Wilfred okiche

  Critics are the bridge between audience and filmmaker. You can’t make films in a void. Critics don’t just give opinion or verdict, anyone can do that. They try to analyse the film, break it down artistically, culturally and emotionally. IN CONVERSATION WITH WILFRED OKICHE was moderated by Dika Ofoma (Rat, Writer, Film enthusiast) on Our WhatsApp group chat on the 23rd November 2019 12noon. Q: Let’s get a little personal. Tell us your favourite Nollywood films. Three of your favourites. Wilfred: Hmm. This is a difficult question for me considering I don’t like to do favourites especially for film. But I will try anyway. Kenneth Gyang’s Confusion na wa is a special one. Witty and funny. I don’t think we’ve seen anything quite like that since. Q: Now as a film critic, could you tell us the best Nigerian films ever made? Wilfred: Lionheart for the dinner scene alone. Perhaps Mildred Okwo’s The Meeting. I am sure I’m leaving other stuff out. Again impossible but I think I will maintain the above 3. Walking with Shadows and The Ghost and the House of Truth are new but I have a feeling they will hold up well. Nodash’s The Delivery Boy. Q: This session with you is themed around objectivity in film criticism.We’d like to know how plausible/implausible this is. How objective can film criticism be? Wilfred: They used to make a lot about objectivity in the past, these days not so much. And it is simple really. Art/film is by nature subjective and every person responds to it differently. So no matter how objective- what is that even?- you claim to be your personal biases based on your experiences and information will always seep in. Yes there are criteria, mostly technical with which we use to judge a film but because it is a visual and emotional medium, it is hard to explain objectivity. It is why a film like Joker despite being excellent technically has elicited polar opposite reactions. Those who love it and those who hate it. Both can recognise technical elements like the cinematography, the sound etc but it speaks to people differently. Americans based on their own realities see it differently than Nigerians. All views are valid. But which one is the objective one, the one I agree with? The one you agree with? But this all assumes that the critic has a baseline knowledge of film history and at least an appreciation of Film, what is good and what is not so good, what works and what doesn’t. So a critic owes it to himself and his audience to educate themselves first before educating others. Q: So how important is film criticism. What do critics offer other than one more opinion? Wilfred: Very important I would say. But then I am one. Critics are the bridge between audience and filmmaker. You can’t make films in a void. Critics don’t just give opinion or verdict, anyone can do that. They try to analyse the film, break it down artistically, culturally and emotionally. What does it all mean? Why should we care? What does it say about this moment in time, about anytime really. Also cinema as much as it is subjective is also objective. Audiences don’t always get it and the informed critic is in a privileged position to teach and influence thought. Q: You favourite Nigerian films differ from the films you consider the best Nigerian films ever made. I assumed favourite would be a subjective view, a personal preference. Then best films ever made is an objective view based on the knowledge and education you have as a critic and is ratified by all other critics. Would WWS, TGTHT, and Delivery Boy also make the list of another Nigerian film critic. Wilfred: Perhaps. If they are really as good as I think they are, they might. But there are so many good stuff out there that there is bound to be stuff I missed out or haven’t seen even. Q: Critics in a sense then, refine art. I like that you pointed out that art can be objective. Viewing art as subjective is ambiguous sometimes. Births the question, what is a good cinema/art? Could lead to misinterpretation of films. This is where critics then come in. Wilfred: Exactly, Sharpen it Q: This too. How important then is the Award system. Considering then that personal experiences/preferences reflect in the appreciation of cinema? For instance, does Green Book winning best picture at the Oscars make it the Best film from Hollywood or from among the submissions? Wilfred: Awards are important if done with noble intentions. It isn’t also a perfect system but the key is to try to adopt a system that strives to reward excellence not popularity or individual preferences. The Oscars primary aim is to promote the industry. Once in a while they actually reward excellence. The two objectives are different. I think that answers the Green Book question. Their system is a flawed one but credit to them for making the effort to ensure excellence always floats to the top. Whenever a group of people gather to decide on something, the result is almost never “the best” but what everyone can agree upon. That is why it is stuff with a broad appeal that eventually comes out tops as opposed to ambitious, experimental or niche stuff. No matter how excellent. Q: Moving away a little from film. You once hosted a segment on Africana Literati where you reviewed books, African novels to be precise. I discern then that you’re interested in film as you are in Literature. But you are also a medic and you practice. I know that there are relationships between film and literature; I’m not sure these relationships exist with medicine. Take us through your journey. How do you marry the arts and science? Wilfred: I still host the book review segment. We shot a new season that hasn’t aired yet. Send sponsor please dear. 😁 Q: Nice!