Agadir 24 | Agadir24
In the world of art and cinema, it is natural for every work of art to have its share of criticism, whether positive or negative.
But what happened with the film “Naida” and Said Naciri went beyond the limits of artistic criticism and reached personal spaces that raise eyebrows, as if the great digital success of the film revealed a deeper crisis in the Moroccan cultural scene.
Instead of discussing the work itself, some tended to dig into Al-Nasseri's personal life and try to distort his image for strange reasons, unrelated to the film or its content.
Moreover, with the movie “Naida” achieving more than 19 million views on the “YouTube” platform, Al-Nasseri faced a wide campaign of criticism, some of which was logical and related to the weakness of the plot or repetition in style, but the bulk of it deviated from the real goal of the criticism. Talk about Al-Nasseri began. As a person, about his private life, and even about his personal decisions and choices.
This campaign was not just a reaction to the film, but rather appeared to be an attempt to diminish its digital success, settle narrow scores for an undeclared party, and refuse to acknowledge the reality revealed by the numbers: the Moroccan audience interacts with this type of content, regardless of the critics’ evaluation.
True criticism is supposed to focus on the artwork itself, analyze its strengths and weaknesses, and ask questions about its message and the extent of its influence.
But when criticism turns into a personal attack, it loses credibility and shows double standards.
Why do some people resort to this method? Is it an inability to confront the numbers that confirmed the film's popularity? Or has digital success confused critics and pushed them to look for loopholes outside the artistic framework? Or is there another undeclared goal?
Numbers do not lie, and 19 million views is not a passing number that can be easily surpassed. This digital success clearly shows that there is a wide segment of the Moroccan audience who found in “Nayda” content that meets their needs, regardless of the opinion of critics.
The film may not be a masterpiece, and it may have many flaws, but the audience chose it and interacted with it. The problem here is not with Al-Nasseri or his film, but rather with the clear gap between critics and the audience.
What happened with Al-Nasiri also reflects a deeper problem in the Moroccan cultural scene, which is the absence of a constructive critical culture that differentiates between the artistic work and the person who presented it.
Instead of the discussion focusing on developing the film industry and raising its level, it deviated into personal spaces that do not benefit the audience and do not serve the art.
If critics truly seek to improve public taste, they must bravely face reality: This audience needs different content, but this does not mean diminishing its choices or attacking the makers of the works it consumes.
The film “Naida” and Saeed Al-Nasiri represent a phenomenon that must be carefully studied. The great digital success poses serious questions about the audience’s priorities and taste, but it also imposes on critics a greater responsibility: to abandon personal judgments and duplicity, and to focus on the artistic work itself.
If criticism continues to move away from its true essence, it will not contribute to the development of art. Rather, it will widen the gap between the public and critics. The numbers have spoken, and the reality they have exposed must be the beginning of a serious dialogue about the future of art and criticism in Morocco.
Related News :