an agenda? Animal didnt have any agendas, it was only for entertainment
@@Lazymath007_ Every movie has an agenda even when the makers say there isn’t. There’s no such thing as an ‘agenda-free’, ‘only entertainment’, ‘apolitical’ content. It’s just when the agenda is to be s**tty to anyone who uses critical thinking is when I have a problem.
bro you commented literally 7-8 times forget barbie man wtf you willl do by getting validation for it it has alrerady earned much from its counterparts in that time and animal recent don't compare the scenario
Baradwaj rangan proved Sandeep Vanga’s point with the “dress not fitting the finger even” scene and critics including you Jammy overlooking it
Shrugging it off as typical raju hirani comedy is suddenly okay but Vanga still gets hate for putting scenes that he felt was fit for the character
Bollywood critics are elitists....
They can do it....but they can't tolerate s omeone else down doing it..... they think mass people are uncivilised.....
Bunch of woke jokers....
Thats a completely different context - an overweight woman asking for a small size dress which she wouldn't fit into. And if you watched Dunki the salesman justifies it by saying that customer is god and we never lie to god but he is consequentially thrown out of his job. That is completely different to many unnecessary scenes (which you think were fit for the character) in Animal which were just there for shock value and lended nothing to the screenplay (eg. Ranbir hitting Rashmika's but even after she says it hurts her, then hurting her with her bra strap and in the next scene applying ointment)
I don't see anything wrong with what's there in hirani and sandeep's films. But the problem is with some critics for whom films are supposed to be just fairy tales and not craftsmanship.
@@rohansehgal269 No, him saying 'Customer is God' wasn't a justification, it was a way of escape from the situation and argument, he was clearly making fun of her obesity when he came up with the comparison of the pants and her finger, that's a hell of an over exaggerattion of a simple issue which is presented as a joke on her physical state by the character. And the irony is - despite being a psychologically unstable person the character of RanVijay still gets criticised only because it was written by Sandeep Vanga. Much duality. Is it still a completely different context?
@@omaewamoushindeiru3303Fair enough about the obesity joke. I just wonder if you could understand and analyse such a small snippet so on point, why the hell couldn't u do the same for animal? And why was there a heroic bgm behind a supposedly psychologically unstable character's criminality? Why was there hooting and cheering in cinema halls like even pvr for the misogynist parts of the movie? I bet that can never happen for, say, the violent scene from 'gone girl' for example. It actually had a horrid music in the background that only meant to terrify the audience and it did its job wonderfully. Animal, u ask? U either have to question the intentions of the director or have to agree he's just bad at film making if he couldn't get his intention right to the audience.
That reaction when Sandeep was bashing the critics tho 😂. Meme Material
That's his whole point, these liberals just know to show faces and can't say it face to face, they just best around the bush, try to mock and then will get triggered and that's it
That's Vanga's whole point, they can't say it face to face, they just show faces, bests around the bush, says achaaa sarcastically, will get triggered and that's it.
If critics have the right to criticize his film, he has a right to defend it, but I'll admit calling them illiterate is too far.
😂😂😂😂
And calling vanga misogynist or saying they pity his mother & wife in cool?
Did you watch Sanju btw ,the same critic's husband made that movie on how Sanjay f_cks 300 girls & gives a toilet seat to his wife when she asked for Mangal sutra
He is a honest man like his characters that speak without any filter!! I would like a honest man/woman any day rather than a hypocrite!!
They are illiterate in terms of cinema
@@crazyfriendist Tbh he is not an honest man. He can't take criticism well . He is so immature. Animal is not even a well made film. He is like a kid bullying critics for not liking his film. Come on!! I don't find him honest or manly he needs to grow up. See RGV how well he receives criticism. Everyone can't be a RGV for a reason.
He sat with such humility infront of Baradwaj Rangan and answered every question so enthusiastically. You could see him happy and excited as a kid when he saw someone (Rangan) was talking about his craft and trying to objectively analyse his creation. But if reviewers use terms like 'I want to throw up', 'For those with the mindset of rapists', 'By an animal, for animals' for his film in the name of reviewing, Vanga is in his full right to get back at these ppl trying to malign him in the worst way smh
Everything you wrote, I got it, and agree with it, bt I didn't get the 'smh' part.
@@architbansal8416”smh” = shaking my head.
@architbansal8416 exactly 😂.
Completely agree. Critique has to be objective based on relevant aspects.
First of all, didn't like it okay give a bad review. But they are the one making content on it😂😂 Like seriously, why give importance to something you didn't like and didn't hope to like as well?
I Agree with Sandeep on the part that no one discussed cinematic aspect of Animal. And yes sucharita tyagi is biggest hypocrite out there
Why is she a hypocrite? Just genuinely wanna know what's the context of your comment cuz I don't follow her as much.
People aren't obligated to do so... We don't have to forcefully like someone or something they create
There are lot of people discussed about it, but this guy points out only who needs to show that they are against him. It is actually this guy using critics for promoting his below average movie
@@JeyAnirudhJekka Her husband was involved in the production of Sanju and she didn't even review it
@antarikshchoudhury173 If he cared about the Critics he won't have made this movie... He made whatever he felt was right & the Critics did whatever their job is ! Both are making their money via people like you.
Good analysis, would like to add some
1.Sandeep problem was misinterpretation of maker intent rather than validation, some critics misinterpreted his intent behind the scenes.
2.Tripti character has so much to do with creating Ranvijay body double, the way aziz asks her about his body parts whether matching with Ranvijay or not says everything.
The whole body double and Tripti arc is forced into the screenplay just to have a Ranbir vs Ranbir faceoff in the sequel.
@@adityanarayan6248 so ? which is more important to your tiny brain ?
@@adityanarayan6248wtf is forced 😂 ur comment and opinion is forced, ur tatti ks forces
@@adityanarayan6248 yes, it was added only for next part.
@@adityanarayan6248FYI, Tripti has a better part in the next movie. Watch the interviews first.
I think Sandeep accepts criticism if it's more thoughtful and constructive, he's only going after the ones that question the intentions of the filmmaker for certain scenes without any context.
Bharadwaj Rangan too had his problems with the film but you don't see Sandeep bashing him, infact he's got much respect for BR cause he speaks about the craft.
💯
th-cam.com/video/gDZs2vaZivI/w-d-xo.html&si=ULyA0DUuYl-kZHUZ
True and the best part is - he asked him politely in his interview with Sandeep.
Had he asked him about the things mentioned in this review, he would've done the same to BR too. BR was actually clever in never bringing them up and silently shoving them under the rug of "oh ur movie belongs to a different universe, so eff all o that" may be because he wanted to play safe and be in the good books of everyone. He just wanted to avoid a confrontation, basically.
@@xyzydoucare The things raised in this review are not mentioned by BR as they are completely characteristics of Ranvijay and what he is going through physically and mentally, am glad BR dint raise these things as they are nothing to do with insulting particular gender deliberately.
Those who say Ranbir was glorified and didn't face consequences in the film need to watch it again.
Scheme accha hai
But why should Ranbir face anything?
Does it work like that always in real life?
Did Dawood Ibrahim face any action?
Exactly man!! The character literally has nothing left at the end of the movie.
The whole alpha male shtick he does goes in vain as His dad is about to die, his wife and kids are leaving and he is left alone, crying.
