(by Vineet Kuruvilla)
I read an article in HuffPost India, Kabir Singh’s Success Dismantles Our False Illusion of Wokeness. This is a response to it. But before I dive into a response to the article, I want to state that I haven’t seen Kabir Singh. I have only watched the original Arjun Reddy. The author of the article, Ankur Pathak, thinks he is exposing the mindset of the Indian public and the “illusion of wokeness”. But I couldn’t get past the feeling that all he achieved was to expose his own (other people who think on these lines) patriarchal mindset and possibly a bit of immaturity.
Arjun Reddy (or Kabir Singh) is a film. It is a work of art and it is a work of fiction. When people say “it’s just a film”, they mean we are mature enough to differentiate between a work of fiction and reality. We are perfectly capable of deciding what is right and wrong for us. Ankur Pathak is a censor board chairman’s dream. He is the kind of person who would love to plaster the entire frame of film with disclaimers “Consumption of alcohol is injurious to health”. If it were in his power, probably, he would put disclaimers about misogyny all over Arjun Reddy as well. And, you must have noticed how he conflates the movie character with a murder, mob lynching and cow vigilantism. He thinks about and treats the audience (and his readers) as infants and he has to show us how to operate in this big bad world.
His reading of the film further emphasises this patriarchal mindset. He terms the girlfriend character, Preeti, as a “misogynist’s dream”. (Probably just like he is a censor board chairman’s dream.) Let’s do a bit of digging into the movie. To be fair to the author, there is very little from Preeti’s perspective in the movie because the movie is about Arjun Reddy. Well, that is in a way expected as the film title is Arjun Reddy and the film is almost entirely from Arjun’s side. But whatever little we know of Preeti, it seems she was smitten by Arjun, the college stud, from day one. As can be seen in the later portions of the film, she is no pushover or hostage to Arjun. Wasn’t she showing off the anatomy drawing Arjun did on her hands to her friend? Wasn’t she the one who got a blanket for Arjun when he slept with his head on her lap? Didn’t she willingly move into his beach house? Wasn’t she the one who initiated lovemaking with Arjun in their beach house? Didn’t she slap Arjun for shouting at her?
For all we know, she liked him and must have been happy to get Arjun Reddy’s attention and be in a relationship with him. Why consider Preeti as a weakling who can’t stand for herself. Don’t mistake her silence in the early portions in the movie for suffering in silence. Even after knowing that Arjun is the father of the child in her womb, she didn’t return to him. If Arjun hadn’t seen her in that garden, completely by chance, she would, most probably, be taking care of her child as a single mother. Doesn’t that show strength of character? It is almost an insult to women by saying Preeti “is a misogynist’s dream”. Who are we to say who is right and wrong for a woman? Aren’t we exposing our patriarchal mindset by judging her for her choice? Women are completely capable of taking life decisions on their own. They don’t need your advice. Quit infantilizing them!
Arjun Reddy is a textbook example of an asshole. He treats people around him like crap be it, friends or family. Like his friend, Shiva, says “Being your friend is like pissing on oneself”. The parts where he intimidates Preeti’s batchmates to not have a relationship with her for “she is mine”, the way he kissed her without consent (I have doubts about the consent) is vile. He fights on the football pitch, he beats a fellow student who plays “Holi” with Preeti. I am guessing “Holi” is a euphemism for sexual molestation. He is so juvenile as well. Look at the way he refuses to congratulate his friend on his wedding just because his relationship didn’t work out. He even insults his best friend because his friend was running a small clinic while he is a surgeon.
He is no saint but he is not a symbol of toxic masculinity either. Toxic masculinity is about the suppression of emotions, maintaining the appearance of hardness, violence as an indicator of power. Arjun Reddy is someone who cries at the slightest distress. He wallows in sorrow and drowns in alcohol, drugs and empty sex to numb himself just to get over the void in his heart. He pines for his ex-girlfriend. He is someone so soft that he can’t even say goodbye to his girlfriend! He is not afraid to show his emotions. He doesn’t see it as a sign of weakness. Not only that, Arjun Reddy shows some sign of reformation, since his college days, in his attitude towards women, in the scene where he admonishes his friend’s future brother-in-law for making sexist remarks about air hostesses.
Arjun Reddy or Kabir Singh is not a movie which celebrates misogyny or toxic masculinity. The title character is not perfect but notably, the female lead character is not a helpless, defenceless child, who is being pushed over and forced to comply by a dominating boyfriend, and is definitely not a “misogynist’s dream” like is being described in Ankur Pathak’s article. The fact that an unpleasant person like Arjun gets what he wants is confused as a “celebration” of the person’s unpleasantness by the author. Well, isn’t that life? Sometimes, even not so nice people get what they desire. It seems to me, that one’s response to the movie reveals more about oneself that the makers, like a Rorschach test.
The article, in fact, exposes the author’s and like-minded readers’ mindset which infantilizes both the lead female character in the movie and also the movie audience. It needs to be reminded, over and over again, even to people who consider themselves “woke” that a woman does not need a patronizing society and for sure, does not want to be told what is good and what is bad and how to lead her life. They are perfectly capable of making choices in their lives. And most importantly, they are perfectly capable of dealing with its consequences, be it good or bad.
Let me end by shouting out my innermost desire as a cinema lover and on behalf of all cinema lovers: We too want to be treated as adults by filmmakers and the government. Quit infantilizing us!
Baradwaj Rangan 
Deepak Jeswal
June 25, 2019
Excellent article. And finally someone said it.
I recall a friend telling me once: ‘if I liked a film on sharks, doesn’t mean I want to go live with them’.
Same here. You can enjoy AR/KS and not necessarily be like him.
(Having said that, I couldn’t complete AR coz I found it a bit of a drag / repetitive and boring – nothing to do with the character per se.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paras
June 25, 2019
Amazing BR…Your article is so thoughtful and piercing. Hats off to your thought clarity.
I genuinely feel that your linking of Rorschach test to a movie interpretation is the most unique and profound way to describe filmmaking profession holistically.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 25, 2019
I wonder if I should start putting the author’s name right at the beginning. Hmmmm….
LikeLiked by 2 people
MANK
June 25, 2019
Great Article. I have not seen Kabir Singh,( neither will i). I liked Arjun Reddy quite a bit, mainly for Vijay Devarakonda’s performance.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paras
June 25, 2019
Oops 🙂
Thanks to Vineet for the article. 🙂
LikeLike
hattorihanzo4784
June 25, 2019
Baradwaj rangan,
You have watched thousands of films. There is a movie, you must be aware of called “birth of a nation” by D. W. Griffith. It is considered as the dictionary of filmmaking. The director is considered as the rolls Royce among directors because of this seminal movie. But at the same time, the heroes of the movie are an army of Klu Klux Klan – the white supremacists who hunt and lynch black slaves who are apparently trying to degrade the sexual modesty of white women. But yet all great American reviewers though apologetic about the content, are still grateful for the film making techniques that are introduced in the movie which helped the industry leapfrog many floors at a time, similar to what citizen Kane, 7 samurai and other great movies have done later. Even the legendary Roger Ebert has archived his review on this movie in the great movies list – https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-the-birth-of-a-nation-1915
Here the hero is a racist lynching scumbag. But the American reviewers are only doing their duty as critics and not degrading the quality of the filmmaking craft just because it doesn’t suit their agenda. As of now, Sandeep vanga’s directorial ability is but a speck of dust on the toe finger of the legendary d. W. Griffith, it is not my intention to compare Kabir Singh with TBoaN. But today all Indian critics are only bashing the movie as the content doesn’t suit their agenda, without talking about the movie itself.
BR, Please tell us if it is ever possible to for a critic to just criticize the movie and not it’s agenda? Please have a go on this angle. You are the right person to talk about this because I have previously seen you just sticking to your duty as a critic even for right wing propaganda movies, even though you are most probably a liberal. You are among the only few real solid liberals in this country and please have your say.
Thank you.
P.S. others also please have your say despite me addressing this to BR. Thanks.
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 25, 2019
Along with what hattorihanzo wrote, I also see many common people, not critics, use these movies (and other movies as well) as a way of virtue signaling. A sort of virtual mob lynching of movies and other art forms to show others how “woke” they are.
LikeLiked by 2 people
arjun
June 25, 2019
*taaliyan! standing ovation.
LikeLike
rsylviana
June 25, 2019
Can I just say a potentially alienating comment in this space ?
Being able to view a film as just a film and trusting the REST OF THE AUDIENCE are doing the same is a privilege in this time and age. For that matter, being able to separate art from artists is a privilege too.
LikeLiked by 11 people
Umamageswari V
June 25, 2019
oh my god.. wat a lovely reply.. even i felt d same after reading the first article on Kabir Singh.. Thanks a lot buddy
LikeLiked by 1 person
So called feminist
June 25, 2019
Dear mr. Vineet
Can u roughly give me an estimate of how many incidences of adam- teasing(!) Have u heard of as compared to eve-teasing in india…how many incidences of male-rape have u known as compared to female rape…surely everyone knows which gender is more prone for abuse..m sure someone has articulate and well read as u is certainly and hopefully not one of those who indulges in these activities…n that’s y u need to know..the outrage against this movie is not directed at saying someone wid intellect of urs will do this…but de ones who have propensity n tendency towards these activities wld do it…dont u agree kissing a girl de 1 St time u meet without even asking her is a form of eve teasin..she didn’t slap him…infact ended up being de mother of his child! What message does it send out to de reckless minds.. U say it’s just a movie..de ones who have had problems have said it loud…yes for them its a big thing that for de 1 St time in Bollywood an A lister n big production house has acted in a movie which has shown de female characters bein so matter of factly abused to derive silly laughs or seen bein mute spectators to mans whims under de pretext of directors vision….but if it’s just a movie…y r u retaliating???? Just watch it..derive ur pleasure n let de so- called feminists speak their mind…its- just-a-movie afteral..in ur own words.. U react..bcoz u get affected by that character…n u despite of bein so called rational minded try to justify his persona…imagine thousands of illiterate n roadside romeos or actual patriarch males who actually exist in this society.. How much high do they derive from this character!!! Esp when then see de girl coming back to him n reiterating my husband didn’t even touch my nail( atleast in AR)…for once stop takin it personally…have u seen what kind of abusive videos ppl have made of sucharita tyagi coz she called out fallacies of a fictional character kabir Singh(!)…hundreds of ppl saying Mc bc(try lakshya chaudhari how he has derived parallels from film to abuse!)..to justify kabir singh!!! These r de ppl who have felt empowered by de toxic depiction of kabir…mute portrayal of Preeti n their glorified fairytale end.. Ppl like me whom u can so easily label as feminist are anyways empowered…sitting in ur AC cabins its very easy to have that myopic view that this is a movie…but come to de ground reality once…n u will realise how films seep into de basic mentality of ppl in India…how blindfolded they follow film stars..n toxic mentality when rewarded is even more convenient to emulate…so get a perspective of life…when a feminist well educated doctor like me gets infuriated its not coz some kabir singh will trouble me…but m worried about 50 gullible young females who work under me who r extremely vulnerable to 1000s of such kabir singhs or lakshya chaudharies….think of de society for once…films don’t have de moral liability to educate de society..but if they r detrimental in any way…they have to b critised!
LikeLiked by 4 people
Jai
June 25, 2019
Vineet….well written and articulate post, and you have argued a number of points with conviction.
However, at the risk of inviting some opprobrium– in fact, I typed out a response multiple times and deleted it each time, Coz I was frankly unsure whether contradictory viewpoints would be welcome– I must say that I disagree with both the premise and the conclusion of your article. I would like to set out the reasons why, if I may, and hence the rather long rejoinder below.
Like you, I haven’t watched Kabir Singh. Like you, I have watched Arjun Reddy.
The reason why I won’t watch Kabir Singh, is the simple fact that I found Arjun Reddy glorifying (or at least inventing multiple excuses) for the patently – as you put it- “textbook example of an asshole”.
Yes, we are shown the titular protagonist going ferociously on a downward spiral of alcohol, drug abuse and empty, meaningless sex. But at the end of the day, we are shown how ‘brilliant’ he is, how ‘intense/immense’ his love is– despite the beginnings of that love being based on consent so very dubious/coercive, it would not even pass the most generous interpretation of willing participation.
I do agree with you on one thing, though– response to this film (as indeed any film) is based on subjective viewpoints/experiences/opinions. The Rorschach test analogy you draw might be true enough—but you must allow, this is true for both viewers who abhor such a film; those who celebrate it; and those who tolerate it with allowances. No one is free from the implications of such a test.
As for me– My views on movies like this are shaped by a very personal experience while I was growing up, when an immediate family member had to fend off the unwelcome barrage of “true love” from a colleague. This said fellow was convinced his love was so pure and intense, that he should just not be turned down. There were a few artful threats of cut veins bandied about– which, thankfully for us, ceased the moment he was given a stern admonition by his boss and told that he would lose his job if he went further with his nonsense.
Now if you tell me, that people like this chap who tormented us do not draw any ‘inspiration’/fantasy value–call it what you will– from movies like this, well then, I have nothing further to say except that I do not agree with you. Perhaps, the difference in opinion arises from the fact that you feel the movie merely reflects such characters; whereas I feel it does more, it also defends/excuses them, and gives the real-life imitators, the hope/belief that the object of their ‘affection’ will, ultimately, reciprocate. Trust me, this is not infantilising anything, it is just a deep wariness of some very real life consequences of such a situation– the nervousness, the fear, the anguish.
As I suspect is true for the majority of educated, middle class households in the country, I was raised in a fairly liberal atmosphere, though traces of conservatism remained in some aspects. Most of us have experienced at least mild elements of patriarchy in our upbringing- Indian society has had that feature for centuries, and changes take time.
