The VFX Debate: Beyond Realism and Into Intent
There’s something deeply fascinating about how a single teaser can ignite a global conversation. The recent release of the Ramayana teaser, starring Ranbir Kapoor, has done just that. While some viewers marveled at its grand visuals and music, others were quick to criticize its use of VFX. Personally, I think this reaction speaks to a larger issue in how we consume and critique cinema today. It’s not just about whether the visuals are ‘realistic’ enough; it’s about whether they serve the story and the filmmaker’s intent.
What makes this particularly fascinating is how Hrithik Roshan, a Bollywood icon, stepped into the fray with a thoughtful perspective. In a candid Instagram post, he admitted that bad VFX can be painful to watch—especially for someone like him, who grew up idolizing films like Back to the Future. But here’s where his commentary takes an intriguing turn: he doesn’t just defend VFX; he challenges us to rethink how we judge it.
The Intent Behind the Visuals
One thing that immediately stands out is Hrithik’s emphasis on the filmmaker’s intent. He argues that VFX isn’t just about realism; it’s about evoking emotion and telling a story. Take Ramayana, for instance. The film isn’t aiming for photorealism; it’s aiming for something grander, something mythical. From my perspective, this is where many viewers miss the mark. They’re so focused on whether the visuals look ‘real’ that they forget to ask: Do they feel right for the story?
What many people don’t realize is that VFX is an art form, not just a technical tool. Just like in animation or comics, there are different styles—some hyper-realistic, others more stylized. Hrithik compares it to the difference between anime and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. Both are valid, but they serve different purposes. If you take a step back and think about it, criticizing a film’s VFX because it doesn’t match your preferred style is like dismissing a painting because it’s not photorealistic.
The Labor of Love
Another detail that I find especially interesting is Hrithik’s acknowledgment of the sheer effort that goes into VFX-heavy films. Thousands of artists work tirelessly for years to bring these visions to life. Yet, audiences are often quick to judge based on a teaser or trailer. This raises a deeper question: Are we being fair when we criticize something without understanding the context or the full picture?
Hrithik’s response to a fan’s question about how to train our eyes to appreciate VFX intent is particularly insightful: “Wait till you watch the entire movie before you judge.” This isn’t just a defense of filmmakers; it’s a call for patience and awareness. In an era of instant reactions, it’s a reminder that art—especially cinema—deserves time and consideration.
The Broader Implications
What this really suggests is that the VFX debate is about more than just visuals. It’s about how we engage with art, how we respect the creative process, and how we balance our expectations with the filmmaker’s vision. Personally, I think this conversation is long overdue. As audiences, we’ve become so accustomed to blockbuster perfection that we’ve forgotten the value of experimentation and risk-taking.
Films like Kalki 2898 AD, Baahubali, and Ramayana are ambitious projects that push the boundaries of Indian cinema. They’re not just movies; they’re cultural milestones. Hrithik’s admiration for these filmmakers is palpable, and it’s hard not to share his enthusiasm. These creators are risking millions—and years of their lives—to give us something we’ve never seen before. That, in my opinion, is noble.
A Call for Awareness
Hrithik’s post isn’t just a defense of VFX; it’s a call for a more thoughtful approach to criticism. He urges us to ask questions like, “Is it right for the story?” and “Is it making me feel what the maker intended?” This shifts the focus from technical perfection to emotional impact—a much more meaningful metric, if you ask me.
One thing that’s often misunderstood is that VFX isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. It’s a tool, and like any tool, its effectiveness depends on how it’s used. A film’s VFX might not be ‘realistic,’ but if it enhances the narrative and evokes the intended emotion, isn’t that a success?
Looking Ahead
As we await the release of Ramayana in 2026, I can’t help but wonder how this conversation will evolve. Will audiences become more aware of the intent behind VFX? Will filmmakers feel emboldened to take even greater risks? Or will we continue to judge films based on surface-level realism?
From my perspective, the future of cinema depends on how we answer these questions. If we can move beyond knee-jerk reactions and embrace the complexity of filmmaking, we might just find ourselves in a golden age of storytelling. Until then, let’s take Hrithik’s advice: hold our opinions, ask the right questions, and appreciate the artistry behind the visuals.
After all, as he so eloquently put it, “The intention by itself deserves applause.” And in a world where criticism often outweighs praise, that’s a sentiment worth holding onto.