@@user-rr9ct7ko1y Yes he had to run out of his country and have to hide and always stay under protection. Imagine the scenario when you cannot go home... Every action has a consequence and Ranbir Kapoor lost everything by the end of the movie
@@yashwanthkumar4394 Run out of India, people anyway want to get out.
It's stupid & naive to think that good guy always wins & bad guy looses
His Interaction with bharadwaj rangan is a feature film itself
3 hour + movie = 2 hour + post analysis
Audience will always be KING. If they wanted, Animal would have been a flop but what happened was the opposite. Let the audience decide the fate of the film.
Audience is the way the industry also pivots! They have the most power.
Sometimes audience is also a Low IQ alpha man we can't do anything ab thay lmao
@@TriedRefusedProductionsIndian audience, esp single screen audiences, have a specific allure to cheesy, cringe, illogical and embarrassing content. It’s the reason why 99% of Indian commercial films age Horribly and are looked down on. Who remembers the classics of the 80’s for example? (Hindi film industry is going the 80’s phase again)
Only few people go to theater vo bhi jab koi bade actor ki movies ati h 😂 pahle option nhi tha isliye zyda footfall hota tha
Bhai us time internet nhi tha varna bollywood ko tab bhi garbage bola jata 😂 pahle regressive aur problematic chize zyda banti thi
What about tyagi girl saying sultan is bad because she wants anusaka movie ? U wont call her out because u worship anupama
Haha true' that
It was evident from interviews that he had all scenes deeply and thoroughly worked out...he knew story is what we have seen 100 times but the creatively constructed sequences & music choices made this movie unique and ultimately pulled the audience.
Ya the creativity in screenplay,non linear presentation
In a country where public gets influenced by films,the questions should be raised on the education system not on film-makers!Waiting for Spirit and Animal Park!🤞🏼🔥
Then watch channels like Soch by Mohak or Deshbhakt, etc and stop complaining in channels meant for reviews and entertainment
nobody is influenced by them they use those movies to justify their violence and idiocy
@@hardikparbhakar7845 true but I also think, media sometimes does exacerbate a problem that is in the society. Once I read an article where the fear of sharks got even more pronounced once Jaws released. So I don't think a movie in itself influences anyone. But it does further propaganda. If there is a prejudice against a community in a country, and a movie made in the country continues to vilify the community, then it is just furthering the bias that had always been there.
It is the responsibility of the education system, both parents and teachers not to bring dumb children every generation. The reason the public is so dumb, is because Indian society wants them to be dumb since it helps them in electing and voting without thinking. If you want your public to think, you have to teach your children the difference. If you yourself get swayed by whatsapp uncles then dont expect your progeny to be any smarter
A country where students have to take coching classes for studies what do you expect
I felt the cheating was shown so you could really hate the character, and to highlight the lengths he'd go for his father. Yes there were other ways to get out the information from her, but I feel that whatever happens in the second half really makes you disgusted from ranvijay, up until the interval you don’t really hate him, he exists in a moral gray area with a justification that whatever he’s doing it’s for protecting his family. The act of cheating highlights his mental instability, and by the end you’re really disgusted by him.
So it’s just two horrible people battling each other in Animal Park!!
@@TriedRefusedProductions Aziz vs Ranvijay. Btw Aziz voice was given by the director himself.
Exactly , the critics are pointing out the movie is glorifying misogyny, whereas noone in their sane mind can actually like Ranvijay leave alone emulating him . He is a psychopath, fighting bigger psychopaths in the movie. To give him a redemption angle would be so insync with his character as he doesn't work on rationale
@@shilpagandhi28 why critics have problem showing violence , there r multiple slasher films made in India and in Hollywood , it's just stupid to have a problem with specific director, all films cannot be about lgbt and feminism.
#Villian fighting bigger villian
from the perspective of common man he is villian. From the perspective of villan he is hero
Finally, what villian thinks of common man #unzips
The problem is critics like anupama chopra, are very biased in terms of their choices, they have clearly seen these kind of movies in Hollywood and most probably have studied them and loved them, but they wouldn't do the same here, and they would just ignore the context the character is set up in, same thing happened with kashmir files, where whole film companion ignored the movie, and similar thing happened with rocketry, they are not illiterate, they are just very biased, they know the art of film making but they don't wanna acknowledge it when it comes from someone of their opposite ideology. That's the whole point he was trying to make in those interviews.
Studied them?😂😂😂
Lol
Anupama chipra is the few of the honest reviewers unlike tried and refused productions
Somehow you also describe Sandeep in this comment.
No Hollywood makes these types of movies by fleshing out the characters and fleshed out conflicts between father and son. In this movie it lacks that. Even Jammy said so: the characters feel one note and there is barely any father and son conflict. She was right about it. She said that the first half of the movie is fun and has a few questionable things but the second half is just made for critics to be angry with no thought put into the story and I agree with her. The second half is written laughably badly and has no cohesion and no story. Things are happening just because
@@shawnthomas6492 for me, the character writing was not the conventional writing, it was written more like, he was writing it for a show, as the scenes in movie, doesn't serve the purpose of larger story, but they serve the purpose of showing what kind of character he is, second half is not bad for me (except zoya's part), the whole recovery process was well written, you might say it was written to show misogyny, but trust me, when a person is in this bad condition physically and mentally, that person is gonna get exhausted. If you have seen breaking bad, hank schrader's recovery is shown in a similar manner. People do get grumpy and annoying when they are recovering from something fatal, zoya's part was most unnecessary thing in the movie, other than that, i loved it.
After SLB and RGV, Sandeep Reddy Vanga is a new man on the block to represent his movies as a captain. The reason Sandeep Reddy Vanga becomes centre of discussion is his sheer conviction to prove his words( irrespective of the criticism ) which is what most of the filmakers in bollywood lack. Fans love it whereas critics will be critical of it.
The problem with critics lies in the fact that they target him personally rather than calling out the problematic aspects of his movies, which he pointed out in Gallata plus interview. And this will never stop. The more the critics call him out the more he'll irritate them and the more the fans will get attracted to him to a certain point of saturation.
I think there's no nuance to the whole Sandeep Vanga extra-vaganza. He simply thrives off controversy. The same way SLB used to fo earlier with Ramleela, Padmavat. But they both make good movies and hence get away with it. And the reason why critics target Vanga personally is because Vanga started it by justifying Kabir Singh's actions in real life by saying one should be allowed to slap in passionate love instead of just saying that it's a movie with a flawed character, period. Also , all the problematic scenes of the movie were actually extremely on the nose snd badly placed instead of being organic which means that Vanga has no sportsman spirit and can't take criticism. I have never seen Anurag Kashyap getting bitter about the criticism even though his first 2 films were actually BANNED. Full fledged banned, let alone criticized.
Please don’t compare a master of his craft like SLB to this annoying manchild of a human vanga..
You got it people hyping mid stories in this country never goes out of fashion like pathan jawan animal how long it will take people to recognise good movies@@anoushkas8726
the personal target thing was when he said violence is okay in a relationship. it was an interview not a goddamn scene from a movie.
I really wany to see Vanga roasting these woke elite so called intellectual critics like Jammy, I bet Jammy don't have the guts to have face to face debate with him cuz he know he'll get ripped apart by Vanga.