But I hope to do better for my own young daughters. I would like them to have the freedom, the courage to stare down a “textbook example of an asshole” like Arjun Reddy/Kabir Singh and tell him to go **** himself, if he dared to express such a proprietary, condescending attitude towards them. And hand on heart, I really don’t think I am feeling this with any desire to show any “wokeness” to anybody.
LikeLiked by 15 people
Siva NS
June 25, 2019
Hi BR, can you add the author’s name or the usual ‘Readers Write In’ prefix for the articles not written by you. I started reading this post and immediately felt it was not written by you. I was scrolling up and down looking for the author’s name. I knew you didn’t write the post and decided to give some time to see if you are updating the writer’s name.
Looks like you just did 🙂
LikeLike
srikrishna1353
June 25, 2019
Dear vineet,
I agreed with your point, You are thinking it from your perspective(rational and intellectual), But there are many general audiences who are taking the character deeply into themselves rather than watching it as a film. For many other movies it impacts for some time. But AR is a character which shown in a very intense way, many people are taking that attitude and rudeness as a heroism and starting behaving like that. They are not looking AR as a character, looking as a Hero and trying to imitate him which will have a very bad impact on their mindset. Even I saw many girls are telling proudly as my boy friend is like Arjun Reddy. I am not sure in which way they are mentioning. But an overall many audiences (especially from so called C centers) are taking so much of attitude and rudeness back with them as a heroism. And also many directors taken the film as a example for boldness and kisses. In telugu industry it inspires many movies like(RX 100, Degree college) which are only concentrated on boldness rather than showing it as a part of story. They all are claiming the success of AR. Totally this movie has created some bad effect on movies and people’s mindset.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Swarnalatha Krishnaswamy
June 25, 2019
This makes a lot of sense 🙂 . I really loved the write up and eventually had one line that stood out for me.
It seems to me, that one’s response to the movie reveals more about oneself that the makers, like a Rorschach test.
I am a typical human in a way that i found a typo too ‘…..about oneself thaN…’ or may be its just me seeing it 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
vinjk
June 25, 2019
Oh boy! I wouldn’t have written this article had I seen the latest Ask BR!
LikeLike
mredlich21
June 25, 2019
Thank you, I had a similar reaction to the heroine’s character in both Arjun Reddy and Kabir Singh and was surprised to find that the reaction to KS was so strong I received comments on my review calling me a “bad feminist” for liking it. I’m glad to know I am not alone in seeing her as being an equal in the relationship.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 25, 2019
Thank you, Jai. You said what I wanted to say, and said it so eloquently.
I’m also intensely curious about how ‘It’s only a film’ is applied only to films such as these – that ‘liberals’ protest against. Show a film that satirises religion, and the knives come out. Show someone eating beef and feelings are hurt. Show the flawed side of a political person and riots break out, calling for films to be banned.
Like it or not, films not only reflect society but also subliminally influences it. It’s not ‘woke’ to understand that a repetition of certain tropes has dire consequences. Women all over see it happen in their daily lives – romanticising misogyny and abuse as ‘intense love’ does a disservice to both men and women. Glorifying it in the context of a ‘hero’ gives it validity. That is sickening/horrifying on so many counts.
It is scary that such movies are still being made in a post-#MeToo era. The success of both Arjun Reddy and Kabir Singh only goes to show how many men relate to, and empathise with, the character’s narrative. That should give women pause.
Thanks, rsylvania and so called feminist for your posts as well.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Paras
June 25, 2019
Can see viewpoints getting highly contested here…however funnily, the viewpoints of the commentators here only reinforce the profound observation made in this article….that all this is like the Rorschach test. The perceptions and interpretations a commentator makes indicate, in a way, personality traits of the commentator.
Take 2 scenarios..Just take the innocuous example of a cute, romantic and evergreen love story like DDLJ. There is a scene during their Euro trip where Raj, as Simran is walking away, keeps on repeating to himself ‘Palat..Palat..Palat’. I am sure most of us found the scene cute and very romantic and as a matter of fact the theme behind that scene was replicated,until few years back, by many lovelorn couples in real life, wherein if your would-be GF/BF turns back while they are casually walking away it means they like/love you. Harmless right? An example where movies influenced the society (in a small romantic way though)
Now take the example of the movie Satya. I am born and brought up in Mumbai and I have seen the influence of the movie on real-life gangsters in Mumbai. When the movie was released underworld in Mumbai was on the rise and there were lot of newspaper reports which said that now-a-days most of the shoot-outs are happening where the target is being shot right directly into the head (and not the chest/abdomen area like earlier). Apparently lot of gangsters had got heavily influenced by the scenes and the song ‘Goli maar bheje mein’. This is very Harmful, right? An example where movies influenced the society in a dangerously negative way.
However, do you really think someone became a gangster ONLY because of the movie Satya? Or rather, do you think number of shootouts increased ONLY because of the movie Satya? Yes, incidences of shooting in the head increased, but if not for Satya, the gangster would have ANYWAY shoot the target in the chest or abdomen like earlier.
I think these 2 examples indicate the extreme ways of movies’ influence and in between these 2 extremes lie other scenarios like people getting influenced by their hairstyles of the hero/heroine, fashion trends change, popular movie shooting locations become tourist places, popular movie dialogs become regular lingo, stalking methods, substance abuse, etc.
All I am saying is that its impossible that a good/matured/disciplined individual would one day suddenly get influenced negatively by a movie and start killing/raping/beating/stealing/abusing partner, etc. If at all such an instance happens, then that would be due to some other influences on that individual and not the specific movie alone…a simple case of Rorschach test.
In between an individual’s thought and his respective action and then the final outcome of that action, there are lot of other subtle factors that influence the final outcome, a kind of Butterfly Effect. And what better movie to demonstrate this cause-effect mystery than the recent masterpiece movie ‘Super Deluxe’
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jaune
June 25, 2019
This review is very obviously from a male perspective so I can’t take the author’s perception of misogyny seriously as he’s probably never experienced it in his life. Also just because the female protagonist showed some signs of affection doesn’t make his predatory and arrogant actions towards her okay. You might be able to view the film as merely a ‘piece of art’ but it’s disgusting that glorifying misogynistic behaviour, violence and unapologetic toxic masculinity is so wholeheartedly accepted by the Indian public and is even celebrated. The character of Arjun Reddy became a sort of role model for many Telugu speaking male youngsters and I’m afraid Kabir Singh will serve as a terrible role model for many more men who would feel justified in behaving the way the protagonist does towards women, his friends and family
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sai Ashwin
June 25, 2019
I think its amazing that a film has such highly polarizing opinions. Its tough to ignore a film like this and the worst thing to happen to a piece of art is to be ignored.
I feel this is India’s equivalent of Taxi Driver,The Wolf of Wall Street, Fight Club etc where the film’s irony is lost on a huge chunk of the audience. I guess until something like the John Hinckley incident regarding Taxi Driver happens to Arjun Reddy/Kabir Singh we wont be able to understand the gravity of it.
But i do think holding the flawed characters in a film to one’s own moral standards is very unfair. One of the biggest problems why the people think the film is sexist is because of the BGM which I always thought was something that reflected the lead’s emotional state. Its the music that is playing inside his head.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abhinay
June 25, 2019
Thanks for putting it out.
Loved reading the article.
LikeLike
Subasri Srikanth
June 26, 2019
I agree to this completelyy!
LikeLike
vinjk
June 26, 2019
The reason I wrote this article was for two purposes:
1) I don’t want to be treated as a kid. The Huffpost author for all his liberal ranting is essentially calling for “banning” of such movies or movies that don’t fit his worldview.
All his attempt at connecting mob lynchings, cow vigilantism and #metoo is a sort dog whistle and virtue signaling to his liberal circle.
The other thing is he shows condescension to people who watched /liked the film. I felt that was completely unnecessary in my view. It’s a movie, people like it, some people don’t.
2) Tons of articles have been written abt AR. But I have not seen one article which tries to see the situation from Preeti’s point of view. Like all artform, this movie is also subject to interpretation. This is one such reading of the film.
Everything written about the character Arjun is true. But what if Preeti was a willing partner to it? I think the interpretation will change dramatically. That’s all.
I haven’t read all the comments. I will respond to them shortly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@rslyviana
“Can I just say a potentially alienating comment in this space ?
Being able to view a film as just a film and trusting the REST OF THE AUDIENCE are doing the same is a privilege in this time and age. For that matter, being able to separate art from artists is a privilege too.”
I don’t think this is an alienating comment. It may well be true as well. But it’s suffocating for people like me who wants to live life as a full adult rather than a nanny state (or society).
LikeLike
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Jai
“The reason why I won’t watch Kabir Singh, is the simple fact that I found Arjun Reddy glorifying (or at least inventing multiple excuses) for the patently – as you put it- “textbook example of an asshole”…………it would not even pass the most generous interpretation of willing participation.”
The fact is we don’t know much about Preeti and what she thinks. So as a viewer, I am filling the gaps here. As mentioned in the article I felt Preeti was looking forward to all these “unwanted” attention. I haven’t listed all the instances in the article but, to me, it felt like the way she was going along with him whether to beat the “Holi” guy or for anatomy lessons or beach house…showed she likes the attention. This is just an interpretation.
“I do agree with you on one thing, though– response to this film (as indeed any film) is based on subjective viewpoints/experiences/opinions. The Rorschach test analogy you draw might be true enough—…No one is free from the implications of such a test.”
Yes I fully agree with you.
“Now if you tell me, that people like this chap who tormented us do not draw any ‘inspiration’/fantasy value–call it what you will– from movies like this, well then, I have nothing further to say except that I do not agree with you. ”
I don’t fully agree with you here. People who prone to such violence will do it and seek out validation for their actions. You can’t blame their source of validation for the act.
“…it also defends/excuses them, and gives the real-life imitators, the hope/belief that the object of their ‘affection’ will, ultimately, reciprocate. Trust me, this is not infantilising anything, …”
Infantilizing is the part where the filmmakers and govt are telling me what is good or what bad for me especially on matters of art and my personal life. Also this is strictly a law and order issue. Instead of dealing with it as such and inorder to cover up the govt’s incompetence, they blame movies, music and other such things as the reason for violence. Like I said previously, people who are inclined to do things will find inspiration from wherever they can.
“But I hope to do better for my own young daughters. I would like them to have the freedom, the courage to stare down a “textbook example of an asshole” like Arjun Reddy/Kabir Singh and tell him to go **** himself, if he dared to express such a proprietary, condescending attitude towards them. And hand on heart, I really don’t think I am feeling this with any desire to show any “wokeness” to anybody.”
Amen to that!
LikeLiked by 1 person
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@srikrishna1353
Dear vineet,
“…many general audiences who are taking the character deeply into themselves rather than watching it as a film…Hero and trying to imitate him which will have a very bad impact on their mindset.”
Can only speak for myself. Movies is only for adults as in those who are mature enough process information that comes their way.
“Even I saw many girls are telling proudly as my boy friend is like Arjun Reddy.”
That’s quite embarrassing. But just as I said above…only for adults.
“Totally this movie has created some bad effect on movies and people’s mindset.”
The universe of Telugu or Indian cinema as it is not a great moral universe. Even celebrated “art” movies like Annayum Rasoolum depicted a creep/stalker, the girl is even scared of the guy. Their love was “celebrated”, the epitome of love and sacrifice. But we don’t hear much about it. I don’t know why. May be because it was made by a “liberal” filmmaker Rajeev Ravi and top-line actor Fahadh Faasil.
By the way, I loved the movie Annayum Rasoolum.
LikeLike
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Anu
“I’m also intensely curious about how ‘It’s only a film’ is applied only to films such as these – that ‘liberals’ protest against. Show a film that satirises religion, and the knives come out. Show someone eating beef and feelings are hurt. Show the flawed side of a political person and riots break out, calling for films to be banned.”
Sorry if the next statement disappoints you. I consider myself a liberal. I have no issue satirising or poking fun or even being demeaning to religion or anything or anyone for that matter. I am a true blue Malayali who eats beef and revels in it (How dare you question my loyalty? :D)
“Like it or not, films not only reflect society but also subliminally influences it. It’s not ‘woke’ to understand that a repetition of certain tropes has dire consequences…”
We don’t see these concerns being raised when a movie glorifying a mafia don or street thugs or other anti-social elements is shown. Cinema might have an influence on society but I think it’s effects are vastly exaggerated. Like I commented above, those who are prone to such acts be it violence, be it love will find inspiration no matter what. We can’t go around penalizing everyone for the action of some.
“It is scary that such movies are still being made in a post-#MeToo era. The success of both Arjun Reddy and Kabir Singh only goes to show how many men relate to, and empathise with, the character’s narrative. That should give women pause.”
Please have an open mind. If there is art, there will be interpretation. This is just one of many. It is not an endorsement of Arjun’s character or actions.
Art is not a completely observable medium. The artist leaves a lot of gaps and unobservable traits and events. It is up to the viewer to interpret these.
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Jaune
“This review is very obviously from a male perspective so I can’t take the author’s perception of misogyny seriously as he’s probably never experienced it in his life. ”
Yes, I am male. Does that mean I can make valid statements only from the perspective of the misogynist?
I don’t have experience in that as well. I am allowed to make any valid interpretation at all?
“Also just because the female protagonist showed some signs of affection doesn’t make his predatory and arrogant actions towards her okay. ”
This is a gray area in the movie. I have taken the liberty to interpret it based on pieces of evidence I have gathered from the movie. I don’t see it as “some signs of affection” as in some insignificant signs. I see it as significant signs. How else are you going to tell whether someone likes or loves you? My wife and I don’t go around telling “I love you” every minute of the day or even everyday. It is understood in our day-to-day actions, the look in the eyes, tones of our words and other subtle signals.
