By Bhumika Hooda

Abstract

‘Animal’, directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga, has received equal hate and love for this ultra-violent cinematic piece. The main critique is that the movie is a senseless sequence of gore, misogyny and abusiveness, one after the other. The film has reignited the debate on the eternal struggle between directive creativity, and moral and social responsibility. This article will recount the effects of the depiction of violence against women in films.

The Indian film industry is one of the biggest in the world. Thus, it should be concerning when the industry continues to portray themes of casual patriarchy, gender inequality, misogyny, and physical and mental abuse towards women, as was rampant in the recent movie Animal. Such portrayal perpetuates this problematic mindset and normalises it. Despite a few critically acclaimed movies here and there, gender bias in film is evident. Almost all significant blockbusters feature misogynistic dialogues. In a study of nearly 700 films from Bollywood, the Hindi film industry, between 1950-2020, there was a decreased trend of gender bias. However, the potential scope for mitigation still exists as compared to global contemporary cinema industries. This analysis should also come with an understanding that every joke made at the expense of a female character is not gender bias. An objection should be raised only when such a portrayal confirms problematic themes and lends normalcy.

The Indian movie industry is a mirror of social attitudes and in turn, helps shape these attitudes. With this understanding of the social effects of cinema, filmmakers ought to be cognizant of their social and moral responsibilities. It is a circle of art imitates life, and life imitates art. The most infamous tales are of the Vivek Kumar case and the Dipti Sarna case, inspired by the movie Darr. The film imitations in real life are long, including DU students copying Munna Bhai MBBS for cheating and Dhoom, where, taking inspiration from the movie, robbers tried to break into Chelembra Bank. There are many risks when people copy the inappropriate and “creative” behaviour shown in real life and decide to do the same in real life. Since viewers are constantly reminded of visual images in movies and advertisements, it has a lasting impact on their minds. This becomes a disturbing realisation when we observe that scenes of misogyny are supported and applauded by the viewers in cinema halls. Thus filmmakers are enticed to include more such scenes, but efforts should be made not to use violence as entertainment in films. A pattern of eroticisation of female suffering and pain is discovered in the analysis of movies of the 80s and 90s of Indian cinema. Priming the audience to the idea that love equates to suffering and pain and the toxic masculine ideas of control over their relationships is of great concern. 

But the paradox is that such violence and depictions of violence or patriarchy must not be restricted as it would have unintended effects. Such depictions show the lived reality of many and their experiences of domestic violence or misogyny, which hampers opportunities for women. It brings out the experiences we often try to ignore in the name of “tradition” or because it has always been prevalent. Banning or restricting such content will lead to further stigmatisation of these topics. Movies like Darlings prove how a socially relevant issue can be made into mass entertaining movies. Movies like The Great Indian Kitchen succeed in showing how a woman’s life may become monotonous and be restricted to the kitchen. The uncomfortable scenes like leftover food stuck in the sink drive the point home about how women are left to do all the dirty and gruesome work. It is almost haunting to see the protagonist labouring in the kitchen every ten minutes throughout the movie.

An excellent example is the movie Gargi, directed by Gautam Ramchandaram. A film based on a school teacher trying to prove the innocence of her father in a juvenile rape case. The movie, through realism, portrays the plight of many girls and women in India. Certain scenes of violence were intentionally dragged out instead of hurrying, as is generally done in films, which makes the audience uncomfortable but privy to the gravity of such violence and sexual assaults against women. Both men and women are victims of society socialising its people to oppression and violence as the norm. 

Often, women are unaware that they are going through something unfair and seeing a depiction might help spark realisation and urge to effect a change to their situation. Thappad, released in 2020, is a tale of how domestic violence is so prevalent in households that women are expected to ignore such actions. This is depicted as the women characters in the movie insist the protagonist forget the small incident of the husband instigating the slap and go back to her “normal” life instead of extending their support. Physical violence is made trivial because it is commonly prevalent in every household. Despite fulfilling the hallmarks of modernity like education and sophisticated professions, wives are often expected to put up with all sorts of oppressive behaviour from their partner, including verbal, physical and sexual abuse. This film highlights how domestic violence knows no class or caste and is as prevalent in urban upper-class settings just as in rural economically struggling households. 

Another fitting example is the Emmy Award-winning series The Handmaid’s Tail, based on a book of the same name by Margaret Atwood. It centres around state-institutionalised sexual violence in the face of dwindling fertility rates. It becomes a difficult watch when you realise that the work, despite being fictional, closely follows our society’s reality, especially in the aftermath of overruling Roe v Wade. Perhaps the most shocking fact about the show is that, despite depicting a regressive and patriarchal lifestyle, it is set in the future. It implies that the fears of repressive progression may not be eradicated. This warrants that such issues be brought to the limelight and talked about. 

Another facet of this conversation is the artistic creativity of the filmmakers. Since we have the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to curtail anything extreme, it boils down to the creative licence of the filmmakers to bring their vision to life. Movies are a form of expression for filmmakers. The right is constitutionally protected under the Indian constitution and may only be derogated if it actively violates public order, decency, morality, and other criteria given under the Indian constitution.  

The heart of this debate is in the quality of material, artistic intention and audience interpretation. Creative work is more complex and cannot be forced within this binary. Where one can defend censoring of violence against women or angry gory sequences, it might be challenging to outweigh the cons legally, morally or artistically. But at least the audience is starting to realise when a work of art is rather necessary and where such depictions are previously used to garner more views. 

Author’s Bio

Bhumika Hooda is pursuing her five-year B.A.LL.B. law degree at Jindal Global Law. 

Image Source: Screen capture from the movie ‘Animal’