I watched his interviews after Animal, he is absolutely right in his opinion. Some critics or TH-cam reviewers just pick sensitive topics from the film and in whole review they talk and criticize those points. They should understand the POV of director and his art. Sandeep Vanga is going to change hindi cinema and these so called gangs of paid critics. He is FEARLESS My best line from his interview " they criticise my films to get views, fame money on TH-cam and then they call me on their round table "😂 He is best.
So basically what you want to say is that no one is entitled to their opinion! When you put out your work to be seen by the public it is bound to get criticized by some and loved by others. You cant dictate what everyone needs to feel about your work. Everyone is entitled to their POV. Just like SRV has his own perspective that he showcases through his movies we too as audience have our own opinion regarding the kind of work he puts out there to be judged! SRV is unusally unnecessarily and uselessly sensitive about everything. If you are this sensitive then dont become a filmmaker and dont put your work out!
@@seemonjena659if you are professional critics and only review a film on it's social impact that shows how technically illiterate you are about films or what your real intention is.
Sandeep is going to change Indian Cinema, especially Telugu Cinema.... he will only do Animal park in Hindi.... other lines ups are all Telugu, now that Salaar is an insane hit, spirit has more pressure. Then Allu Arjun, then Mahesh Babu......
@@seemonjena659well, it seems the woke critics are more sensitive, they will definitely watch the sequel and again bash him again without any sense
@@ankansenapati3600who did that ??
I watched both of those interviews too !! I feel that Sandeep Reddy Vanga is a deeply authentic creator. He sets the mood and emotional tension of the film extremely craftfully (when he mentioned he uses mood boards for every project to get a feel of what the shot will look like). However, that's also his biggest problem - He's authentic to a fault, even at the cost of being unintelligent. Gangster dramas aren't a new genre. I actually compare Rannvijay's character a lot to Sonny Corleone. Both hotheaded egotistical animals, who charge into dangerous situations head on without thinking about the consequences. But in the Godfather, it's clear that Michael is the true successor to Vito because of his ability to stay calm and rational in every situation. You see this dichotomy in Peaky Blinders too, with Arthur and Tommy
Even in this movie, Abrar's character isn't so trigger happy that he can't listen to his brother Abid who is the planner in the family and is trying to take out the father insidiously without trying to leave a trail of breadcrumbs to connect it all back to him. But that's also only for a moment, because at the airstrip, Abrar subdues Abid, because he wants to finish off Rannvijay himself.
I get from the interview that Sandeep wanted to show a man who would go to any depths for his obsessive love for his father, but instead of using the leverage he has - money, power and a few members in a loyal inner circle to smoke the enemy out, he goes on a blood rampage instead, violently escalating the situation at every turn, making more mess for his father to deal with. I don't know why Rannvijay's character refuses to realise this. The movie works if it acknowledges that irony, but in the interviews Sandeep Reddy Vanga is still focusing on the emotional depth of the character, not on his misinformed and misguided rationality
The biggest problem of the film is that it doesn't care about anybody's POV except Rannvijay's or maybe perhaps the people who belong in the world he's creating, like the Tabbar or his enemies. The placement of the B Praak song at the airstrip fight sequence only makes sense to me if that's what's playing in Rannvijay's mind during that scene, especially since his earphones get knocked off and he can't hear anything else
I'm still excited for SRV's future projects, although I'd love to see him rise upto the challenge of writing characters who aren't so impulsive throughout the movie and atleast at some point in the film realise their place and position, and the consequences of their actions as part of a larger world with other people coexisting
I felt arjun reddy was far more authentic. This just felt self indulgent !
You make a very valid point.
At some point if the character realises/ reflects on his impulses and their consequences it seems a more rounding off of the character and life in general. When there's no reflection it becomes a psychological case.
Cinema influences people's thinking. Onee could differ on whether it's the creator's role to give lessons to the public or not-- that's a different point altogether.
Jammy, what no one is mentioning here is that the dramatic scenes in this movie are at an all time high. The whole Papa's 60th birthday scene, the scene where Ranbir returns with his family and him being stopped by his jija and then blasting out at the factory. And finally his role reversal with his Papa, I haven't witnessed such powerful scenes in a while.
Facts
But nahi …humme toh keval misogyny ka RR karna hai
Toxic masculinity ka rona karna hai
But having 3 emotional scenes that last 15 min max in a 3 hour movie that was teased to be about that conflict is laughably bad. Like I enjoyed the movie but there are many lows in the movie and not fleshing out the conflict between father and son is one of them. Like they only fight twice in the movie and then it’s over at the end. There is no nuance or build up
@@shawnthomas6492 sandeep in the interview mentioned that he conceptualised this movie as a 2-3 part series
Maybe there will be more understanding of motivations and traumas of every character in the next movie
That's just too much to expect from an audience. we are not watching a documentary or an 8 episode tv show, its a movie@@manavlulla907
@@manavlulla907 that is not what ur supposed to do… u tell us a good amount of the character now and teach us new things about him in the sequels. He doesn’t do that in animal pt1. He just says “fuck it ranbir kills ppl because he loves his father a lot”. There is nothing else except that. There is no depth to his character in any way. There is no REAL drama in the movie’s second half at all. It’s all just “let’s have an affair cuz why not, let’s show some weird scenes for no reason but to provoke ppl” like why? Atleast develop other characters
He learned filmmaking in Australia but idk if he missed classes on critique and that silencing the critics is not the flex he thinks it is. Also, people should understand the power dynamics between critics and filmmakers.
Anupama is the wife of a established Bollywood mogul ,vanga has made 2 Hindi movies in entire life.
Marxist apne theories woke University Mai hi rakh, yaha bhowk maat
Silencing the critics who doesn't talk about nothing other than sensual scenes and ramping on those
None of the critiques he mentioned talked about music, screenplay, direction, acting, cinematography... All of them dumped their personal opinions and bashed movies and were mum when a movie like veere di wedding or manmarzia which glorifies extramarital affairs
No, his problem isn’t with criticism of his intended scenes, it’s the criticism of the scenes taken out of context and given a twist for the sake of it
@@yashwanthkumar4394 everything else is dumb editing is so bland its liek powerpoint presentation transitions tooo long movie
I think in the recent Prashant Neel interview with Baddy, Prashant roughly said "If your parents can't teach you good/bad, I can't do it for you." So, watch a movie as a movie. You, as an adult, are responsible for your actions. As a reviewer, you just review a movie, don't look beyond that. A movie can't change society
This is such a surface level understanding of how society works. For better or worse, media absolutely has an influence on people. Not just on kids either, fully grown adults get influenced by media all the time. So it's perfectly justifiable for people to criticize a film or creator when they glorify/ don't explore the consequences of harmful actions. Of course, I'm not saying that those creators shouldn't make films at all. But it is absolutely reasonable for a film or creator to be called out if their message is harmful in the same way that it's reasonable to praise them when they put out a good message.
@@suhailrefaye92 Uh-huh. There are many movies on scientists. How come we have not produced a single mathematician like Ramanujan? If bad guys in movies face consequences, how come we still have not-so-good people in the government or society?
There's a concept called nihilism that says life is meaningless. What if somebody reads that and stops living? Should we ban such concepts as well? You make the decision, you're responsible for your actions. Period.
