The announcement of the jury members for the 72nd National Film Awards has started a huge debate online. Most of the talk isn’t about the movies themselves, but about the people chosen to judge them. Specifically, people are questioning the decision to put director Om Raut on the main feature film jury panel.
The main reason for the anger relates to his last movie, Adipurush. When it came out, the film faced massive backlash across the country. Audiences and critics felt he completely mishandled the Ramayana by using overly modern dialogues, strange character designs, and poor visual choices for a story that millions hold sacred.
Because of this, many film lovers are asking a simple question: Should a director who faced so much criticism for distorting a holy epic be given the power to decide the country’s highest movie awards?
On the other side of the argument, the people who select the jury look at a filmmaker’s entire career, not just one big failure. From an industry point of view, Om Raut has had major success in the past.
His movie Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior actually won a National Award for Best Popular Film a few years ago. Plus, his experience working with massive budgets, complex visual effects, and heavy action brings a technical viewpoint to the judging panel that the awards committee values.
This situation leaves movie fans with two completely different sides to consider. One side believes that the people judging the nation’s best cinema should have a respected track record and show cultural care. The other side believes that institutional roles should be based on technical knowledge and past achievements, regardless of recent public backlash.
Ultimately, it brings up a tough question: Should a highly public creative failure keep a director from being an award judge, or should these decisions stay separate from public anger? The final answer is left to the readers and film audiences to decide.
