Trending
Actors Faysal Quraishi and Hareem Farooq have raised concerns over alleged paid negative publicity targeting their Punjabi-language film Mango Jutt. They warned that coordinated online campaigns could damage individual productions and further weaken Pakistan’s struggling cinema industry.
Quraishi addressed the issue in an Instagram video, questioning the practice of publishing negative reviews shortly after a film’s release without properly watching it. He said such activity could undermine efforts to bring audiences back to cinemas.
The actor also questioned the wider impact of what he described as paid propaganda, asking how many people suffered while others pursued their own interests.
“Because it is a negative thing, which has been fed [to them], you’re saying the same thing. But seriously, while focused on your gains, how many people are you harming?” he said.
Quraishi compared the alleged campaign with the approach of film critics who take time to watch a production before reviewing it.
“I know a lot of such serious film critics who wait for two to three days, for Friday, Saturday and Sunday to pass, before writing a review. But when there’s paid propaganda, the reviews start pouring in from the next day,” he said.
He maintained that audiences should ultimately decide a film’s commercial fate. He also acknowledged that mixed reviews and differences in taste were natural parts of cinema.
However, he argued that genuine criticism should remain distinct from deliberately manufactured negativity.
“Paid propaganda against anything, whether it’s a drama or a film, causes loss to the industry. We [already] have a very small industry,” he said.
Quraishi also highlighted the financial considerations involved in visiting cinemas. He suggested that misleading online narratives could further weaken moviegoers’ confidence when deciding which films to watch.
Farooq, who produced and stars in Mango Jutt, also weighed in on the controversy.
She shared screenshots on Instagram that appeared to raise questions about whether some negative posts about the film involved payment.
One exchange included the question, “And is it a paid post?” The response was affirmative, followed by another question: “Will you share the cost or budget?”
The screenshots prompted questions about the nature of the posts and whether the criticism represented independent opinion. However, the material described in the posts does not, on its own, establish the extent of any coordinated campaign or identify those responsible.
In a separate Instagram post, Farooq highlighted reports that several cinemas had dropped the film, while others had reduced its showtimes or moved screenings away from prime-time slots.
The post attributed the reported decline to competition from Hollywood releases and negative word of mouth.
Sri Lanka Elect to Field Against England in Final ODI Tri-Series League Match
The controversy has renewed discussion about the role of online reviews and publicity in shaping a film’s commercial performance.
Negative reviews are a legitimate part of film culture, and viewers have the right to express disappointment with a production. The concern raised by Quraishi and Farooq is whether some criticism is being presented as independent opinion when payment or coordination may be involved.
Any assessment of the allegations would require further evidence, including verification of the screenshots and the circumstances surrounding the posts.
For Pakistan’s cinema industry, the debate highlights the challenge of rebuilding audience confidence while navigating online criticism, competition from international releases and the financial pressures facing local productions.