@@SunilSkandaLol😂 you burned him dude😂
@@suhailrefaye92 Muslim community is most toxic community in the world but people don't talk about mulla and muslims
@@SunilSkanda true ek scientist pe hamne movies nahi banai bhai sharm aani chahiye ramanujam pe bhi movie Hollywood banata hair doob maro chullu bhar paani me
Just because he is fearless doesn't mean he is not glorying his problematic messaging, when those deserve a matlab kuch bhi I think this deserves the same too
I mean, if a director is VERY CLEARLY fat shaming someone and ‘omg who does she think she is doing saree endorsements’, I think there is a problem. Media training? He doesn’t know her.
When did he fat shame?
What exactly is fat shaming?
Because calling a fat person fat is not fat shaming.
@@krishshautriya5170 Why do you want a dictionary definition of fat shaming? Commenting on one’s appearance (in this case, someone who’s not thin) when it doesn’t matter is a problem. Do you need a keynote presentation to understand why SRV is a sack of s**t?
you fools won't call out dunki for it right ? liberal spotted chillout no argument needed i guess you haven't seen it or coming from the perspective that it shouldn't be shown anyways but Ranbir was fat shamed didn't he by his father isn't it real? try putting on some unecessary weight and look at the reactions of family you will get my point and If you are talking about fat shaming of girls then tha wasn't the most controversial topics at all in a drama film I expect this kind of a cliche dialogue.
@@krishshautriya5170 in a way it is. It depends on how you use it. Depending on how you use it, it can be okay or derogatory.
I honestly feel that its a good thing that vanga cares more about unfair criticism about the movie rather than box office returns, it shows he cares about the craft instead of pleasing the audience by showing them what they want to generate more box office returns.
What would be the reaction of critics if they watch the A Clockwork Orange
😂😂😂😂😂
Saar critics existed in 1971 saar😂😂😂😂
forget about clockwork orange, these bollywood critics can’t even digest tarentino movies
@@HrithikAhari29 Yeah man these guys need anti hero to have a bad ending but in real life always flawed people wins at the end
They would like it because it’s well written lmao. If animal was well written, many would overlook the mysogyny. But he didn’t write the story well
Oh! So let me get this straight. This is a critique video of Sandeep Reddy Vanga's reply on the film critics' critique of his movie. Will there be a critique video of this critique video next?
Yes.
Creators or I must say TH-camrs are just here to make content, they can make 10 videos on a topic if it is giving them good engagement.
Animal is a cash grab, be it business wise or content wise, people want to listen and talk about it.
So yeah, expect more of such videos.
@@vedsharma3496 totally agree. Some of these videos are totally unwarranted
Yar honestly I am very disappointed in Jammy… I feel a handful other TH-camrs and him made it their agenda to promote Animal and a few other movies from the time of trailer release itself… I understand you are excited about a film… but dedicating one single film (which is very average in my opinion) 4-5 videos is just for business…
LOL 😂
Animal was titled Devil first, but than they changed it, Sandeep offered it to Mahesh Babu first too, but he rejected it because it was “too dark for his audience” 😬
Glad he didn't accepted. Ranbir is the perfect for this role.
touchwood hell yeah @@ashy5808
@@ashy5808 no it was a different script...Sandeep said in many interviews
Animal and Devil are two different scripts.
Actually Pokiri and Businessman are kind of the same as this movie. There wasn't much violence but rest is same.
Nah at this point Sandeep is in love with the critics, especially Rajeev Masand and vice versa
The one thing about the whole drama that rubbed me the wrong way was when Sucharita Tyagi, Rahul Desai, and Ishita Sengupta in their long review straight up said that "we didn't want to discuss the technical leap taken by the flick coz of the whole flawed social concept of the film", which didn't really make sense to me.
Lol then whats the whole point of being film critics??? Should have just been politicians
I mean there isn’t much of a technical leap tho, the editing is not innovative it’s okay, the writing is piss poor in the second half, the music is great they should have talked about that, they all said the actors were on point, the cinematography needed work, some of the framing of shots left a lot to be desired
They're being so immature themselves. 😅😅
That's plain ignorance. Then why are they so keen on reviewing indian movies. If you see hollywood now, no actual sets are built, it's just a vast long wall of green screen, the technical crew is so bitten down in the crunch, that outputs in color grading and vfx is terrible, acting is also mediocre, and everything comes down to one thing.. THE FUCKING SOCIAL MESSAGING. But as indians we build sets, we have passionate crew members, we believe in practical stunts and effects, we may learn from hollywood at times, but we have gone forward from them. Because we ain't preaching agenda, we are entertaining audience for the value of money they have earned with blood and sweat to watch a movie. If they cannot appreciate the technical leaps, then their job is Fcking scam
@@shawnthomas6492atleast their are no abrupt jump cuts in the combat sequences, the sound editing is just terrific, when you see ranvijay smashing abrar haque face with the kada, the kada hitting the ground is so clear to hear. Metal clanging sounds Of axes on skull helmets was also thrill to hear. Agar yeh critics focus karke dekthe toh unhe pata chaltha ki kitna effort or dedication lagtha hai ek feature film banane mein, it's easy to wear a two piece suit and say we are not going to speak technical because a movie hurt our feelings. The preproduction work, location recee, camera light set building, actors preparing both physically and mentally for roles. They think it easy but it's not, they need to respect the grind , period
What I really felt about Sandeep Reddy Vanga's interaction with BR is that He is really an intelligent filmmaker and he wants the same level of approval as Tarantino gets in Hollywood. He was literally pissed off. But after the interaction I realised he gives quite some thought to every scene he writes unlike some useless filmmakers.
India doesn't think like America. it's impossible to think and expect he will get the same level of approval. he probably does give a lot of thought and time to scenes, but u need to get some practicality with the aftermath of his actions.
As a person interested in creative writing, I always read movie reviews by critics. Infact the way certain critics point out the director's vision from certain scenes are mindblowing. (Plus, they have quite increased my vocabulary. Jammy also includes in that list. 😊)
The thing that some critics are biased are only because of the universal fact that they're just humans like us.
This is the same for directors too when they choose a particular narrative for the films.
It's ultimately depends on an individual's experience whether he/her liked the movie. And that experience is solely restricted to him/her.
The fact that some people do get influenced by movies is only because our schools don't encourage critical thinking and skepticism from young and comprehensive ages. If done so, it would really help people in filtering the good and bad aspects of any fictional piece of work.
Neither did i have any problem with Sandeep expressing himself in his movies, nor did I have any issue with critics as media persons pointing out problematic aspects of scenarios in a social lens. We need both of them for a civil society.
Like Vanga said they should go to China to give english tuition. I watch reviews to see whether the movie is good or not, cuz i dont have time for mediocre sheet, i dont watch reviews to learn english, I can't go every two mins to google to know the meaning of the words. These elite critics think they have moral highground, it's kinda like savarna mentality
It's always helpful to ask and find out director's intent about a scene. However if the intent is not clearly reflected and open to misinterpretation then it's a problem with the movie. For example:
One of the foreigners who reviewed this movie early on, seemed to be most shocked and annoyed with Swastika in the movie. That was critique's issue. His ignorance of the symbol and lack of homework - if it shocked him so much, he should have googled why that word is so benign in India.
However when Ranvir is being misogynistic, critiques have to call it out as such whatever the intent. It's also to remind the audience that it's not normal behaviour but a character flaw. It certainly is not good to put it in positive light.
