Ajit Rai (1967-2025) The critic who bridged worlds between theater, cinema, literature and society by © film critic Lalit Rao.

Ajit Rai (1967-2025) The critic who bridged worlds between theater, cinema, literature and society by © film critic Lalit Rao (FIPRESCI) dated 10.08.2025

 

 

On 23 July 2025, the world of Indian arts criticism lost one of its most well-connected and distinctive voices. Ajit Rai, a seasoned theater critic who, by a twist of fate, ventured into the realm of cinema, passed away in London. His death leaves behind not only a personal void for those who knew him but also a complex legacy that blends personal charm, deep knowledge, networking mastery, and a unique — if sometimes controversial — role in Hindi-language film criticism.

 

                                From theater stages to the red carpets of world cinema

 

Ajit Rai’s professional journey began not in the darkened halls of cinemas but in the vibrant, immediate world of theater. He was, first and foremost, a theater critic — a man whose sharp observational skills and nuanced understanding of performance were honed in live productions. His transition into the cinema world was, by his own admission, accidental. Yet it was in this arena that he would become a regular, visible presence at some of the most prestigious film festivals in the world.

 

Since 2015, Rai attended the Cannes Film Festival every single year — a rare feat for an Indian critic without formal membership in FIPRESCI (the International Federation of Film Critics). This fact often became a point of good-natured banter among friends, with me once joking that “it is as if a doctorate student is expressing the desire to do an undergraduate-level course,” such was the unusualness of his regular access to Cannes Film Festival without the usual institutional affiliations. His connections and charisma proved more valuable than membership cards, enabling him to move with ease through the exclusive circles of international cinema.

 

Beyond Cannes, Rai’s passport bore stamps from other major film gatherings. He attended the Red Sea Film Festival in Saudi Arabia and the El Gouna Film Festival in Egypt. At home in India, he chaired sessions at the NFDC’s Film Bazaar, an influential platform for fostering Indo-international cinema collaborations.

 

                                                     The Man of Connections

 

 

Connections were at the heart of Rai’s professional life. He maintained an active and formidable network across cinema, theater, literature, music, and politics. On Facebook alone, his friends list swelled to the maximum limit of 5,000 — an eclectic mix of artists, critics, filmmakers, and admirers.

 

His administrative and political reach granted him memberships in prestigious institutions, most notably the Press Club of India in New Delhi. But it was his friendships with high-profile figures such as the influential Hinduja family that often opened remarkable doors. The Hindujas, among the wealthiest business families in the world, extended warm invitations to Rai, hosting him on their luxurious yacht in Cannes and at their residences in Mumbai and London.

 

In return, Rai expressed his gratitude in a manner befitting a writer: he penned a book on the Hindujas’ contributions to popularizing Indian cinema globally. It was a gesture that combined personal friendship, professional respect, and his instinct for preserving cultural narratives.

 

                                       Champion of Hindi language world cinema writing

 

Perhaps Rai’s most unique professional identity was his claim — proudly and frequently stated — that he was the only journalist writing in Hindi about World Cinema, especially the Cannes Film Festival. While the merit of the language distinction might be debatable (“Frankly, it never mattered if a film critic wrote in Hindi or any other regional language,” as I have often noted), Rai’s enthusiasm and commitment to sharing global cinema with Hindi readers was undeniable.

 

His writings brought films from far beyond India’s borders into the consciousness of audiences who rarely encountered them in mainstream Hindi publications. He was able to contextualize European arthouse cinema, Asian independent filmmaking, and African narratives for readers who otherwise had little exposure to such work.

 

Yet his mission also raised a broader, somewhat uncomfortable question: Do Hindi newspapers and magazines truly care about world cinema? Are they genuinely committed to providing space for it? Rai’s persistence suggested he believed they could — but the reality of editorial priorities in Hindi-language media often told a different story.