“You might be able to view the film as merely a ‘piece of art’ but it’s disgusting that glorifying misogynistic behaviour, violence and unapologetic toxic masculinity is so wholeheartedly accepted by the Indian public and is even celebrated.”
I don’t see it as a celebration of misogyny.
“The character of Arjun Reddy became a sort of role model for many Telugu speaking male youngsters and I’m afraid Kabir Singh will serve as a terrible role model for many more men who would feel justified in behaving the way the protagonist does towards women, his friends and family”
I have addressed this in my other comments.
LikeLiked by 1 person
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Paras
“However, do you really think someone became a gangster ONLY because of the movie Satya? Or rather, do you think number of shootouts increased ONLY because of the movie Satya? Yes, incidences of shooting in the head increased, but if not for Satya, the gangster would have ANYWAY shoot the target in the chest or abdomen like earlier.”
This is what I try to explain in some of my reply. Thanks for your comment.
LikeLike
brangan
June 26, 2019
vinjk: Did not realise “”Vineet Kuruvilla” was you! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 26, 2019
There’s a strain of comments I’m getting to the effect of “you don’t know what it’s like”. I’ll give you this story.
There was this woman who started to think every review I write contained coded messages to her. I mean, if I said “Bajirao and Mastani are the kind of lovers we all wish we could be”, she’d read it as “BR is saying that he and I should be that kind of lovers.”
I would get notes from her about these “interpretations” and all, and at point, she wanted to meet. She even found out my office address and sent a whole bunch of chocolate bars, after taking a bite out from each one of them. Like, I could see the crescent-shaped bite marks on the bars.
I am not judging her. She probably needs to talk to someone. But it causes me a lot of anxiety to know there is someone like this out there, especially that now — in the digital world — I am much more “available” than I was earlier.
So yes, I admit I do not (and will never) know what stalking is like from a girl/woman’s POV, but I face my share of it. I know this “phantom stalking” is not the same as actual, physical stalking, but still…
LikeLiked by 5 people
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@brangan Yes, that’s me.
Since my anonymity is broken, probably I should expect a Black Hand letter for this article.
Just kidding
LikeLike
gabrienkedrick
June 26, 2019
@vinjk
“I don’t fully agree with you here. People who prone to such violence will do it and seek out validation for their actions. You can’t blame their source of validation for the act.”
Individuals aren’t a closed system. For many years black Americans were afforded the roles of sidekicks and tokens. Even earlier than that, white actors performed in blackface, propagating harmful stereotypes. When I say harmful, I mean the collective disenfranchisement of an entire race that resulting in everything from rape to lynching to a perfect, complete system of oppression which took a bloody and humiliating civil rights movement to start moving the needle. Were the movies to blame? Yeah, since they were a mirror in that loop of “hey, these people don’t matter.” To deny that is…just wrong.
People who are racist were emboldened by these movies, but guess what? Most people were racist then. Why? Because that was the “norm”. That word is operative here. Unfortunately in a country like India, the way women are treated like property or second class citizens is still very much the norm, so this movie does nothing more than enforce that norm and that is why isn’t only a Rorschach test – because what you think is influenced by who you are around and what you grew up on, including film. That is the very nature of society.
To think Kabir SIngh and Arjun Reddy won’t have an effect on normalizing this behavior is idealistic and misinformed. And many women are reacting because it’s their safety that’s at stake. If you think this movie won’t have a direct damaging effect on women, then you’ve not been reading the news.
@brangan
I’m sorry you went through that experience. It really is terrible. I feel bad for the many Indian women, and men like you, who have to go through this. I hope this movie does not encourage more people to behave like this or continue the horrible acid attacks, physical stalking, and rape that tends to be an extension of this type of societal thinking, which is partly blamed on the sorts of films in the 80s/90s that normalized the behavior. Hopefully Kabir Singh won’t fall into that flaming heap of damaging cinema.
LikeLiked by 1 person
AK
June 26, 2019
I’m a Malaysian Tamil, and I find it strange how strong movie depictions can influence society at large in Tamilnadu; as we also watch the same set of movies here. Physical stalking has never been a major issue here; mostly it’s cat-calling and online-stalking. Physical stalking rarely happens here for couple of reasons : 1. the girls here will fight back, and people will mob and beat the guy 2. stalker will be warned by family/friends or will be reported to police 3. if the stalking continues, the stalker usually will get beaten (by girl’s side). So stalking is a dangerous act for the stalker himself. And in Malaysia, stalking cases reported are from both genders.
So I think, this is more of a cultural issue that need to be addressed, although the idea is perpetrated and aggravated by movie culture.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Tina
June 26, 2019
Well rangan sir, it is totally different from a woman’s POV where you are constantly objectified, by default considered as someone with no agency. And someone with agency is usually seen as a aggressive. Now imagine what this film is doing. Hammering these things onto stone. It takes ages for a man to slowly become sensitive. And all it takes is some macho filled crap to undo everything and how.
Like you say in #askBR, is it really charisma (and maybe fact that this guy is positioned as an educated ‘doctor’) that it doesn’t rile you as much as remo did? It should. Even though SK targets kids and this movie doesn’t.
The problem is not the movie. The problem is how successful it is. What does it say about us? People are surely not lapping it up for its amazing craft, but because it connects with them.
Now imagine you are a woman. And you live in this society that ‘connects’ with this movie. How afraid would you be? Will you still say its ok because the hero is charismatic and is educated?
Come-on, you totally understand that this is unfair right?
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
June 26, 2019
Tina:. I think you misunderstood my point about charisma. I said that the star charisma helps us buy these lout-ish characters, whereas with a less-charismatic actor, we might see them differently.
I am not saying I bought ARJUN REDDY only because of the charisma. I do think Sivakarthikeyan has his own charm, and YET I did not buy REMO at all.
I am saying I saw Preeti as not just some mute, meek thing without ANY agency — but as someone whose character liked this boy, and I use two instances from the film to explain this.
1) The part with AR says she looked at him in the eye when all the other girls were looking away
2) When he plonks down on her lap and instead of shrieking in disgust, she asks for a blanket.
Now, you may not LIKE that a girl does these things. But within the universe of the movie, THIS girl did these things and I was able to buy the fact that it wasn’t some one-sided thing like SETHU / TERE NAAM — even though I would have liked her character to have been fleshed out more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tina
June 26, 2019
Oh, also Taxi driver and all. Please. Are the societies the same? Rape rates, crime rates, etc.? I mean. Seriously? Its ok for an educated audience that can ‘filter’ to watch anything.
Can we? Do we? Iron rods inside a woman, blah blah? How easy is it to come across a situation like Arjun Reddy in any damn college in India? If yes, then what is the impact this shit will have.
This movie at best should be treated like porn. Not something that is societally celebrated.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tina
June 26, 2019
Oh BR. Sorry, I am actually a fan girl. Just this movie needs to be called out – it is not OK this movie gets remade and remade and remade. That’s just making money without conscience.
Sorry about the rant!
LikeLike
brangan
June 26, 2019
Tina: PLEASE do not apologise. That was not a rant at all. You have to say what you feel, just like Vineet had his say. So thanks for that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tina
June 26, 2019
The girl liked him. I concur with your reading. But that’s YOUR reading, no?
I will tell you what a lot of ‘unable to filter’ people will see – She asked for it. She wanted it. Therefore ALL girls like this kind of assholery, hell maybe even want it.
The girl never explicitly consents in the movie if I remember right. That you have to justify your reading is the problem. Not your reading, but how it will be read widely. Also, I have not watched Kabir singh, but I’ve watched Arjun reddy.
Thanks BR. I am sorry because I did write my comments in a moment of I-can’t see-why-you-can’t-see-it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madhav
June 26, 2019
Wonderful man!I totally agree with you..
LikeLike
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@gabrienkedrick
So what do you recommend we do with Kabir Singh/Arjun Reddy? Please state that too.
Everyone watches movies from their own life experiences. Movies are made by filmmakers from their own life experiences too. Art will, in general, be in-sync with the times and society it is being made in. We can’t expect every art to be norm-breaking.
Also, we have to see movies for what it is and not what we want it to be. I see AR as having scope for some alternate interpretation.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 26, 2019
@Vineeth – thank you for responding. Glad to meet a fellow Malayali here.
May I say I disagree, though?
We don’t see these concerns being raised when a movie glorifying a mafia don or street thugs or other anti-social elements is shown.
Yes, we do, if the movie glorifies a mafia don or a street thug or any anti-social element. Wasn’t Sanju called out for whitewashing a misogynistic, entitled brat of a man-child, who was being tried for anti-national activities?
Please have an open mind. If there is art, there will be interpretation. This is just one of many. It is not an endorsement of Arjun’s character or actions.
I am not objecting to your interpretation of the film. I’m objecting to the film glorifying abuse, deifying a misogynistic creep who embodies toxic masculinity. I’m objecting to a film like this being made today, when we are seeing more and more horrifying cases of stalking-gone-wrong – acid attacks, rapes, murders, etc.
It’s not right to say that films don’t have that much of an influence on society. Perhaps someone won’t turn to crime because of a film. Perhaps. But there have been copy-cat robberies and murders reported. Crime against women, especially violent crime against women is amplified today – many of them follow the ‘stalk a girl until she says she loves you’ trope that they see in films.
Visit the Remo thread and read the comments from women who work with that reality – as counsellors, as teachers, as students who have faced this behaviour, as women who brave this atrocious behaviour day in and day out. Films are the only exposure that many of these young men have to man-woman relationships. Do you honestly think they are not influenced by their idols?
Heck, look at the number of girls who want a Shahrukh Khan-type romantic lover. That’s the benign influence (though I’m sure the average guy will disagree it’s benign). Look at the young women who dream of a wedding like the Yash Chopra weddings, kids who jump from terraces mimicking Spider Man or Super Man; young men who smoke because their hero smokes on screen, who think that their hero’s bravado and machismo are exactly how a man should be…
You may not be influenced by films. I certainly am not; but a larger society is certainly influenced by it, in their dress, their manners, their behaviour.
I read the article you linked to; I certainly didn’t see the interpretations you put on it. I thought it a well-argued article on precisely the things that we women are afraid of – that a man who is attracted to us decides he can brand us as his property, behave atrociously, even abusively, and then eat his cake and have it too.
I would have had no issues with this film if it had showed the two protagonists as flawed – one, for being abusive; the other, for being a masochist. But no, Arjun Reddy glorified the man’s actions; it made a case for him being who and what and how he is, and rewarded in the end with the doe-eyed heroine. The film didn’t show her as being attracted to a certain type of guy; it just made her a non-entity, with no thought or agency of her own. Even in the end, she had to tell him, of course, that she had never let her husband touch so much as a nail. Because God forbid, she\d made her peace with that marriage, but walked out when she realised she was pregnant with Arjun’s child.
Unfortunately, the male gaze continues to write its women the way they want their women to be – sheep, with no agency of their own. Equally unfortunately, there were men in the cinema hall in which I watched this movie who whistled and shouted approval of Arjun’s treatment of Preeti. That is a scary thought for the women in their lives, and for society as a whole.
LikeLiked by 11 people
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Tina Thanks for your comment.
“This movie at best should be treated like porn. Not something that is societally celebrated.”
I am saying, I am mature to watch this “porn”. And don’t judge me for watching it and even liking it. Or even judge the filmmaker for making it. I don’t want movies banned thinking I won’t be able to handle it. I don’t want disclaimers all over my movie frames. And, I don’t want to be spoonfed by artists.
Also, I would like to add that I can clearly see why this movie is problematic for many people. But unfortunately, that’s the only opinion I see being published. I am just here to say, that’s not the only possible interpretation for AR/KS.
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Anu
Maybe we need to see the movie ‘Preeti Shetty’
LikeLike
Tina
June 26, 2019
Vineet – I understand that to an extent, what I am asking for is ‘dystopian’. But you also need to understand that the ‘average’ man you interact with and the ‘average’ man an ‘average’ woman interacts with are REALLY different and I mean it. My avg for instance = fn(gropers, flashers, stalkers, ‘assuming tacit to be consent’-ers, etc.)
I do not live in a perfect society. Why do you want me to behave like I live in one and give artistic freedom to reaffirm unacceptable thinking that will eventually boomerang to me?
Why can’t this release on a streaming platform? Why does this have to release again and again and again till we have entrenched the idea pan-India that assholery is cool?
I get it that movies are movies – good movies do not have to be morally right, etc.
But given our society, the context within which this movie is set (i.e. college like yours and mine) is problematic. It is only fair to ask that this was thought about before unleashing this ‘dude’ in India.
And in the bigger scheme of things, this movie is already a success. All I ask is for someone of BR’s stature and influence to be a bit more empathetic to the ground realities of publishing anything that even remotely defends this movie. Just agree that there is a really strong possibility that this movie can impact our society negatively. Just a caveat.
Don’t say this glorification is ok because this is art – your experiences in this society are so different from mine and I can’t even tell you the ways this movie will play in the heads of many indian men.
Like I said, I don’t live in a perfect society. I don’t even have qualms watching a movie like Arjun Reddy, it is but a movie. Hell, I can even appreciate it. But what after those 3 hours?
I have to breathe, socialise in this Indian society that has connected to this movie without a filter.
In an alternate reality, I am sure I am leaving comments praising this movie. But not today, not here.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Tina
June 26, 2019
Also Vineet. You’ve put your piece out there. I will judge it. Like how people can and will judge me for my comments. I totally judge the director. Making this movie once was for art. Every time after, its business. He is selling it. Period.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jai
June 26, 2019
@ Paras: “All I am saying is that its impossible that a good/matured/disciplined individual would one day suddenly get influenced negatively by a movie and start killing/raping/beating/stealing/abusing partner, etc”
and
@Vineet: “People who prone to such violence will do it and seek out validation for their actions. You can’t blame their source of validation for the act.”
