The jury is always biased, the decisions are biased, no film awards in our country are credible, the awards are just a way of promoting the star sons and daughters and prevailing directors and producers for whatever films they make whether it be bad or good, we should trust our own judgement only.
By
Anindita C, Freelancer, Teaching/Education
| 02 02 2011 04:43:42 +0000
The awards are just bought and sold.
By
Asif M Khatri, Group Account Head, 3 Brothers & Fils
| 02 01 2011 14:28:07 +0000
No.
No film award in our country is trustworthy. It is commonly
observed that anchors of the award show and their close friends get the award.
Also the actors and actresses who perform in the show get the award as soon as
they perform, even before they change their clothes. Why not because the labor
laws in our country says daily paid workers should get their wages before their
sweat is dried.
Some awards are ok but majority of the awards are partial
and prejudiced.
By
Nilesh Pawar, Legal & Secretarial, Valencia Professional & Management Services LLP
| 02 01 2011 13:36:03 +0000
|
An award in itself is not a conclusive proof that accentuates an artist from others. An award, by and more, being repeated in its essence, is willingly an effort to encourage not only the persons who have excelled but to encourage them who are in a hard race to excel. While a credibility of an award is challenged, we must not forget that, the same is not a technical process. It cannot be based on ratio to ratio proportionate equation. The technicalities mentioned cannot be applied in the form of equation as the object in respect of whom the technicalities are measured is a human being and not a lifeless object which will return a constant effect. As to the award functions I have seen, I am inclined to say that,excellence in art has been always recognised and encouraged. While dealing with the averments as to the biased based awards or awards being given to family acquaintances, I would in reply, say that no matter, what award one gets, it is the audience to answer at the last. The audience is only the referee to the artist and has to start and stop as per its whistle. Having said enough I can say that even if substantial awards are given we consider the award as given to all and to the right person.
By
Amarendra Gogoi, Law, Law
| 02 02 2011 19:54:20 +0000
An award in itself is not a conclusive proof that accentuates him from others. An award, by and more, being repeated in its essence, is willingly an effort to encourage nor only the persons who have excelled but to encourage them who are in a hard race to excel. While a credibility of an award is challenged, we must not forget that, the same is not a technical process. It cannot be based on ratio to ratio proportionate equation. The technicalities mentioned cannot be applied in the form of equation as the object in respect of whom the technicalities are measured is a human being and not a lifeless object which will return a constant effect. As to the award functions I have seen, I am inclined to say that,excellence in art has been always recognised and encouraged. While dealing with the averments as to the biased based awards or awards being given to family acquanitances, I would in reply say that no matter, what award they get, it is teh audience to answer at the last. The audience is only the referee to the artist and has to start and stop as per its whistle. Having said enough I can say that even f substantial awards are given we consider the award as given to all and to the right person.
By
Amarendra Gogoi, Law, Law
| 02 02 2011 19:50:55 +0000
yes i think so....the jury people are very well known and credible....I think only filmfare awards are some how credible rest all the other award functions from every other channel are not at all worthy....and then the National awards are genuine.
By
Shweta Nigam, Asst. Manager/Manager -(NonTechnical), IBM-Daksh
| 02 01 2011 13:38:25 +0000
|