I haven't watched the movie by the way- so it's not a comment on the movie - I don't if in the movie it's normalized or not. If it's normalized, then it's a huge no in a country like India. It's tricky thing to show it while condemning it at the same time, so it's usually the villains who are depicted to do these things. That way message is clear.
@@multi_star_05 reviewer and critic is different. But yeah last line is somewhat accurate if not generalized.
@@Pantheist2602 Jammy is a critic who reviews movies, so I think both have same meaning
Sandeep never generalizes critics, He always says "Those two-three people"
I think the Tripti Dimitri sequence were included because maybe they are essential to the plot of animal park
Yeah but it fucked with the movie we got. You shouldn’t make a movie with a sequel in mind. Look at the Batman or lord of the rings or Star Wars: they tell their own story of what they want to cover and then leave it at a cliff hanger where u will be happy to watch the next movie. Animal doesn’t do that. It dedicates most of the 2nd half of its runtime to build a plot point that makes no sense in scope of the movie just to tease a second movie. It’s goofy and is why ppl didn’t like the movie. It was just shit writing for the sake of pissing ppl off. If it was written well, I don’t think ppl would have minded the mysogyny. There is a reason why kal hi na ho is still beloved by many even though it has many problematic scenes: it’s written well
that's what. there is no regard for law and order. they have made the second half a character development rather than a story development. @@shawnthomas6492
Critics college principal -Anupama Chopra
Professor:Rajeev masand
Students: Suchitra Tyagi
Obedient student-Jammy
It's not about criticising it's about thinking that what Anupama thinks should be agreed by all and trying to be a boss lady..
Anupama Chopra is the biggest hypocrite and manipulator out there
If Sandeep has freedom of making his film, same goes to Critics to Criticize his film. Critics should have responsibility to audiences, but not to film makers. His angry Intolerance is unfair.
You literally made 7 videos for this movie, what's happening to you lately, stuck in a loophole? We moved on, why aren't you able to ?
He's woke that's why. He's the wokest critic in North India.
To show that he's not biased he made a video critizing toxic feminity anf toxic mascunility but even in that 12 min video, 9 mins he was talking about toxic mascunility and 3 mins he just addressed one or two toxic feminine shows in a watered down manner and that's it. That itself shows how biased he is. Vanga should've called out Jammy as well. He might've never seen his videos.
More views 😂more money😂
@@Abdu_Mustafa_59 yo dum dum chutney Telugu viewer, he ain't exactly woke. Infact he praised animal in his first review way more than anyone should. You literally have the pfp of an actor who can't act so I guess you might be another edgelord teenager who likes animal. Even after taking out all the non PC stuff, it's the most logicless film I've seen, which is a trademark of Telugu cinema where physics and logic follow different rules just like in your terrible film RRR or any one of rajamouli films tbh, where you dum dums bend coconut trees 😂
Faridoon's reaction to Sandeep randy vanga's words made me crack up lmao.
It’s an addition to the ‘Achaa’
Lmao the only good part of these interviews
The problem with this movie was glorifying the toxicity and misogyny. There are Malayalam films ( recent ones) where they show toxic masculinity and misogyny and they just don't glorify these kind of behaviours. They say its bad not good for example " the great Indian kitchen" . If SVR had not glorified he would not have got so much backlash.
So in ur opinion GOT is worse not good just because it glorifies incest and toxicity of of rooms
Can you please define misogyny?
@@minimathew7274 hate towards women and in got Ramsay Bolton and so many characters are shown as evil
@@mforsforever9294The show doesn't glorify it, you see how the other characters react when they find out about the "ncest. If you even watched the show properly, the characters all have strong opinions towards it, and they actively try to hurt Cersei several times
@@vigneshnehru9822you tell me what is misogynistic in this movie?? The only thing I found sexist was the actions done by abrar haq to his wives.
Infact, ranvijay cares more for his sister. He can enter school premises with gun to stop his sister's ragging. He tells his sister that she has rights to make decisions. He stops his another sister from going into toxic relationship. When ranvijay get involved in extramarital affair with Zoya, he feels bad and ask for apology from his wife. If he was toxic, why would he ask for apology? He takes care of his father even though his father doesn't behave with him properly.
Second thing, is ranvijay toxic? Yes he is. That is what movie portrays and that's why the name of movie is animal. Character of animal is
not an ideal character. He is not a social reformer. And nowhere in this movie his acts are glorified. In joker movie, his acts were psychopathic but still they were glorified and everyone praised that movie. There are many Hollywood movies in which violence is justified.
He just understood his business...targets a particular genre for a particular group of people..he knows what today's gen of people want to watch..what is actually trending for best theatrical experience in today's time..the more controversial is the film the more people will watch it..at the end of the day he is making tons of money and nothing else matters for him...all this conversation of critics, visions, reviews are pointless..
Business and box office aside, his first movie was Arjun reddy. To make a film that like you need to be good technically and understand the craft thoroughly. Even the highly rated directors like SSR called Sandeep an original director who broke several “rules” of cinema and surprised everyone. You can’t just be a good director just by thinking I’ll create controversial film since it is bound to make money in current scenario - film making is more than that.
@@myspace04what was technical brilliance and craft in that movie, to me it just felt like a normal movie.
As someone who watched Animal on big screen, I can say that anyone saying Ranvijay's character is shown as ideal man are straight up delusional and deserve a slap on the face (no pun intended). He's literally shown since childhood he's been unstable, shaking constantly under stress, making extreme decisions even while having good intentions, and in the end loses the things he cares about (except for his son, but maybe that'll make him more stable in the sequel). He's shown to be a broken man, not some winner in life. How does anyone think that's glorifying him as the perfect man is beyond me.
People in india find movies like jawan and Pathaan masterpieces. What kind of IQ do you think these people have when it comes to cinema?
Plus most of the people hating this movie haven’t even watched it. They just saw reels and clips on social media and following the herd like a mindless sheep.
@@agasthya9128 unfortunately true. Even I wasn't sure if it would be good because of how the clips manipulated the scenes. But watching it carefully on the big screen, it was obvious that Ranvijay wasn't "glorified", we just get a look into his mad yet authentic life where he's always honest, even when he's had an affair...to the extreme.
Vanga Vs Critics me in my mind retrieving the famous dialogue of Jaatiratnalu "Dinnama emm feel undhra ikkada"😅😛🤪
"I agree with Vanga that critics do not evaluate the technical aspects of the movie such as editing, sound design, and so on. Instead, they judge it based on their personal moral values. The film is three and a half hours long, and yet the critics only focus things particular things such as misogyny and offensive humor. They should provide an overall review of the movie and also assess the director's, editor's, and sound designer's work.