I think these statements are only partially true, you seem to be focusing on extremes without addressing problematic/distasteful behavioural patterns — which may not fall under the traditional definition of “violence”, but are harassment, nevertheless.
First off, can you at least acknowledge that not everyone who watches such films is a “good/matured/disciplined” individual? For that matter, even otherwise “good” individuals can and do sometimes indulge in questionable/bullying behavioural patterns. Perhaps influenced by peer pressure, perhaps by some other situation.
You also ignore the fact that there is a stage in life when even the best natured people do have the tendency to rebel against norms and mores of ‘ideal’ behaviour. For the most part, this rebellion remains within reasonable bounds; but there are numerous instances when this does lead people astray. How often have we ourselves used or heard of words to the effect of “I can’t believe he/she did something like this, he/she is such a good/trustworthy person!!”
Like it or not, good/matured/disciplined standards of behaviour are sometimes flouted. What one’s peer group/ clique highlights as “cool” behaviour, can and does drive certain actions at a certain stage of life. Otherwise “reasonable” people can and do take steps influenced by what their role models portrayed as “acceptable” behaviour.
I am just saying— in a society where we are still shaking off the effects of gender bias, certain engendered elements of patriarchal dominance and sexism; this is yet one more portrayal of a male character indulging in the worst kind of behaviour and yet giving him excuses for this. As others have mentioned above already, there are going to be hundreds, perhaps thousands of minds out there, who would latch on to this “role model” for standards of acceptable (or at least excusable) behaviour towards the “object of their affections”.
And–just so we have this clear– I don’t think many people on this thread are asking for a ban on this film. Bans are futile, counterproductive and set a bad precedent. For that matter, even the Huffpost article which Vineet linked, does not ask for a ban at all. It says explicitly– “Kabir Singh could remain exactly the film that it is. Only if its leading man was shown as what he is—a sick man in need of immediate help. ”
This movie has a right to be put out there and to be judged by the viewers. Likewise, it’s important that people have the right to critique the problematic aspects of the film, its tacit excusing of some extremely coercive and bullying behaviour by the “hero”. This is the churn, the dialogue through which films as an art form evolve and ultimately (after several years, perhaps), stop dishing out the same sexist, misogynistic fare as before. I mean, at least today there are very less chances of getting a film like Benaam Badshah– where the heroine “decides” to convince her rapist to marry her, and reform him in the process. Who knows, a decade or two down the line, we could get movies like Arjun Reddy/Kabir Singh, highlighting the coercion and violence for what it is, and not encouraging viewers to root for him. 🙂
LikeLiked by 7 people
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Tina
I don’t see the movie as a glorification of misogyny. I felt the character Arjun had some kind of reformation. Also the character Preeti was not a victim. We differ in our opinion.
I just finished watching #AskBR. Brangan does a far better job of dissecting the character and sequences of the movie. Please see that.
Maybe there are people who hasn’t/can’t grasp these aspects in a movie. I don’t know…I speak for myself and also treat it as just a movie. The movie shouldn’t be penalized for dumbf*cks out there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
June 26, 2019
@ BR- Sorry to hear that you had to endure that stalking. This kind of behaviour is not acceptable, no matter the respective gender of the stalker/stalkee. I think that sense of disquiet and unease (at minimum) and crippling fear (in extreme cases) is something lot of people tend to underestimate.
It’s interesting, BTW, the double standards when it comes to cinematic portrayals of obsessive/stalker-ish behaviour by the male “protagonist” versus when the female “antagonist” does so.
3 examples I’d like to cite here.
Pyar Tune Kya Kiya– Urmila’s character is an obsessive stalker, who gets stoked by some (very) friendly banter from Fardeen’s character– (the banter incidentally, seemed a bit flirtatious, but hey, we’re shown Fardeen’s character is just like that!). She relentlessly pursues him, even after knowing he’s married and does not want to cheat on his wife. Conclusion of the film– Urmila’s character lands up in a lunatic asylum.
Kalaba Kaadhalan– Arya’s character has a sister in law who’s obsessively lusting after him and wants him to marry her, though he’s already happily married to her half sister and they’re expecting their first baby. In the hallowed tradition of many male characters in other films who have refused to take No as meaning NO, she also does the same. Unfortunately, unlike male leads who get rewarded for their obsession by “getting” the object of their desire, in this film Kanmani’s character gets brutally raped, is forced to marry the man who raped her, and then commits suicide. There is even a cringeworthy dialogue where, after she gets raped, she tells Arya’s character that she finally gives up her obsession to “have” him, since she is “no longer pure” and cannot expect Arya’s character to marry her. I mean– God help me. Mind you, this movie actually did well commercially.
Uyir : Sangeetha’s character is obsessed with her younger brother in law (Srikanth’s character), and at the end of the film, commits suicide since he refuses all her advances.
And yet, and yet, we still get movies like Arjun Reddy and Kabir Singh, where the male protagonist (!!!) goes around happily behaving like a peeing wolf, marking his ‘territory’, forcing his affections on the girl, and then getting her to reciprocate. At the end of Arjun Reddy, for crying out loud, we even have this proclamation by the heroine that she is still physically, only Arjun’s. As Anu pointed out above, Preethi’s character even declaims with dramatic sincerity, that she only let her husband (of a few days) touch her fingernail. Sigh.
I do think these double standards in portrayal are both symptomatic and problematic. And they need to be called out, till such time changes do come in and the normalisation stops. It will take time, but I’m hopeful in some years, unacceptable behaviour on screen for the “hero” will be shown to be as deplorable as it is for the on screen “female antagonist”.
LikeLiked by 7 people
brangan
June 26, 2019
Jai: That’s a great point you bring up, and it reminds me of how many women saw the Glenn Close character in FATAL ATTRACTION — as being “punished” for daring to break a marriage, where the man who cheated gets away.
LikeLike
vinjk
June 26, 2019
@Jai
“… can you at least acknowledge that not everyone who watches such films is a “good/matured/disciplined” individual? ”
I acknowledge this. But as I have mentioned before I don’t want to be penalised for some immature, crazy person. What you are proposing is to serve the world what is graspable to even the most immature, unstable among us. If some people can’t behave, throw them in jail, put them in an asylum,… The failure of our govt to maintain law and order shouldn’t be put law abiding, sane people (like me). I know the world is not ideal. But do you really need to discard whatever little freedom we have now?
“It’s interesting, BTW, the double standards when it comes to cinematic portrayals of obsessive/stalker-ish behaviour by the male “protagonist” versus when the female “antagonist” does so.”
I get your point. We are well aware that there is a disproportionate amount of male perspective in movies and in society itself. The women stalkers stories that you cite are written and directed my men I assume. I haven’t watched them. But those are not reasons to discredit this movie.
Ankur Pathak (HuffPost) writes “Kabir Singh could remain exactly the film that it is. Only if its leading man was shown as what he is—a sick man in need of immediate help.”
That’s not the movie Sandeep Vanga Reddy wants to make. That’s Ankur’s wish of how the story should have been.
LikeLike
Madan
June 26, 2019
Without watching either AR or KS, my view, irrespective of the subject matter of the film, is I cannot sympathise with any restrictions on free speech and no, that does not make a Men’s Rights Activist but call me that if you so please. HOWEVER, by the same token, all non violent means of registering opinion for and against the film will have to be tolerated as well. Argue with that feedback all you like but don’t be so defensive as to misconstrue it as an attack on free speech. Just as it is not acceptable to censor artistic content on socio political grounds, it is also not acceptable to censor the nature of critique. You cannot direct critics and other viewers to criticise the film only on artistic grounds. If they have qualms with the content itself, let them express it. You can of course say that their doing so is wrong but they will not agree with you and that’s how it goes. The actual freedom granted to a filmmaker or any other artist will be determined by whether there is any public fallout from such criticisms affecting the film or the reputation of the producers or publishers. This is obviously not nearly the case in India but it would appear that the Anglo American universe has gotten there. Whether that is a good or a bad thing is entirely dependent on your worldview.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Madan
June 26, 2019
When I say obviously not the case in India, I refer purely to depiction of misogyny in cinema. Clearly religion is a hot potato or rather THE hot potato for us.
LikeLike
Jai
June 26, 2019
@ Vineet- wrt “What you are proposing is to serve the world what is graspable to even the most immature, unstable among us. …. I know the world is not ideal. But do you really need to discard whatever little freedom we have now?””
No, not at all. I think I have been quite clear that I am not suggesting any ban on this film at all. All I am saying is — I see it as a very good (and in fact very necessary) thing, that viewers are calling out the extremely problematic aspects of the film. I feel the film does tacitly excuse the protagonists’s bullying and unacceptable behaviour, it does tacitly message that he is somebody to root for. I (and several others) are registering our strongly held disagreement with this stance. That’s all.
In fact, by voicing out our opinion, if anything, we are promoting freedom of expression, debate and discussion. Not stifling it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Isai
June 26, 2019
Jai, BR: While I don’t care for AR/KS and see them as problematic films, I don’t think the examples quoted by Jai, BR are appropriate for this discussion, because in all those 4 movies, the other person was married. We have had movies like Darr & Vaali, where an A list star like Ajith who is shown pursuing a married woman, is treated as a villain and ends up being killed. We have had many other movies like Aasai where the MALE harassing obsessively is treated as an antagonist and ends up being killed. We also have MANY movies like Mounam Pesiyadhe, Nenjinile, Aaru, Ayya, Arul, Mannan etc. where the FEMALE keeps pursuing the hero despite clear expression of his disinterest. And boy, they do end up being happily married.
In Fatal Attraction, the married man has an extra marital one night stand. This is vastly different from the obsessive stalking, verbal abuse, physical harm to the family etc. done by the woman after that ‘stand’. His wife is shown to be enraged after getting to know about the affair and does ask him to leave. Beyond that, what punishment would be commensurate for his ‘crime’ is highly subjective. I have seen married women comment in this blog that an extramarital affair is only a misdemeanor. Also, the movie itself serves as a warning to married men that what you, in a moment of weakness, think as only a casual fling, can come back to haunt you and your family.
We have had many movies, where a woman in love is shown to intimidate, abuse or even assault other women who dared to flirt or even speak with ‘her man’. This is considered as acceptable and is usually played up for laughs or is shown as part of a song (Ayan, Geetha Govindam etc.). I do understand that such issues are far more problematic for women in REAL LIFE but please don’t PROJECT these feelings to movies and accuse the industry of double standards.
LikeLike
Isai
June 26, 2019
“You cannot direct the critics and other viewers to criticise purely on artistic grounds” – Madan, I believe that the audience are fully entitled to voice their concerns and criticise the movie for any reason(s) that they deem fit. But, I think professional reviewers/writers do have an obligation to review the movie in its entirety. But many seem keen to dismiss/pull down the movie just because they are opposed to its idealogy. Both Padmaavat and Manikarnika do seem to espouse a right wing agenda with their portrayal of Non-hindu foreigners as barbarians. But, there is a huge difference in the making, engagement factor of these 2 movies. So, when a critic EQUALLY dismisses the above 2 movies without even delving into these aspects, just because they espouse an agenda that he abhors, then some people are pissed. That is why some people are defending this movie for its unfair treatment by CRITICS.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
June 26, 2019
@ Isai : You’re right, the film examples I referred to are not a perfect mirror image of what Arjun Reddy or Kabir Singh portray. Yes, I grant that in the examples I quoted, the person harassed/ obsessively pursued was shown to be married, which is not so in AR/KS.
However, we can keep shooting empirical examples at each other over days, but I think it would be fair to conclude that Indian cinema in general, has had a tendency to more often portray stalking/ harassing behavioural patterns favourably when done by the male protagonist, rather than the female one.
Of course, there are films which show the male antagonist doing this as well– which is usually shown as creepy/repulsive and the antagonist almost never “gets what he wants”, so to speak. The male protagonist displaying almost similar levels of pursuit, on the other hand, is portrayed as a “lovable rogue”/ “sincere lover”/ “lout with heart of gold” — (choose your euphemism).
While there are a few films which show borderline obsessive/unwelcome pursuit by the female protagonist, I think if you keep looking for enough examples, you would find that the instances of such pursuit being portrayed by the “hero” far outnumbers such portrayal from the “heroine”. By and large, depiction of obsessive stalking by females as shown in the movies, is portrayed negatively, as in a “female antagonist”.
Anyway- we can agree to disagree on several points. I am glad to note, however, that in your very first sentence, you said this: “While I don’t care for AR/KS and see them as problematic films…..”. We, therefore, seem to be in agreement on a very key point here, though we might differ on others. 🙂 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahul
June 26, 2019
Vinjk – “Also the character Preeti was not a victim” Jai has mentioned Benaam Badshaah here.
From wiki –
“Found in a garbage bin, abandoned by his biological parents, a young man grows up to be a paid assassin, kidnapper, and rapist (Anil Kapoor). One of his rape victims is Jyoti (Juhi Chawla), who is raped on the day of her marriage to a doctor groom. Her life ruined, unwed, she decides to convince her rapist to marry her, and goes to live in his neighborhood.”
Do you think Juhi’s character is a victim ? (this is in light of second last paragraph of your write up )
LikeLike
Sai Ashwin
June 26, 2019
Let me add what I think is a new point that hasn’t been talked here.
Recently I watched John Wick 3 in a theatre and there were cheers, claps and all kinds of stuff whenever John Wick killed/beat up/thrashed someone usually in pretty gruesome and violent ways. Somehow I felt uncomfortable during that, this is horrifying violence and the film glorifies it and the audience celebrates it. Not judging anyone but if something like that happens in real life, most of us would be horrified.