 

                                                 A scholar of the film festival circuit

 

At Cannes, Rai was more than just a visitor; he was a scholar of the festival’s offerings. He immersed himself in the films, absorbing trends, cinematic languages, and storytelling innovations. He carried this knowledge back to India, where his insights enriched discussions not only in print but in personal conversations. I recall how, whenever he happened to be in Jaipur, he would call me to talk about world cinema — our conversations ranging from the latest Palme d’Or contenders to overlooked gems. It was this deep knowledge, combined with his warmth and sociability, that made him a bridge figure — connecting Indian audiences, especially Hindi-speaking ones, with the broader cinematic landscape.

 

                                                   A desire that remained unfulfilled

 

For all his achievements, there was one professional ambition that Ajit Rai never realized : joining FIPRESCI in India. The international critics’ organization would have given formal shape to his standing as a world cinema critic. Yet, for reasons both circumstantial and perhaps mysterious, the membership eluded him. His death in London came before that dream could be fulfilled.

 

In the end, it is perhaps fitting that Rai’s legacy is one of informality — of influence exercised not through titles and associations, but through personal relationships, deep expertise, and a kind of cultural diplomacy that did not require institutional rubber stamps.

 

                                                              Ajit Rai : The social critic

 

 

Rai’s social life was legendary. He was a connoisseur not just of films but of life’s pleasures — good food, fine wine, and the company of interesting women. His friends list spanned continents and disciplines: Marianne Borgo, the French actress; Alice Kanterian, the German film journalist; Charles Thompson, the Australian actor; Pierre Filmon, the French director; and Somendra Harsh, Indian festival organizer. Each of these friendships reflected a facet of his personality: artistic curiosity, cosmopolitan flair, and an ability to make people feel valued in his orbit.

 

 

One of my fondest shared experiences with him was at the inauguration of Rajasthan International Film Festival (RIFF) 2022 in Jaipur. Accompanied by French director Pierre Filmon, we attended a large gathering where, to my surprise and amusement, Rai publicly declared that “Mr. Lalit Rao is a knowledgeable film critic who also happens to be a walking encyclopedia of World Cinema.” Coming from someone so deeply embedded in the international festival circuit, it was a compliment I have not forgotten.

 

                                               A critic who lived but not without critics

 

 

For all the admiration Rai inspired, his career was not without detractors. Some argued that his role in Hindi film criticism was overstated, and that the broader Hindi-language media landscape was indifferent to the kind of world cinema he championed. Others pointed to the nature of his access to festivals, suggesting that connections and social skills rather than journalistic merit often paved the way. Yet such criticisms miss an important truth: in an industry where access is often gate kept by institutions, Rai found alternative routes — and used them to expand the conversation in ways that might not have been possible otherwise.

 

                                                       The human side of a film critic

 

Beneath the public persona — the man photographed on yachts, in festival lobbies, and at high-profile dinners — there was a deeply human Ajit Rai. He had a generosity of spirit, calling friends simply to share ideas or discuss a film that had moved him. He took genuine pleasure in introducing people to one another, weaving together networks of creative minds across borders.  Even his indulgences — in cuisine, in wine, in social charm — seemed less about vanity than about fully experiencing the richness of life. He understood that the arts were not merely to be observed but to be lived.

 

                                                         A loss that is both felt and questioned

 

Since his passing, some of Rai’s friends and admirers have called his death “a big blow to film criticism in Hindi.” While this sentiment is heartfelt, it also prompts a question: is the space for such criticism in Hindi media truly robust? Or was Rai’s career an exception rather than part of a thriving ecosystem? His life’s work suggests that individual passion can temporarily compensate for institutional neglect, but it also underscores the fragility of such a model.

 

                                                                        Ajit Rai’s legacy

 

Ajit Rai’s life story resists easy categorization. He was a theater critic who became a film festival fixture. A Hindi journalist who brought Cannes to readers far from the Croisette. A man of letters who also thrived on the glamour of high society. He was, above all, a connector — of people, of cultures, of ideas.

 

In remembering him, we are reminded that influence in the arts is not always about titles or formal positions. Sometimes it is about being present, being curious, and having the courage to build one’s own pathways. For a man who lived and worked so much in the spaces between — between theater and cinema, between India and the world, between officialdom and informality — this may be the most fitting tribute.

 

As the lights dim on another screening at Cannes, one can almost picture him there still: notebook in hand, wine glass nearby, already planning his next conversation about the films that matter.