Brilliant analysis of the movie. Totally agree with your statement “some of the scenes is uncomfortable for the sake of it, rather lending to the story”
It was not that brilliant
Animal is a poor movie that I found hard to sit through, and it bothers me that mediocrity is getting this much attention and love. Makes me concerned that makers who may actually have good ideas will instead try to replicate this.
bollywood is always mediocre industry
When films like Jawan, Salar, Animal earns huge, it reminds me this quote from Kamal Hassan
"When mediocrity has been set as standard, rubbish is acceptable, acceptable becomes extraordinary, extraordinary becomes genius"
I say the same to MCU movies, people are trolling Scorsese for saying MCU was theme park, infinity war made money while Greenbook in same year didn't get any collection
I am not a big fan of Prabhas but i am really excited for his upcoming film, Spirit because of Sandeep Reddy Vanga (the most brave Indian film director of this decade) ❤🔥
Anmol is anupma lite
Anupma chipra ke sath rahkar wokeness aa gayi h
Inko baki film me kuch kharabi nahi lagti bus Sandeep Reddy vanga ki movie me sari wokeness dikhani
Shit critics
Here's my 2 cents.... SRV has talent in filmmaking. His choice of music, making main heroes into realistically toxic, his unapologetically way of telling stories is unequal. SRV is an excellent creator. But he picked the wrong place to do movies, he would've excelled in pornography where women are treated like animal(pun intended) & don't yoy dare come at me with BU BU BU HIRANI DID THIS & ANURAG DID THAT... Hirani also gave us strong female in PK, Munna Bhai & 3 Idiots & Anurag made f***in Sunny Leone ACT. Show me 1 female character in SRV films who have decent characteristics or are worth mentioning. He's probably the guy who wanted to beat up his wife & embarrasse all the women that wronged him but couldn’t so he's letting his barely disguised fetish become CREATIVE CHOICE and putting it on big screen. If you wanna watch a good film where a toxic main male protagonist actually gain character development, watch Jigarthanda Double X
He said teenage girls are illiterate. He didnt include boys awell. Am i the only one who find it shocking?!
That man is only 2 movies old. Raju hirani was making movies since my childhood. Give it time to atleast create his legacy! 😂
@@lakshmikrithika2521 3 movies... Raju Hirani didn’t defend his actions with pompous attacks like this
@@AsifKhan-fq5xg 2 movies. you cannot consider a remake as another movie, it is the same story...
It's not that easy to tame the Animal that's why geethanjali is bold and strong female character. None of these women in pk, 3 idiots or munna bhai could've handled Ranvijay or made him fall on their feet. Geethanjali was beating up Ranvijay left right and center and you felt like Vanga wanted to do that to his wife? Bro what are you smoking? I don't understand that logic. In fact Animal movie is misandristic towards men, bcuz not only Ranvijay is treated this way by Geethanjali but also the other men in this movie are brutally killed by Ranvijay. Vanga didn't say teenage girls are illiterate, he only said high school girls shouldn't be watching this movie when he heard the news about some highschool girls watching the movie. Hirani, Kashyup and Amir khan are liberals who make violent films and then give lecture about how bad it is, they'll say respect women, then they'll make item numbers, then they'll give lecture about how problematic and dehumanizing it is, then they'll again objectify women and they'll again talk about how wrong it is. Atleast Vanga is not a hypocrite like those liberal people, he believes in what he believes in and is confident about it.
Sandeep reddy vanga has a point. 2-3 scenes are picked and the entire review of the film revolves around it. Kabir slapping Preeti was kinda odd in Kabir Singh but it didn’t linger on or effected the story, but if you believe the reviewers, the rest of the film doesn’t deserve an analysis coz of that one scene. Same with animal, the entire point of ranbir asking Tripti to lick his shoe was not to ‘disrespect women’. It’s just to mock her confession of love after she also tells him she is in his enemy’s camp.
The immediate next scene is ranbir warning his cousin to behave. He can’t kill her when rashmika asks him to coz somewhere, he did connect with her andche hates to admit it.
All this discourse is thrown out of the window in the review and it’s just labelled as a misogynistic scene. The criticism of the scene isn’t the problem, but the criticism of the scene after misinterpreting is.
Btw, I didn’t even like the film. But it was technically good. It has some 4-5 scenes which I’m gonna watch on a repeat just coz how marvellously the acting, bgm, editing come together.
Preeti slapped first
Exactly sir! That's what i have been telling my people, now i am going to share the screenshot of this comment in our groups!
The fight and emotional scenes most probably!!
Also the statement about hip is just his opinion, I dont see any problem with it.
I have been saying the same as, the title animal literally personify the character. He has no moral compass, heavily territorial, decency and compass is out of question for ranvijay, he may be a space craft engineer, but his actions are not even fit to call him a high achieving man, we are not suppose to take Any inspiration from such a piss of a human like ranvijay balbir yet the audience saw the opportunity to jump on the wagon unnecessarily and waste their money and still trashing the film outside the theater
I appreciate your willingness to call out the problematic elements in the film. You are always open to discussing all sides of arguments and issues.
For me, as a woman, some of the issues appear so problematic and toxic that they hit a raw nerve and cause a visceral reaction. It becomes impossible to see the positives because the negative elements overwhelm you. Fortunately, I am not a professional critic, nor do I need to have any objectivity in my personal opinions.
I also believe that the cultural relevance and cultural criticism of a film are important aspects of film criticism, along with the technical aspects of the craft. How a film is received in society, and its impacts on society are important discourses to have. Some films, despite technical drawbacks, become great films because of their cultural relevance. Other films, despite being technically flawless, draw criticism because of cultural impact. In media journalism, there have always been culture columnists who talk about films specifically through this lens. But in the past decade or so, many media outlets have laid off their culture writers. There has also been a blurring of the lines between cultural criticism and technical criticism, where both are packed in one review, and oftentimes, one aspect overshadows the other. I think you can flaw Rajeev Masand or Anupama Chopra because they claim to be pure critics. On the other hand, Sucharita Tyagi has frequently advertised her "Women telling women's stories" lens, and you know she is going to review each film from a feminist lens. And Shobha De isn't a critic at all; she has always been a cultural commentator, and her job is to write about current culturally relevant things - she doesn't have to consume it. While it is completely legitimate to disagree with and criticize critics, we have to admit some of it is petty and a bit too personal.
Finally, Vanga still has a long way to go in terms of filmmaking. Despite having technically good sequences, they don't always flow coherently together into a narrative. There are too many abrupt narrative shifts. I also think he is thinking too much about what critics are saying and responding to them - that he is adding unnecessary bloat that prevents his movie from being crisp. It's going to be a vicious cycle. He baits the filmmakers by creating content intended to touch their raw spots and garner a reaction. Then they take the bait and reach exactly how he expected and then some. He gets riled up by their reaction and vows to create content that will hit all the raw spots of their current criticisms. I don't think one can aspire to be a good filmmaker if they are so obsessed with critics instead of movies for the sheer joy and love of filmmaking.
All hindi film makers are so worried about review of critics, that's why they're making such horrible movies.
@@multi_star_05they are more worried of politician and religious organisations.
@@MoinKhan-uf4pg outrage from politicians and religious organizations will only benefitt the movie that's why Pathaan and Kerala story was superhit. The filmmakers also know this, they do it intentionally.
@@multi_star_05 pathaan controversy was not intentional and subject of Kerala story was enough to get political attention.
There's no way they didn't thought about the color of bikini when they wrote "BESHARAM" rang knowing the political situation. They were not born yesterday. The exaggeration in numbers in Kerala story was intentional, there was no need to be offended by the subject bcuz it it is reality.
SRV and critics are match made in heaven. IDK what's more toxic the critic's take on his movies or his take on them.
😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Almost one minute after 6:48 i stopped to comment.
SVR knows what hes doing..The explanation of villians wearijg mask & " More carnage to be accepted" is fantastic observation 👍🙏.
As an audience i just felt how impactful it actually was....