I think its similar with Arjun Reddy. If we met someone like that in real life, we would be disgusted and get the fuck away from him. But just like how I felt during John Wick, many people especially women might have felt during Arjun Reddy. The glorification gets completed only with the audience’s reaction to it.
I do not know what to think of it, please share what you guys think of this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
shemz
June 26, 2019
Obvious problems aside, I found AR a hypocrite. He chastises that guy who commented on the air hostess for objectifying women when that is exactly what he did by going to a class and telling the juniors that Preethi was his and that they were free to pursue other girls except her. He reduced the entire batch of women to objects.
He was ‘righteous’ enough to accept his crime of being drunk during his surgeries during the court hearing. He feels the medical profession and his patients deserve better. Yet he doesn’t realize his problems with anger management and doesn’t think he should work his problems out before, doesn’t think she deserves better.
That said, as much as I didn’t like the movie, I would not call a ban on it. As much as the makers have the right to create it and release it, I have the right to diss what it represents. It might be a movie worthy of various interpretations and I have a problem with one and I am voicing it.
LikeLike
shemz
June 26, 2019
@vinjk – just as the critics cannot assume immaturity on part of the viewers and you cannot assume maturity on part of the viewers either. I realize you speak only for yourself in the article.
But what is the worst that happens when someone assumes immature audience, you have to sit through or read through pieces that try to explain to you what’s wrong with the movie. I hate that too. I hate when I am infantalized. People assume I don’t know what I am doing on a daily basis and think it’s their life’s duty to set me right or teach me. But u know what, I am only irritated or annoyed by it. It’s not the end of the world.
But what is the worst that happens when makers assume maturity on part of the audience, most of whom could still be consuming it with zero filters? They try to emulate what they see on screen. May be he willl think the best way to start romance is to kiss the girl on the cheek when she barely knows him and stands as irresponsive as a log! I am no longer annoyed, I am now scared. I am not sure that could effectively ever be communicated unless one goes through with it.
LikeLike
shemz
June 26, 2019
The movie does a disservice to people suffering from addiction and mental health issues. It is implied that they could snap out of it, which isn’t true. AR isn’t shown seeking help for his addiction or anger management. Everything is suddenly peachy in the end.
LikeLike
Madan
June 26, 2019
” I think professional reviewers/writers do have an obligation to review the movie in its entirety.” – In a movie REVIEW, yes. The piece discussed in Vineet’s post is not a movie review. Took me a minute to check this. The writer Ankur Pathak clearly marks the ones he intends to be treated as reviews with the label ‘review’ in the title. This article on Kabir Singh was not marked as a review. He clearly therefore did not intend to review it but to specifically discuss the misogynist aspect of the movie. And he is entitled to do that once he makes it clear it is not a review. Also, while I agree that reviewers should review the movie in entirety, IF they do that but also devote a para or two to discuss such socio/political aspects, that cannot be censored. As long as they ARE reviewing the film, what all they put in the review is theirs to decide. There is no editorial integrity without this basic freedom and in such a case, the audience may well write reviews as they please in their own heads.
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
June 26, 2019
Brilliant write up Vineet! Agreed with you on so many points. Frankly, I am sick and tired of folks forever attacking artists and holding them up to a higher standard of ethics. This self – righteous censorship needs to stop. On the one hand you have rigid right wing Hindutva types calling for a ban on Padmavati and on the other , you have the woke liberal brigade attacking movies like AR/KS without the slightest regard for nuance or balance. The tragedy lies in how similar the extreme right and left is.
Most of the key points have been covered by Vineet but it really pisses me off that a salwar clad heroine (complete with dupatta) who is a little quiet and inclined to meekness is dismissed as having zero agency. Whereas a character like the one played by Taapsee in Manmarziyaan is supposed to be empowered and feminist approved just because she drinks, screams a lot and is horny. Not judging that character either but there are all kinds of women out there and it is stupid to assume that women need to behave in a certain kid of way to be considered liberated.
Returning to AR, the way I saw it, Preeti loves Arjun every bit as obsessively as he loves her. In fact, there is a scene where she admits to having sweaty sex with her lover to her Uber conservative folks. There is a certain quiet strength to this girl which was overlooked entirely by critics hell bent on reinforcing their woke credentials. People put up with a whole lot of shit when they are young, crazy and in love which is why the film with its searing honesty rings true for so many and went on to be a massive success. While I had tons of issues with AR, I still respect Vanga for his artistic vision and the rawness of his film. He reminds me of Selvaraghavan from his Thulluvatho Ilamai, Kadhal Kondaen and 7G days.
BR, horrified to hear about your experience. It does not become less grim simply because it is ‘phantom stalking’ as you called it and I don’t know why you felt the need to place it on a lower scale than the instances of stalking women experience. Bad behavior is bad behavior is bad behavior irrespective of gender and it always needs to be called out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 26, 2019
shemz: He chastises that guy who commented on the air hostess for objectifying women when that is exactly what he did by going to a class…
These are two separate phases of his life — with Preeti and without her. There is enough evidence in the film to suggest that after she left him he reconsidered a lot of things.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahul
June 26, 2019
BR. , to me it seems not just hypocrisy but zero level of self awareness. If I am doing something wrong for the major part of my life, and even if I reform, I am not going to chastise others for doing the same thing , but will think shamefully about my past. I have two theories about it.
1. The director wants to show a level of ironic distance from the portrayal of the character , and the moral compass of the film. It is as if, he is saying – see , this is your hero ? This is who I made you guys root for ?
2. The director wants to gloss over that part of his life.
In both cases, it does not say much about our Arjun Reddy saab.
LikeLiked by 1 person
shemz
June 26, 2019
BR: Yes they are two phases of his life, but what I saw on-screen was his dive into self-destruction and suffering, not reconsideration of his life choices. He does tell off that guy for his remark about the air hostess, but isn’t telling people off something he likes to do? He mocks his friend for being content with a clinic and not going for his masters like he did and he says to another friend that he doesn’t deserve love marriage. As much as I liked the scene with the friend’s brother-in-law, I didn’t find it an indication of personal growth or anything. It was also post-preethi, that he was ready to harass a girl at knife-point, he was desperately calling his friend so he could have a girl come home and he even goes to the extent of calling a student(?!) to come to a seminar at his house. As far as I remember, his telling that guy off felt like a stand-alone incident. But, it’s been some time since I watched the movie so may be I am not remembering all of it.
LikeLike
Eswar
June 26, 2019
I haven’t watched Arjun Reddy or it’s remake. So my views are based on the underlying principle rather than the interpretation of this movie.
“It’s just a film”:
Things around us affects us even if we are not consciously observing it. Priming, in Psychology, is a great example for this. One doesn’t even have to consciously absorb his surroundings. Mere presence of something in one’s environment can alter their behaviour.
“it is a work of fiction”: Couple of points here.
1. Our brain does not always differentiate ‘imagination’ from ‘reality’. At least when it comes to evoking emotions. I think it was the current Dalai Lama who explained the two ways we experience things. One is sensory perception. Other is through Concept. Sensory perception is the reality. Someone insults you, you perceive through your senses and it evokes anger. At a later point of time, you play this insult back in your mind. Now this is not reality. There is no sensory input. But just playing in mind conceptually will evoke the same emotion. You just think about it and feel angry. A well played imagination is sufficient for the brain to evoke the same emotion as if it were happening for real. Watching an intimate scene in a movie can make the viewer sexually excited. The brain reacts to the scene as if it is participating in it.
2. Humans have been listening to stories for thousands for years. From early humans listening to stories told around a fire to the modern day cinema hall. Only the medium has changed. The underlying theme, to narrate and to listen, has a long relationship with us. Across civilisations, people have grown up listening to myths. It may have inspired us, it may have destroyed us but there is always a story, fiction or not, that would have affected us.
3. Books and Movies, two mediums that I am familiar with, take great efforts to suspend the fact that these works are mere fiction. The detailing of the background, development of a character, the back story all makes us to invest in the story and its characters. These enable us to laugh, cry and cringe spontaneously.
One can be aware of the fact that this is fiction, before and after the experience. But during the experience, great works always make one forget that it’s fiction. This means it has already affected us.
Experiencing Cinema:
An art work does not attain it’s full meaning until an observer has experienced it. This means, a viewer’s own background and experience is as relevant as the intention of the art itself. Because a story affects me in a certain way it doesn’t necessarily mean it will affect other people in the same way. But this doesn’t make either of our experience is false. To instruct others about how a certain work needs to be experienced is being insensitive to the person they are. If we were in their shoes, then it is likely that our experience of this art would also also be like theirs.
Influence of Cinema:
If movie experiences are about individuals, then it’s influence also depends on the individual. While some people can consciously shun the influence of cinema, others may not even be aware that they are being influenced by cinema. Movies may not trigger someone to act in a certain way, but it can very well endorse one’s thoughts and actions. The source of the original thought can be anything, but movies could justify them. Could make the viewers believe that it’s okay to act in a certain way. One may have doubts about kissing a girl without her consent, but when they see such a scene being applauded and the girl eventually falling for the person, it could make the viewer believe it’s probably okay to do it. When one isn’t already aware how to behave with a woman, then they could very well believe this is the norm and this is what women want. A ‘No’ from a woman sounds like a ‘Yes’ to them.
If the general movie watching audience is not aware of the influence movies can have on them, then the makers, who stem out of this general audience, will also be not aware of the impact of their work. The solution is not banning these works but in creating an awareness among the viewers and the creators. The responsibility lies within the society. And the creators are part of the society. We cannot expect for a better society by freeing some of its members from their responsibilities.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Isai
June 26, 2019
Anuja, excellently written. Wow.
“The tragedy lies in how similar the extreme right and left is.” – Very true.
Some of these left extermists brand themselves as ‘Liberals’ and sanctimoniously repel any protests by right wing as an attack on freedom of expression, but when the same expression doesn’t suit their agenda, they try their best to protest and pull it down but conveniently call their protests as necessary for social enlightenment. After all, the masses are not as woke as them. Sadly, this is mistaken by many others as just superiority complex.
LikeLike
hari
June 26, 2019
vinjk thanks for the wonderful article and for bringing the movie Annayum Rasoolum. I just watched the movie in Netflix (liked it) and was wondering why there was not much noise about the stalking done by Fahadh’s character. IIRC for almost 30-40% of the movie he is just stalking Anna. And also for Anna’s character was also not shown to be strong or having her own thinking capacity. Now I kinda kinda understand why.
I read somewhere that why does the same crowd which liked Alia Bhatt’s character from Gully Boy (most of them thought it was cute) not like Arjun Reddy, aren’t both so obsessive about their SO? If a full movie is made out of Alia’s character showing her violent streak will that be accepted?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isai
June 26, 2019
Madan, I have not yet read the huffpost article. I saw the ASKBR video, and have read Vineet’s article and its comments. As I had mentioned in my comment, my opinion is about why some people have a problem with treatment of this movie by film critics. As I said “But many [film critics] seem keen to dismiss/pull down the movie just because they are opposed to its idealogy.” (I have written a more detailed comment about this on ASKBR article)
To illustrate, let us compare Rajeev Masand’s review which I suppose is the most watched review of this movie with the review by Atika Farooqui (of Colors Cineplex). This wonderful lady headlines her review as ‘Bad example for the youth but good cinema’ and mentions all problem areas of this movie. BUT, she also talks about the performances (both good and bad), dialogues, music, cinematography, making and how she perceives this movie as a whole. (This despite her review being slightly shorter than Rajeev’s.) Whereas Rajeev Masand doesn’t do any of this and seems to drill on this point ‘Shame on you if you even consider watching this movie, despite seeing this review’. YOU TELL ME if Rajeev’s review just ‘takes a para or two’ as you said or attacks this movie without slightest regard for nuance or balance, as said by Anuja.
And hey, nobody is censoring their opinion. They are just being called out for their bias.
It is okay if a cricket fan is ecstatic when his team shines and is silent otherwise. But, when a professional commentator does this, he will be called out for his bias. It cannot be excused as basic freedom or editorial integrity.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 27, 2019
Anuja, are you really equating writing thought pieces about what a piece of misogynistic crap Arjun Reddy is, with the self-righteous howling of women’s honour and Rajput Pride and the violence that accompanied the call for the ban of Padmavat?
Or are you saying that no one can critique a work of art because freedom of speech is being attacked? As far as I know, no one stopped Vanga from making his creative vision – twice. People disagreed with what they saw as his glorification of the male protagonist’s abusive behaviour. As is their right to do so. As far as I know, that is freedom of speech.
You claim Preeti is empowered because that’s how you interpreted her behaviour. Perhaps. But there is room for more than one interpretation, no? I definitely didn’t see her as empowered and that had nothing to do with her mode of dress or her meekness. I didn’t see an obsessive love; I saw a woman trapped in an abusive relationship, enabling her abuser because that’s her normal. This learned helplessness is what keeps women (and men) in abusive relationships because ‘s/he must really love me’. This is their definition of love, learned from, who else? Their abusers.
No one that I know of, who objects to the depiction of the female character in this film, thinks Preeti doesn’t have agency because she is a quiet, salwar-kameez wearing type. That is a rather disingenuous accusation. It’s not her mode of dress or her meekness that we object to; it’s her complete validation of the open abuse she’s made to go through.
For that matter, Taapsee Pannu’s character in Manmarziyan may have been a smoking, drinking, swearing, horny one, but no one said she was empowered because of that. Anurag Kashyap didn’t glorify the smoking/drinking/swearing/horny aspect. You see a vacillating, confused, complex character coming to terms with life. As you do with Vicky’s character – weak and confused and commitment-phobic, who comes into his own later. For the most part of the film, Taapsee comes off as quite unlikeable.
Off-hand musing (not related to Anuja’s post): I wonder if people would still react to this the same way if there was a [insert Hindi/Telugu villain of choice here] in this role instead of a charismatic Vijay or a baby-faced Shahid Kapoor in this role.