He literally told why but u say I don't believe him. Why are u in denial is it because of anupama
Sandeep Reddy Vanga is easily the most entertaining director for interviews; the dude gives 0 fucks and that is very rare these days. This is why we really like watching his work/interviews, since he literally does everything against the status quo. This guy really reminds me of a young Anurag Kashyap and how he was major force of controversy and free speech/content for Indian Cinema.
This sounds so much like buttering honestly...i don't know why..but the movie was nothing out of the world..songs were really the best...felt like he got inspired from scenes from other movies and series and put it together. Like those masks from squid game..
Srv has slapped the Indian audience and we’re celebrating it th-cam.com/video/gDZs2vaZivI/w-d-xo.html&si=ULyA0DUuYl-kZHUZ
Now he slapped critics, and Jammy pants have enjoyed the slap
No self respect
What if.....chup movie was directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga 😨☠️
After the film, I was left with this feeling that this movie could have been a great cinematic piece had the director decided to have a crisper edit. There were so many scenes where it just seemed that SVR as a person was speaking (obsession with bigger appendages, the protagonist calling himself the director and then being called a hero, straight up dismissal of the opinion of women). Even the love bite colour palate scene was completely unnecessary.
Having watched some of his interactions with the media, I truly feel that he is only able to respect/listen to the opinion of men. He does not believe that female critics have a right to dissent, fueling his need to piss them off further with his choices in the movie.
I think that the father-son, or the sister-bullying dynamics were enough to establish that the character was mentally unstable.
I enjoyed the movie! I feel I would've loved it/raved over it had it been a tighter edit, not motivated by SVRs personal begrudgings.
Don't best around the bush, just say you think SVR is a male chavnist. The female critics are woke, rajeev masand was also woke that's why he critized Rajeev for his woke review of Kabir Singh. He've not seen Jammy's and Dhruv Rathee's video. Jammy and Dhruv is also woke asf. SVR is anti woke, he have no problem with normal critics, but unfortunately there's no normal female critic. The things you've said in (), what Ranvijay said about appendages is just SVR's opinion, take it or leave it, the protagonist calling himself director and then being called hero was genius way of telling us that SVR is the real hero, haven't you not dismissed any woman's opinion in your life? Do you obey/accept everything they say? I agree the love bite scene was unnecessary. Jammy didn't get anything SVR said in his interview. When he said these critics should go to china to give english tution 😂 that was a slipper shot for Jammy. Also Vanga said critics have personal issues with him more than they have with his film, he have every right to give it back to the critics through his films, when critics put video after video bashing this movie, how can jammy think it should be a one way traffic. i'd say this movie is primarily made to piss off woke critics and it worked very well.
@@multi_star_05 Could not agree more. Reject Modernity Accept Tradition.
As a general audience I judge a movie based on its repeat watching value. Like you watch a movie in theatre the first time and months after that when it's airing on tv or ott, if you still feel like giving it a second watch, then it's definitely a good movie for you... Rest of the opinion/ criticism doesn't matter. Exactly why I have nothing but praise for kabir singh coz I had a great time watching it. Now coming to the recent releases like rrr, pathaan, jawan etc... I could hardly finish em the first time... Let alone even thinking to watch again😅. And unfortunately animal belongs to the 2nd category. Say whatever but it's just a lame movie. More than 3hr runtime and still not even 10min memorable
Strictly personal opinion
😂😂😂😂😂 agreed
this is the opinion he wants he wants criticizm in the filmaking of this movie not about his understanding of the society
@@ArpitSgh36 great to know
people don't watch the movie to dissect each scene and character, they watch it for the overall story, and it's a long movie with an average story. @@ArpitSgh36
Animal was much much memorable than Pathaan, Jawan, Tiger 3 or any recent blockbusters from bollywood. People are still talking and debating about the movie which means nobody has forgot anything about the movie.
Sandeep puts a lot of Alpha male stuff in his movies but when someone lays a finger and says something negative about his movie he becomes a child and rants them like fat guy,illetrates,jokers.😅😅😅...Why man ??..Even few people hate Prashanth Neel,Rajamouli, Tarrantino also but they don't lose their cool like him..Taking critism is not one of this Alpha guy things😂
Mahn tarantino was criticised for violence in his movies.. and there's a clip of him shouting "it's so much fun". Idc infact the movies they make. But one thing always think of is Sandeep shouldn't evolve into an RGV whom we see today.
Srv is an immature idiot who copied scenes from other movies and directors, makes shocking content like roadies and splitsvilla, complains and cries over anyone giving him feedback. He’s pathetic and has the audacity to call himself a director.
😂 prshant neel and rajamouli your choice is 💩💩💩
Lol, Tarantino had blasted critics with unsavoury language when they talked shit about his films.. 😂😂😂
Alpha men will react, those men who don't react are the men who are afraid of the woke world.
A film director can't deny his responsibility towards society in demand of art. He/she can show violence (even in extreme level also) but in a way of realism or repercussions (either realism or surreal). Mr. Reddy could present Ranvijay's character in an negative vibe who eventually suffers repercussions for his evil deeds. Although here many people will say many times in reality devil people don't meet bad ends but there's also a term called "poetic justice" which we shouldn't forget. An artist can portray a situation with his/her imagination where evils meet their retributions and virtuous/victims get their rewards/good endings. This poetic justice not only can give an art fulfillment with beauty, satisfaction, emotion but also motivation to show its audience a correct path of enlightenment. Such a poetic justice was also needed in Animal which Mr. Reddy couldn't execute. The character of Ranbir is shown somehiw as a Bollywood hero with manly good looks, careless manly attitudes, manly servility to a successful man (his father), manly violencs and brutality, manly infidelity and obviously manly misogyny. And, it definitely can strike the brains and characters of manly empty-headed males of today's generation who only find entertainment in watching violent movies, games and funny Instagram reels. This is a failure of representation. A failed representation of evil in popular culture easily can mislead a generation which includes all sorts of classes- educated, intellectuals, uneducated, half-educated, retarded etc.
What about allu arjun he look dark but he is handsome more than ranbir
You think average Indian men's are not good looking?
@@raja-jl9osdo you see average Indian men handsome?
But maybe, a true look at society, where so many people with power and influence, commit all kind of evils and still escape... The responsibility of a filmmaker is towards cinema. Since the cinema is born from society itself, his responsibility invariably tends to the betterment of society by showing society.
@@aadeshramaswamy3445 Evil people definitely get bad ends today or tomorrow. Their triumph can never be permanent. And also, a director should make a villain as a hero aur glorifying, charismatic and stylistically presentation of an evil person mostly pull audience, but it definitely puts bad effects on society. I myself have a lot of people who think like masculinity is actually defined by harshness, mercilessbess, savage, vulgar and dating numerous girls at a time. But if u still want to deactivate ur senses to be supportive for ur favorite movie, then no logic or no proof can work in any argument.
Many scenes have zero logic , like some southern movies not a great story.
A casual clash in slums is upgraded to rich family clashes nothing else .
As a film maker Sandeep Vanga has a brilliant vision. I don't feel every anti-hero needs to have a redemption arc and at the same time not every protagonist is to be projected to be emulated by its audience. As an audience we need to evolve to a stage where we leave a movie in the theater and not carry its impressions or teachings with us outside of it. On the other hand bullying critics on social media isn't the right way to go about it either.
"I don't think he was bullying any critics he just mentioned the names of those who gave biased reviews.. What's wrong with that? It's important to point out those who did wrong!"
Well critics started it first with being biased..
Also judge a film by how it’s made rather than oh my God what is he showing…
@@shalinasaroya4571 While genuine criticism of a film is not a problem,bt these buffoons were personally attacking the director during reviews They were telling people not to watch the film, shaming the entire public, nd actively trying to halt the film's production through debates and podcasts.. Who does that? They are outright dictating what movies the public should or shouldn't watch, disregarding any choice the audience might have!
@@browncandy3750 I’m with you on that..totally agree
I was trying to say the same thing..
If critics and people bully Vanga, Vanga's fans will also do the same to critics and people. It's karma.
Anmol, why don’t you send your Animal review to SRV and set up a discussion with him? It’d be nice for him as well to sit with someone who discuses every aspect of cinema on TH-cam.
Yeah He is Right in terms of films 😅 They didn’t work in Films How would they know what is good or bad …
In the world of Farhad Nolan Samji ,prabhu deva etc SRV has created a sacred space for himself and people love to see his craft. His next project needs to work big time to cement his legacy.
He should silence the critics with his work and not with his words.
T&R wala sabko pata hai kis ideology ko follow karta hai. Animale full right wing movie hai.
Sandeep is 100% correct , you can’t make films if you judge on everything . Audience don’t judgemental while watching films so they liked . Critics have personal agenda so they can’t enjoy movie
Filmmaking is a hollistic process. Involves alot of things. Story and screenplay are def a big part but there are so many mid movis now adays that are made superior or elite just through the presenation, cinematography, music, lighting, costume, set, or star power. Animal, was a polarizing experience bc it challeneged our minds as morally set humans to actually think about the actions. not once in the movie did vanga justify ranbirs character. there were characters that were slashing him for all he is doing. even the tripti part, it wasnt glorified cheating, it was shown and he got his due consequence, barring the need for the arc at all. but vanga is a good story teller, and if given a good story, he cando some serious horror or thriller stuff. he just needs a good story and remember, good story doesnt have to be likeable by all. it can be a good dark story, people have tastes and opinions of all sorts. I like butter chicken but someone may like chicken tikka, the diffenrece? the cream added. literally.
I mean SRK in Don doesnt face any consequences. We have even reached Don but everyone is loving it, right? 😂😂
@@Lazymath007_He was not shown as misogynist in that movie and was completely different genre..He was shown as a criminal and police was after him.
@@MoinKhan-uf4pg so just sit and think, what is worse? A misogynist or a murderer???
Between creator and audience there is no need of middlemen
Bharadwaj Rangan's opening of 'Dunki' review sums it up for me, underlines the double standards of certain film critics.
I don't know how knowledgeable those "critics" are of filmmaking and all but when you see them talk about movies, its either solely from a business/box office perspective or else a complete roasting session with little to no constructive criticism about the various aspects of the film.
They're very much unlike your reviews which discuss good and bad aspects in even films with almost no redeeming qualities.
The same people who are defending Vanga, are the ones who were bashing Barbie, Thappad, Pink, Rocky aur Rani ki Prem kahani etc. And whining about feminism, misandry or destroying family values. Cut the hypocrisy
Bhaiyya gussa ho gaye😂, anupama ji ko daanta sandeep ne.
Ashutosh Rana said it best, we want cinema to teach us and school, college to entertain us😂😂
So much criticism about the boot licking scene… I think what most of the people have missed out on is that the scene was in a way acknowledgment of Ranvijay’s feelings for Zoya… If he actually didn’t have any feelings towards her, he would have let her lick it instead of withdrawing. This was further solidified afterwards when he was reluctant to harm her… who knows maybe sandeep has some arc in his mind regarding the two…
I thought the same. So in a way he actually cheated on his wife. He just doesn't want to admit. And srv did said that Zoya and rv arc will be explored more in part2
Salaar ka review kidhar hai bhai
I just want an interview between Vanga and Sucharita ❤❤
The interviews are so satisfying 😂😂 when he mentioned about English tution in china , i instantly remembered you jammy
I think it was not wrong on his part to call out the critics. Hopefully he presented the truth from his side. I think it is okay at times to call a spade a spade.
I think if the critics truly care about the impact of movies on the public then they why do they close their eyes to the objectification of women in item numbers where the lead dancer is showing skin and surrounded by numerous creepy men and the worse part is that that this is watched by the younger kids and is normalized by the media and the general public because they have been fed this diet of item numbers for the past 20 years or more.
Apart from Bharadwaj Rangan nobody talked about the themes he put in his film. You've to read a film to get its subtext and unfortunately in India it's rare that subtext gets read.
He didn't call them illiterate in the general sense, he said they are illiterate when it comes to certain types of movies
Jammy only heard that word and ignored the rest, he did'nt want to understand his point bcuz Jammy is also woke.
I have watched sandeep's both interviews and the crux you came up is the same what i was thinking..good analysis.
For me 1st half was phenomenal in every department..2nd was good but little dragged in recovery sequence
3:40 said " they are illiterate or has no Sense when it comes to film making" he didn't said critics are illiterate in term of general education 😅
5:53 the main problem for me with the film is that I did not feel that happiness is being taken away from Ranvijay. It did not even felt like his wife is leaving him. That's where I lost it.
Movie did not serve any purpose.
His father's resentment
His mother's Sadness
His wifes emotions were not extracted well coming to the end.
He is just focused on torturing criticis rather than focusing on movieline.
The correct example I can give is Fight Club, the entire movie is a torture to critics but coming to the end it serves the purpose, it tries to justify the actions and reactions.
I have no clue why the fuck are people behaving the way they are in fight club, why the fuck is protagonist the way he is, but in the end you get answered somewhat.
Fightclub is masterpiece
Sandip doesn't mind criticism,he dislikes the personal attacks like calling him mysogynist or saying his mother & wife should be fearful of him while these critics keep mum on the mysogyny of Bollywood insiders.
Vanga needs to do more interviews. Man he is fire and on point 😂😂
Being Sigma or alpha or whatever else doesn't equates to disrespecting women
some people are either ways violent towards women and a movie can never change there view .Similarly a movie cannot make a man(who is raised well) a rapist or violent towards women . people needs to understand that just by taking out controversies and banning some movies would never fix the misogynistic society.
people should watch the movie as a movie(not taking the negative elements and implementing it in their lives). At last,It is at the core of who we are which makes us a good or a bad person .The only thing which people should do is thinking wisely and not just judging a movie just because a well known person is against it.
may god bless everyone .
Shocking that Vanga studied his craft in Australia cause all I noticed was that he has watched a lot of Korean movies and like Kashmir files and Kerala story he caters to the current taste of the audience.
I genuinely want to know where he expressed hsis thoughts on kerala story
After watching his interview with baddy, I felt like half of his intentions just didn’t translate well enough onto the screen.
The whole you have a big pelvis scene could’ve been played off as an excellent scene if it was established that ranbir was insecure and desperate, so that he says any random thing to get her attention. Which was his intention, but vanga is too scared to make ranbir a bit vulnerable, he makes him deliver those lines in his usual confident and smug manner, which makes it come across like Ranbir is an asshole.
Movies are just opinions and critics review is their opinion on someone else opinion. So there is no right and wrong!!
Directors want it be a critically acclaimed movie.
Producers want it to be a masala that earns money.
Product is in front of your eyes.
Bro is the real Kabir Singh