I remember being appalled at how stalking (and worse) was normalised in Darr only because a riding-high-on-his success SRK played the protagonist. Or how Anjaam ‘redeemed’ a murderous thug by making the woman he destroyed die with him in the end. And this was in the 90s. Two decades later, we are still arguing whether glorifying a stalker/abuser is artistic vision or as Tina put it, ‘making money without a conscience’. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Sutheesh Kumar
June 27, 2019
All of you breaking into hives about this poor girl falling for this lout, have you heard about Hybristophilia?
LikeLike
Sutheesh Kumar
June 27, 2019
Vanga has been trolling the feminists and the wokes right from the beginning. Watch the teasers of Arjun Reddy and you will understand.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
June 27, 2019
Although I agree with the premise of the article, I don’t buy this argument:
“Who are we to say who is right and wrong for a woman? Aren’t we exposing our patriarchal mindset by judging her for her choice? Women are completely capable of taking life decisions on their own.”
This way, we could give a clean chit to almost every film (regardless of how the characters are fleshed out). Or, imagine a film like Puthiya Paathai is made today. Would you still respect the heroine’s choice (to marry her own rapist)? Also, don’t you think women could be more patriarchal than men at times?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sutheesh Kumar
June 27, 2019
Say what you will of Vanga, he is a marketing genius, his promotions for AR were unconventional and provocative which garnered a lot of attention to their movie,Vijay being a game partner to this. Like they say even negative publicity is publicity, it leverages the polarization that it creates to their advantage business wise.
LikeLike
vinjk
June 27, 2019
@Rahul: “Her life ruined, unwed, she decides to convince her rapist to marry her, and goes to live in his neighborhood.” Do you think Juhi’s character is a victim ?”
@Honest Raj: “Or, imagine a film like Puthiya Paathai is made today. Would you still respect the heroine’s choice (to marry her own rapist)? ”
I haven’t seen the movies referred by Rahul and Honest Raj. From these statements, I’d say Juhi is a victim and Puthiya Paathai heroine’s choice will be respected but she is and was a victim.
In the AR, I don’t see Preeti as a victim of harassment or misogyny. Arjun has a reputation in college, for all I know she is knew what she wanted. Probably this is the difference between your reading AR and mine.
LikeLike
Madan
June 27, 2019
Isai: Respectfully, Rajeev Masand is a terrible reviewer with or without an SJW angle. I never understood how he got so popular in the first place. So you’re wasting energy in taking him to task for this when the larger question is why do such reviewers get popular anyway. I THINK in India we mistake emphasis for analysis because he is very good at biting down on consonants with excessive force.
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 27, 2019
@Rahul: “BR. , to me it seems not just hypocrisy but zero level of self awareness.”
Yes. I laughed at this scene. Here’s a guy who is a total dipshit sermonising to another. He lacks self-awareness. But I know people in college who were well-known harassers/gropers and who are now sermonising others on feminist values and admonishing people for sharing very very mild sexist funny videos. Probably they have changed like, I think, AR did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
vinjk
June 27, 2019
@To all readers:
An instance that I want to highlight about Arjun’s character is that he was wholeheartedly willing to get back with Preeti even if she were carrying another man’s child.
Does this come across as something an icon of toxic masculinity would say or do? I don’t think so. But probably people who have thought deeply about this issue could shed some light on this part of the film.
NB: I completely agree the ending of the movie was cop out by the director and Preeti’s dialogue about being “untouched” was cringeworthy. Leave that aside…(if you can)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahul
June 27, 2019
A few things.
In a movie, it is the writer who is making the choices for characters . They are not real people who are responsible and accountable for their actions. It is fair game to question the choices made.
If a female character is mentioned to have no agency – then it is a comment on the society – not a comment on the female character. The girl can be anything from meek to outspoken and still have zero agency when it comes to violation of consent \body etc. If you see it as demeaning to the woman then you are blaming the victim.
Vinjk, If Mr Reddy had changed as you seem to believe, there has to be self awareness. The fact that he has turned into a wisdom dispensing uncle , makes it less, not more likely that he has changed. Maybe after incessant drinking he cannot get it up (happened to Dev D in the Kashyap movie).
The most problematic statement that I see on this board is the claim by Vinjk that Preeti is not a victim of harassment. I think as far as sexual assault is concerned, we cannot hide behind reductivisms like Rorschach test and subjective interpretation – Vinjk I hope you agree with that. There is a legal definition of sexual assault .. Touching or kissing a person sexually without their consent IS sexual assault.
Why is it that we do not get to know about the impact of the assault on Preeti ? Why is it glossed over? The answer I am expecting is that the movie is about Arjun Reddy . This is not a real answer. Even if that is the case , why does the film gloss over Mr Reddy’s career as a sexual assaulter? His friends advice him to stop drinking – do they advice him to stop sexual assault at any time? At what point in his life does he decide to stop this behavior (if he indeed does) For his drinking he does get punished – his medical license gets cancelled. Does he ever face any blow back on account of being a sexual assaulter?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahul
June 27, 2019
The numbering seems to get lost when I post my replies. Apologies, I would have formatted it better if I remembered that.
LikeLike
Sutheesh Kumar
June 27, 2019
LikeLike
Vidya Ramesh
June 27, 2019
Well written vineet! I wanted to say this I’m glad you said it. If I liked the movie it doesn’t mean I liked the hero or idolise him in some way. I liked the Ted Bundy documentary.. Doesn’t mean I like getting murdered! A lot of critics were implying that if we as viewers watched the movie and like it that we were somehow ok with such men and will tolerate that in real life.. Eh no? It just means that I engaged with this movie just like I engage with many other movies all gangster movies for instance. Nobody makes a movie about a woke venkatasubramaniam who tallies his accounts everyday and goes home and plays with his kids everyday because it’s boring and no one will watch that!
I also don’t buy the argument that movies like this influence boys to behave a certain way. Male behavior is a product of years of conditioning and misogyny ingrained deep into the psyche. I studied medicine in a govt hospital.. Do you know that the bribe you have to pay the hospital ward boy to take your baby home is lesser if it’s a girl because they feel” bad” For you? It starts there. Every day the boy is shown that he is entitled to a lot more than his behavior demands Even as a toddler.. Families are just happy a boy is born and you blame movies for misogyny? Hell look at your own grandma and our own families. Iam from a middle class ,educated family and I vividly remember getting into physical fight with a male cousin when I was 8 and going to my grandma and telling her that he hit me.. She just said yes he is a boy and boys will hit , you be nice to him.
I have another point about toxic masculinity.. Is it a problem only if it is that “toxic”? Like when he says befriend a fat girl she will stay with you.. Isn’t that what ALL our heros / movies imply? Most heroines have a not so good looking girl friend no? How many movies have a hero’s friend who makes fun of fat girls and ” Ugly” Girls. Is that ok beacause that is soft masculinity and not so toxic? Atleast this movie shows him up as an ass hole.. Most of our main stream heroes are in fact – assholes .you just don’t see it because they don’t drink themselves silly and almost die and are willing to fuck a lamppost in the agony of wanting the object of their affection. The ” Hero ” Here is obviously unlikable but is definitely watchable. Don’t blame the movies for male behavior..it is your grandmas fault.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jai
June 27, 2019
@ Vineet – In regard to your last comment above, “”An instance that I want to highlight about Arjun’s character is that he was wholeheartedly willing to get back with Preeti even if she were carrying another man’s child.
Does this come across as something an icon of toxic masculinity would say or do?””
See, this is where one’s interpretation of the character comes in, the Rorschach test as you titled it. There is no “one size fits all” to define a person with features of toxic masculinity. Even the worst sort of boorish cad may have some redemptive features, right? Isn’t that how characters work in real life? No one is a 100% evil or a 100% good. Besides, this point itself becomes meaningless when Preeti promptly clarifies that the baby she is carrying is theirs, she hadn’t even had sex with her husband.
Arjun at several instances in the movie, comes across as displaying a rather hypocritical trait of “Don’t do as I do, Do as I say”. The fact that he expresses his willingness to get back with Preeti even if she is pregnant with another man’s child, goes only so far and no more. Saying something is not really meaning it, or actually exercising that parenting role responsibly. The film doesn’t bother to show us this arc, but personally, I find it really hard to believe, that Arjun would go on to be a responsible or caring parent to (this hypothetical) adoptive/non-biological child of his. Especially, if and when he had his own biological child(ren) with Preeti. He is just too much of a narcissist for that. Anyway, this arc is never explored, so it is tough to argue about a fictional hypothetical within a fictional setting. 🙂
What matters is the overall pattern of behaviour, what one sees as the dominant arc in that person’s conduct. I differ from you in feeling that just because Arjun Reddy/ Kabir Singh weeps and bemoans, pines for his ex-GF and wallows in misery, he does not “fit” the “archetype” of toxic masculinity. This may be my interpretation, but the way he goes about exerting unbridled aggression, violence, and frankly, an appalling level of bullying behaviour, very much qualifies him in the toxic category. As someone else commented above, had any of us met such a person in real life, there would (mostly) be a queue of people jostling to get the hell away from such a person.
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 27, 2019
Came across this review of Kabir Singh by Shubra Gupta in the Indian Express
https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/movie-review/kabir-singh-movie-review-rating-shahid-kapoor-5791976/
Seems “A lot of this has been lost in translation, and the Hindi version, with Shahid Kapoor in the lead, is the poorer for it.”
LikeLike
Thupparivaalan
June 27, 2019
I think the key point in AR was the consent of Preeti. The first time Arjun kisses her she doesn’t make her consent clear. She neither says ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. Infact we are unable to make out her feelings at any point till she shows off her hand to a friend. And after that the film makes it clear that she wants to be in the relationship. She moves in, kisses him, and makes it clear that she wants to be with him. Now are the choices she makes Bad and Stupid? Maybe, but there are people who make stupid choices to be with people who are toxic.
If that is made clear now comes the next part, does the film/screenplay force or coerce Preeti to take any decision? Does it show her capable of stating her opinions/taking an decision when she wants to and not be a sitting duck? Yes. She states about the sex she had with Arjun to her whole family. Forget that, she comes onto the road outside her house (People don’t understand how big a deal this!) and pleads with Arjun to come back. Now, anyone who is in India knows how big of a deal it is to go after a man being a woman in front of your neighbor’s house. In a world where women are judged for even looking straight and walking Preeti doesn’t give a fuck and goes after him. Now is it a tragedy that she goes after Arjun Reddy a entitled asshole? maybe. But, things don’t always go right. People fall in love with the wrong people and shit happens.
Now after that painful incident in Arjun’s house, she goes back and takes a decision to go through with the marriage. She takes the decision to do that. Not because her family had forced her to. When the marriage didn’t work out she comes out lives alone with a granny, which is again her decision. So, she does have agency.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Jai
June 27, 2019
@ Anuja, I really do feel your comment has a number of false equivalences and incorrect assumptions woven through it.
Anu has already replied to several points in a very lucid manner, but I would like to add my two cents if I may.
First off, I just don’t get this urge to bracket any opposition/criticism to a film as “right wing Hindutva types” or “woke liberal brigade”. Indian society at large is too vast and complex to be capable of such reductive labelling. Just a snapshot from this thread, Vineet has clarified that he considers himself a liberal, but has an overall favourable view of the movie. I personally have a right of centre position politically, but I feel this film’s messaging is problematic in the extreme.
Also, drawing a parallel between the protests against Padmaavat to the criticism of Kabir Singh is quite baseless. The former had all these loonies engaging in public brawling, violence and anarchy, even stoning a bus carrying children! The latter merely has people criticising though written/spoken word, what they see as the film’s excusing of the protagonists’ appalling behaviour. Now, if one starts feeling that people should not exercise their right of speech to criticise a film, then I think that’s being quite regressive.
Secondly, I do think you have missed the point of the criticism by miles, if you feel that “the salwar clad heroine (complete with dupatta) who is a little quiet and inclined to meekness is dismissed as having zero agency”. That’s really inaccurate. No matter how Preeti is shown dressing in the film, the way Arjun proprietarily declares her as “his territory” without even ascertaining her interest, is nauseating. Not to mention the coercive way he initiates their first kiss, etc. You may feel that she was a willing participant later on, that might well be true. But if you really feel that the beginning arc of their relationship is wholesome and is not based on dubious/forced consent, then we have a fundamentally different way we have understood the film.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Vidya Ramesh
June 27, 2019
I am so sorry BR that you went through that phantom stalker.. She clearly has erotomaniac delusions and needs help. Also what kind of a psycho would bite off a piece of chocolate and give it to someone else..i can’t even do that with my kid.. Will eat the bar if I can.
Ps I’m sorry i made a joke about the chocolate.. I know it was traumatic but That was the first thought that came to my head:).. I need help.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
June 27, 2019
Also, @ Anuja, Apropos this sentence in your comment: “People put up with a whole lot of shit when they are young, crazy and in love”.
I agree, and this is very true of the portrayal of, say, Rani’s character in Yuva. She loves Abhishek’s character despite the fact that he is hired goon, has a violent streak and is thoroughly amoral. Her choice, her freedom.
If you compare Rani’s character to the ‘Preeti’ portrayal in Arjun Reddy, I think one key difference which stands out is, that Arjun is shown to be initiating the romance with Preeti in a pretty coercive manner. Her consent is very dubious to start with, to say the least.
Whereas in the case of Rani’s character in Yuva, the first time we see her, Abhishek is coaxing her to leave her father’s home and come with him. Her father is objecting, urging her not to leave with this goon. Neither of them forces her, not overtly at least. She makes her choice (one can argue, an ultimately very poor choice, but hey, that’s hers to make). I did not see Arjun giving a similar choice to Preeti when he declared she was his ‘property’, nor when he first kissed her. Therein, IMHO at least, lies a key difference.
LikeLike
Isai
June 27, 2019
Madan: “Rajeev Masand is a terrible reviewer.. So you’re wasting energy in taking him to task for this..”
I may think Shahid is a lousy actor and well who knew Sandeep Vanga, but I cannot use that as a reason and say that people should not waste their energy in taking this movie to task. The movie is being widely watched and when some people find it problematic, they are going to voice out. SIMILARLY, for the review. AND I don’t think Rajeev is an exception. Even other popular publications like Hindustan Times, Film Companion (Rahul Desai) don’t show the balance or nuance as pointed out by Anuja. On top of this, there are MANY articles being published that denounce this movie. But, I am not able see ANY article published by a well known media outlet that even asks for this balance (leave alone wholeheartedly defending this movie). That is why some people feel that they are being manipulated.
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
June 27, 2019
‘Anuja, are you really equating writing thought pieces about what a piece of misogynistic crap Arjun Reddy is, with the self-righteous howling of women’s honour and Rajput Pride and the violence that accompanied the call for the ban of Padmavat?’
Any Warrior: That is exactly what I am doing. The mindset of those who force their opinions on others irrespective of their motives or ideology tends to be similar. Take domestic abuse/violence. Is there such a big difference between the man who beats up his wife and the genteel type who may not raise a hand but is content to belittle his wife constantly or calling her a pox addled whore for showing a hint of midriff while mopping the floor? Both are forms of abuse and both do a lot of damage. Hindutva hoodlums are obvious when it comes to intent. But many social justice warriors are bullies too who have no qualms about hollering their contempt for you from the rooftops if you dare to disagree with their exalted viewpoints. Calling out something you see as problematic is perfectly fine but condemning those who don’t see it the same way as being symptomatic of the bigger issue is just plain ridiculous. I understand that some folks hate AR (my mum was horrified by it though she likes Vijay) but many of us consider it engrossing cinema and it is unfair to dismiss us as jerks who are flag bearers for toxic masculinity.
Getting back to AR itself, we are free to interpret the Preethi character as we see fit but I definitely think her attire and overall demeanor was definitely a factor which led to people seeing her as lacking agency. It is pretty much the equivalent of assuming that a feminist can’t be into S &M or that a village Belle who actually likes keeping house and doting on her husband and thinks nothing of massaging his feet or a burka wearing femme who is a devout Muslim has been brainwashed into being subservient. That judgemental, condescending, one size fits all attitude is just not something I can endorse.
As for Taapsee in Manmarziyaan, there was a lot written about how her character was a step forward for feminism because she normalizes traditionally male behavior on screen for women. I have no issues with drinking or smoking (in moderation) but let us not elevate bad habits to something one should do in order to enhance coolth value and boost Tasmac and tobacco sales shall we? And what next? Drop trou and pee on the road because that is normal behavior for a man and unacceptable behavior for women which makes it somehow the empowered thing to do?
I’ll admit the last line is extreme but when we insist on viewing everything through the gender lens and a predetermined faux woke narrative, proper perspective gets screwed along with sense and sensibility.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anuja Chandramouli
June 27, 2019
On a related note, was I the only one bothered by the fact that Alia Bhatt’s character smashed a bottle on a rival’s head in Gully Boy? I mean if it were a guy who did that we would have been up in arms but since Alia is cute, talented and fiesty her unacceptable behavior somehow becomes acceptable or not worthy of censure… As I said earlier, bad behavior is bad behavior is bad behavior irrespective of gender and we tend to get so bogged down and preoccupied with gender related issues we have made it the norm to miss the forest for the trees, which is a pity.
LikeLiked by 3 people
srikrishna1353
June 27, 2019
@BR, Its Nice to see many movie lovers all together here. Glad to read all different opinions.
Yes, Arjun has two stages in his life. Before preeti and after preeti. But what the main problem is sandeep showed all his anger management issues in a glorifying way and left the key point (where he goes back for preeti) loosely. And he finally became matured to a level to accept preeti with that child. But there is not enough convection for that scene. He saw her in park and then he went to talk to her. Is there any scene where we can realize he becoming matured. Did he made any move towards her. He just waited and became addicted to alcohol and emotionless sex. Sandeep just picked him as a guy who has anger management issues, but is there any single scene/shot where he tries to realize his anger management problem and how he creating problems with that. Sandeep shown that his anger management issues in a glorifying way rather than showing it is a problem. And many people asking there are many gangster movies like satya , Did people changed to gangster?.It shows what happen to satya in the end. Gangster characters are more non relatable characters and also we well known about what will happen to them in reality and about laws. we don’t connect with the gangster character until and unless they show some evidences of they became gangster unexpectedly or due to situations around them. But here film shows the anger management issues in a heroic way and arjun is a more relatable character as a student. There is no laws for that to control any one on how to behave.If we found any arjun character in real life I am not sure how many people will support him like shiva (Arjun’s friend in movie) all his life even if he continuously behaving rudely with him. Agreed, it is a movie. One will take movie how he wants. But I can say more or less it shows some effect on people’s(particularly for teenagers, college students) consciously or subconsciously.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 27, 2019
Anuja, my response to your Alia comment first – yes, it was problematic. She was shown to be a complex, problematic angry kid who’s rebelling against the repressive atmosphere at home. Who said that what she did was right? The movie certainly didn’t. She’s called out for that behaviour, she faces the consequences Including being charged with assault (Kalki’s character withdraws the charges later) Ranveer’s character even breaks up with her after that.
No one, at least no one I read/watched said that behaviour was acceptable.
Yes, there are people like her and like Arjun Reddy, but only one of them faces the consequences of her action.
As for the rest: on Padmavat where you were castigating SLB for the jauhar scene, you wrote: …if SLB sees fits to showcase his prejudices in his movie, that’s his call. And if he gets called out for the same, he has only himself to blame.
and
When it comes to art people must have absolute freedom, even if it is to portray stalkers or a sensitive issue like rape however they see fit. And those who have issues with such portrayals are free to express their revulsion.
[Emphasis mine.]
Your absolute freedom for art stance hasn’t changed, but it appears that people expressing their revulsion for something shown, or calling it out is now a no-no.
As another poster said, feeling judged or condescended to for liking Arjun Reddy may be irritating and annoying for a while, but when someone emulates that behaviour (and sure as hell they will), then there are women who will be scared. That’s the difference. Jai and Rahul have also responded to your false equivalency, so I will desist from writing another vishesh tippani. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Arjun
June 27, 2019
I’ve always maintained that freedom of speech is a sham since most of its champions have feet of clay. They run with their tails between their legs at the slightest threat of violence and most of them remain silent spectators if not cheerleaders when artistic expression or speech they disagree with is clamped down upon. Take for instance this recent case in the UK where ads that supposedly “propagate gender stereotypes” have been banned. What is this if not an outright assault on artistic freedom and expression. Yet see the matter of fact, if not mildly celebratory manner NYT reports this
Same is true of other liberal media outlets. No concern about FOE, no editorials expressing concern…. What’s more, I’m sure many liberal commenters here would also welcome this. They’d also probably celebrate if the censor board tomorrow banned movies that depict stalking.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
June 27, 2019
“AND I don’t think Rajeev is an exception. Even other popular publications like Hindustan Times, Film Companion (Rahul Desai) don’t show the balance or nuance as pointed out by Anuja. ” – So this is precisely my point. I read the HT, Firstpost, IE reviews among other publications. Masand alone has gone to the extent of saying shame on you for liking this film. Other reviewers skewered the film for its alleged misogyny but again, they have the right to do that. As long as they also touch upon the technical/performance aspects also of the film, you cannot quarrel with the weightage they give to all of these in forming their perception. They have the freedom to do so. If you start questioning that, might as well write your own review in your head than read those of others. Because…
“And hey, nobody is censoring their opinion. They are just being called out for their bias.” – But all reviews are inherently biased. I don’t know what anybody who makes this complaint of reviews really expects from them anyway. All you are saying is you don’t like THEIR particular bias whereas if another reviewer pandered to YOUR biases, you would tolerate it. Shrugs That can’t be helped. Neither is it new nor particular to liberal reviewers.
Speaking of which, my point in bringing up how terrible Masand’s reviews are is, contrary to your claim, he is the only one he went that far in slamming the film as to shame the people who watch it. So as a representative example, he fails completely. He is NOT representative of general English language reviews of this film (in fact, Midday gave it four stars). As a standalone example, yes what he did is problematic but that would be like saying say Atif was an Islamic fundamentalist that that is the only problematic thing with his singing (as opposed to his struggles to stay in tune).
LikeLiked by 3 people
Madan
June 27, 2019
“I’ve always maintained that freedom of speech is a sham since most of its champions have feet of clay.” – I would disagree and say that liberals did fight the good fight for many, many years and that it was safer under the custody of the Kennedys (as an example). Somewhere with the advent of Clinton and Blair, they started using political correctness and identity politics as a mask to conceal the fact that their economic agenda was suspiciously similar to the conservatives/Republicans and therein lay the roots of today’s selective freedom norms. It has now of course come to the point that many liberals, including some in India, accept as a truism the statement that “some opinions are dangerous”. How is that NOT thought control? Unless you act on such an opinion, how is holding it in your head or even voicing it politely ever dangerous? Not that that justifies “Jews won’t replace us”, mind you. It’s like the right is perpetually looking for a suitable alibi via a folly of the left to push things to dangerous extremes. Again, just a grand charade to cover up the abject failure of economic policy since the meltdown, Brexit being the most dangerous and treacherous gambit in this game.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuja Chandramouli
June 27, 2019
‘First off, I just don’t get this urge to bracket any opposition/criticism to a film as “right wing Hindutva types” or “woke liberal brigade”. Indian society at large is too vast and complex to be capable of such reductive labelling.’
Jai, I agree but to clarify I was referring solely to the extremists in both factions.
‘Your absolute freedom for art stance hasn’t changed, but it appears that people expressing their revulsion for something shown, or calling it out is now a no-no.’
Anu Warrior: Not really. I am all for FOE. People have the right to express their dislike for a work of art of course. As I have the right to call them out for a lack of balance or perspective especially when it extends to scathing condemnation of those who happened to like said work of art. It is the judgemental my shit don’t drink tone that sticks in the crawl. At the risk of getting called out for false equivalence, I think it is akin to getting mad at someone for choosing pistachio flavored ice cream over Belgian chocolate. Sometimes preferences have little to do with principles people!
‘She’s called out for that behaviour, she faces the consequences Including being charged with assault (Kalki’s character withdraws the charges later) Ranveer’s character even breaks up with her after that.’
Kalki is the second character she attacks physically and Ranveer breaks up with her only because Kalki is integral to the furtherance of his career. The first time she attacks a rival, Ranveer calls her a hell raiser (or something like that, in Hindi) and it is all cutesy and lovey dovey. So yeah, that character was definitely problematic for me IMO but to the best of my knowledge, critics raved about this character and Alia’s performance. This in my book qualifies as double standards since AR was also a complicated character with anger management issues.
‘As another poster said, feeling judged or condescended to for liking Arjun Reddy may be irritating and annoying for a while, but when someone emulates that behaviour (and sure as hell they will), then there are women who will be scared. That’s the difference.’
I am sorry but you are passing off your personal opinion as irrefutable scientific fact. Curtailing violence against women is going to be a painstakingly complicated process and censoring movies is too simplistic a measure to make a tangible difference. Art imitates life and life imitates art. But it is not enough to call for change in the artistic sphere without bothering to change ourselves first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 27, 2019
Curtailing violence against women is going to be a painstakingly complicated process and censoring movies is too simplistic a measure to make a tangible difference.
Again, who here is talking of censoring movies? Not me. Not Jai. Not anyone who’s disagreed with the characterisation.
People have the right to express their dislike for a work of art of course. As I have the right to call them out for a lack of balance or perspective especially when it extends to scathing condemnation of those who happened to like said work of art.
And anyone who reads that opinion has a right to call you out for your lack of balance or perspective and your scathing condemnation of everyone who disagrees with you. 🙂
That we are having this discussion at all, and civilly at that, is proof that liberal/conservative/or in-between, we all value freedom of expression. Disagreement and dissent is important in a free society. And I think you and I and quite a few others agree that we absolutely defend our own perspective, and still agree to disagree. In today’s times, I’ll take that!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Spandana Vaidyula
June 27, 2019
The argument that Preeti is crazy enough to want AR fails for me because apparently female agency exists in our films only when it comes to self destructive decisions. Something similar happens with Leela in KV. She had this delusions about VC. Though that movie portrays her journey from being naive enough to fall for VC and gradually understanding that the hero in her head is far removed from her abusive partner, the happy ending is such a cop out. Of course there are plenty of abuse victims who for a plethora of understandable reasons can not or will not leave their partners, but if all you know about partner abuse is from what you see in our films, apparently all women (due to their own personal demons) would willingly put up with violent partners without any resistance whatsoever. Simply because there is no evidence in mainstream cinema for the contrary. Where are those movies where victims actively attempt to escape abuse, both for themselves and if any, their children? Whether they succeed or fail is a different story altogether. What I’m asking for is for victims who are at least aware of their abusive situation with their priority being safety of themselves and not reforming their partner. Without a spectrum of portrayal of abuse survivors in mainstream cinema, it is hard to digest the nut job Preeti because that’s all we have.
Alia’s character’s violent behaviour in Gully Boy is nothing to be excused. But I think the reason her character did not receive similar flak is that her aggression is not a norm. I’m not saying that female abusers do not exist, but that is not a behaviour that is encouraged or glorified in media or society. The situation of male abuse victims is (though sadly comically, but still) rightfully portrayed in movies as something that they should want to break from unlike female victims which I spoke about above. The converse is not true in a culture where male aggression is celebrated. Where men pursuing women is romantic, but women pursuing men is pathetic.
In a comment Shabana asked why should happy endings be discouraged in the name of gender politics. The answer is that happy endings are rarely the norm. Statistics show that relapse is far more likely than reform among abusive partners. And there is 30-60% likelihood that abusive partners end up harming their children as well.
Speaking of AR and Preeti’s fictional child, I can’t be the only one worried for the poor kid’s well-being right? Could you imagine having BOTH those nut cases as parents? Jeez!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ramit
June 27, 2019
There was a huge applause in the cinema hall when Alia’s character smashes bottle on Kalki’s head.
LikeLike
Isai
June 28, 2019
“As long as they also touch upon the technical/performance aspects also of the film, you cannot quarrel with the weightage they give to all of these in forming their perception.”
The problem is not about weightage or perception. It is about COVERAGE. The problem is they BARELY touch upon the technical/performance aspects. When they allocate 80-90% of their words in their REVIEW to talking about only one aspect of this movie, say cinematography, then I find it odd. But when that aspect is something non-intrinsic to the movie like say ideology or impact of that movie on society etc., I find it unfair. If a critic had reviewed the mallu movie Oru Mexican Aparatha and spent 80-90% of his time/space in denouncing communism in kerala and student unions, I would have felt the same way as I do for this movie. Similarly for birth of a nation and racism. It is a bit like going to a movie and seeing many “Thanks to” cards being shown for 2+ hours and the actual movie is only 14 minutes.
“But all reviews are inherently biased…All you are saying is you don’t like THEIR particular bias whereas if another reviewer pandered to YOUR biases, you would tolerate it.”
Bias is defined as an inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair. I don’t think all reviews are inherently BIASED. They are SUBJECTIVE. I hope the difference is clear.
“He is NOT representative of general English language reviews of this film.” – When did I say he is? I am sorry but I don’t agree with your view that he was the only one who went too far in his criticism. I just watched Suchitra Tyagi (FC video) and re-read the HT, FC articles and still feel that they took only a para or utmost two to talk about the technical/performance aspects of the movie and squandered the remaining space/time lobbying against the movie.
My original comment was not meant as a rebuttal to your comment. It was just an explanation for why someone like me, who sees this movie as problematic, may still defend its right to exist, against a section of media which seem to want to bomb it out of existence.
LikeLike
Isai
June 28, 2019
“I definitely think her attire and overall demeanor was definitely a factor which led to people seeing her as lacking agency. It is pretty much the equivalent of assuming that a feminist can’t be into S &M”
(For those who don’t know:) Rahul Desai, who is a colleague of BR in FC, wrote this in his FC review:
“As a senior at a Delhi medical college, his eyes fall upon the docile “white Salwar-kurta types,” Preethi”. Can someone tell me what he means by white Salwar-kurta types?
“He gets a kick out of exploiting her virginal meekness.” What is virginal meekness? A man uses words like these in real life, nobody is bothered.. but when a movie shows an asshole stumbling upon a happy ending after showing an hour full of his miseries, people want to bomb it out of theatres.
A lot of people say that they felt uncomfortable seeing how this movie is being received by a section of the audience in the theatre. Unfortunately, this is how a section of our society is..even today. Taking it out on this movie seems to serve as an easy outlet for venting out their frustration.
I don’t think this movie’s tamil remake is going to be THIS successful irrespective of how well-made it turns out to be, because…. there aren’t many really/ferociously militant castes in Tamil Nadu.
LikeLike
vinjk
June 28, 2019
@Isai
“A man uses words like these in real life, nobody is bothered.. but when a movie shows an asshole stumbling upon a happy ending after showing an hour full of his miseries, people want to bomb it out of theatres.”
I felt this hypocrisy in the original Huffpost article too though it was this obvious (“Kabir Singh could remain exactly the film that it is. Only if its leading man was shown as what he is—a sick man in need of immediate help.”).
Many woke liberals want to be identified as one can’t tolerate a piece of work which goes against their thinking. They cry hoarse saying “this is our freedom of expression, we will air our disagreement with the work”. That’s fine. But at some point in the debate, they all express their incredulity and disgust that such a movie was made and is being shown in theatres in the first place (“in a post-#MeToo era”). Given a chance, I think, they would have banned the movie.
No wonder, inspite of many different govts coming along we still have a censor board. Even the liberals of this country don’t have the conviction o integrity to stand for ideology. So, who are the govts (even willing ones) trying to please by dismantling the censor board?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
June 28, 2019
@Isai : Oh, so media seems to want to bomb the movie out of its existence? So in short this is really about you feeling threatened by their exercising their free speech. Added to that is the factor that you still ascribe to the media their old power of making or breaking a film and fear they will unfair skewer a good film. None of that has happened. The film is doing great business at the BO. If anything has dented its business, it’s the World Cup, not critics. And this is not a one off. Even a film like Badla that one would have expected the woke set to take to, they disliked but the audience liked it and it went well over 100 cr with just Amitabh and Tapsee Pannu in the cast. So it’s not about what they are saying, it’s about the power you fear the English language media wields. Which they don’t anymore and haven’t for a few years now but you have not adjusted to this reality and there are others like you.
LikeLike
Apu
June 28, 2019
This has been a great discussion.
I have not seen nor intend to see the movie, for the sole reason that I cringed at the trailer, the songs and the comments of folks on youtube who thought it “cute” on Shahid’s (yes, they called him cute, not the character) part when he beats up a guy for playing Holi with Preeti or asks her to come out of anatomy class. It is through their remarks that I came to know that the next “class” would be of the upper torso. I felt nauseated.
I agree Vinit – no one should ban a movie. Movies have a right to be made. Liking a movie does not mean you like the protagonist etc.
But, as said by rsylviana: It is probably your privilege that you can separate art from reality. Because probably it is not your reality. You might not be emulating movies. You might think no one else does. But probably you have not been in my boots when I have walked past “eve teasers” (more correctly harassers) who sing the latest item song with double meaning thinking that it is fun for me to hear them do it. And this is one of the lesser harms.
For those who have either faced it, or seen others facing it, we cannot ignore or separate art from reality or be idealistic about it. This applies to misogyny, racism, casteism and many other atrocious behavior against someone whom I might empathize with.
Anu, Jai, Rahul, Tina and many others: thanks for echoing my thoughts. From the time I had seen the trailer, it has been painful for me to read comments and wonder how warped our thinking can be if we consider AR cute. At least, some people are calling that out.
LikeLiked by 4 people
vinjk
June 28, 2019
@Apu, Thanks for reading and commenting. I liked the discussion and I am glad that broadly discussion stuck to the matter in the article itself and didn’t derail into the usual morass.
I don’t want to respond to anything you have written as I will be repeating myself. You have made some valid points just like the others you listed Anu, Jai, Rahul, and Tina.
LikeLike
Isai
June 28, 2019
“Oh, so media seems to want to bomb the movie out of its existence?” I had said a SECTION of the media.
“So, in short this is really about you feeling threatened by their exercising their free speech.”
I am not a distributor of this movie. Why should I feel threatened? I am all for exercising free speech. I BEGAN by saying that audience can criticise the movie for any reason(s) that they deem fit. But IN MY OPINION, a critic or a sports commentator has a certain PROFESSIONAL obligation to COVER a movie in its entirety. He can still rate it 0 (zero) for whatever reasons, but he cannot walk out of a movie in 15 minutes and write a review for the entire movie, saying ‘I know how it will be’. Similarly, he can’t devote 80-90% of his review space to scenes covering <5% of its runtime, irrespective of what those scenes contain. I felt that this was intentionally done to make the reader feel an aversion to this movie. I repeat, this is what I FELT and I believe that I have the right to freely express this in a public blog.
“it’s about the power you fear the English language media wields.”
I repeat I am not being benefited/affected by the success/failure of this movie. So I am not even bothered with its box office performance.
“Which they don’t anymore and haven’t for a few years now but you have not adjusted to this reality and there are others like you.”
Please don’t make assumptions about me without a sufficient basis on my comments. I am well aware of the diminishing power of the traditional news media. But, even when it is unsuccessful, I still felt the need to point out this attempt to unduly influence public opinion through limited/selective coverage. And I don’t think that’s wrong.
Frankly, I am bored with this discussion and won’be commenting any further. Apologies.
LikeLike
shaviswa
June 28, 2019
The debate here is on whether you need to balance between criticising the story/plot vs the how the film is made.
That can be one way of reviewing the film. But not everyone watches a film that way. There are some who would watch plainly for the story. There are others who love how a film is made.
For example, I did not like Idhayathai Thirudathae – because I did not like the plot. I found it very unrealistic and at times even juvenile. But many liked it for Mani Ratnam’s direction, many others for the music, a lot many people went to the cinemas just to watch the cinematography.
We cannot expect everyone to watch a film and enjoy the nuances or other aspects of film making when the main story and plot is shoddy. Arjun Reddy is one such film. I found the plot nauseating and that means nothing else in the movie could make up for the poor characterisations and story development.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Isai
June 28, 2019
“However, we can keep shooting empirical examples at each other over days, but I think it would be fair to conclude that Indian cinema in general, has had a tendency to more often portray stalking/ harassing behavioural patterns favourably when done by the male protagonist, rather than the female one.”
I am not very aware about Indian cinema. But, as far as Tamil Cinema is concerned, I don’t think the above statement holds. Nowadays, we are more attuned to the real life problems faced by women due to stalking and hence quickly recognise and strongly condemn and remember when such scenes appear in movies. But, when I skimmed the list of tamil movies released year-wise and tried to recall the portrayal and treatment of stalking, I don’t see the conclusion that you mentioned. It would be great if someone can take an year or a decade and prove Jai’s above conclusion. For, I still think that we are projecting our feelings about our society on to our cinema.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
June 28, 2019
“But many liked it for Mani Ratnam’s direction, many others for the music, a lot many people went to the cinemas just to watch the cinematography.”
And some for the heavenly “Om Namaha”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
shaviswa
June 28, 2019
@Honest Raj – I like the songs in Telugu more than in Tamil. Thanks to Mano, the Tamil songs sound a bit meh.
Om Namaha in Telugu is super good.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
June 28, 2019
@shaviswa: Agree. Mano was leagues behind SPB in this film. He couldn’t nail “Jagada Jagada” either.
LikeLiked by 1 person
An Jo
June 30, 2019
Oh fuck AR/KS and the movies and feminism/’toxic’ masculinity Just watch Jasprit Bumrah bowl the death overs and get legitimate orgasms. To hell with movies for a month!!!
BR Saab: Please go on a cruise!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
July 1, 2019
@An Jo Haha 😀
That bowling was orgasmic!
LikeLike
sachita
July 2, 2019
@vinjk: “And don’t judge me for watching it and even liking it. Or even judge the filmmaker for making it. I don’t want movies banned thinking I won’t be able to handle it. I don’t want disclaimers all over my movie frames. And, I don’t want to be spoonfed by artists.”
Later half of that – People arent asking for a ban/disclaimers.
On the first half, We have every right to judge the film, the film maker ( his statement) and you for liking it. No one gets to dictate others freedom/thinking on that either.
Year after year for decades now – movies are mostly made on heroes who are vile or portray toxic masculinity btw that is potato/potatah – at the end of the day since he liked preeti, she is his ‘property’, he feels he can dictate who can be her friend – treating women as property is toxic. period. And then celebrated all the way to the box office. This is as cliched as it gets.
Women’s perspective and consent is all dubious because well all these movies are always named/portrayed from the male perspective.
Strangely enough we are only now getting to even write about it. Even those writing against arjun reddy seems intolerable to people/fans of the movie.
*** Somewhere I think you had also mentioned that make movies where heroine centric movie where they fight/whatever. Hindi films are making a lot of successful movies where women are the main protagonist. And they are thankfully not portraying just some wonder woman/super woman character. It is only telugu that is seriously lacking in this. ( tamil atleast has a couple of these movies for starters).
LikeLiked by 3 people
An Jo
July 6, 2019
@vinjk – The brilliance of Bumrah’s death overs-bowling aside, India are literally clobbering Srilanka today – while SA have put on 300+ . If SA win, and Srilanka with an obvious loss here, India stand to face NZ which is anyday a better option than facing a rejuvenated England. Praying for an Aussie loss here…
Having said that, India are extremely unlucky to have lost Dhawan in peak form: Together, they were a ferocious pair; now, Rahul has to really rise up though he is a technically finger batsman…
LikeLike
An Jo
July 7, 2019
And here, BR Saab finally meets his rival and an able competitor – a worthy rival to boot..
https://twitter.com/BabaJogeshwari/status/1145216195487920128
LikeLike
Acyuta Rao
July 8, 2019
Reblogged this on The Film Insight.
LikeLike
Satya
September 16, 2021
Some say, Arjun didn’t care for Preethi’s consent. Some say, Preethi was as mad as Arjun in their relationship. I too had my own perspective, which I wish to share here.
Given how this alpha male was into wallowing and self-pitying, and how Shiva’s behaviour during the flashback and the present are very different (he is brash with Arjun in most of the present sequences and considers him irredeemable, but almost plays a devotee in the flashback), I had my own theory – my hypothesis was that most of his past, that glorifies him, was actually a drug fuelled fantasy of a loser who never had the guts to stand up for his lover. That he compensated for his failures by imagining himself as a force to reckon with. That would have made things interesting? I don’t know. Now that it makes little sense, I dropped it.
PS. Arjun Reddy was almost released 4 years ago, and I revisited it again, which made me write this.
PPS. Sandeep Vanga actually wanted to give Arjun Reddy a dark and tragic ending, and if that happened, I wish Arjun faces the consequences of his substance abuse, something our beloved high-functioning protagonists never get to do.
LikeLiked by 1 person