Boycott Bollywood?

My reaction to the article Resident Evil.

Well written, but not balanced.

I too am uncomfortable over what you eloquently call the anticipatory boycott trend. I did not watch Laal Singh Chaddha (LSC), so can't tell you if it should have succeeded, but I know what you mean. I dislike the the over-the-top criticism on the movie Ponniyin Selvan over perceived distortions.  I did not like Amir Khan being hounded a few years ago for his comments on rising intolerance. I did not like Kamal Haasan being held hostage by the Muslim organizations over the perceived portrayal of Muslims in ‘Vishwaroopam”.  

The other side of the argument is that a good business considers the needs - including perceived needs - while designing a product. When it doesn't or can't do it, it is an exposure. A good example is the failure of Chevy Volt, a well-designed car we would now consider a plug-in hybrid. It was arguably ahead of its time. The biases against General Motors, resulting from financial handouts caused the public to view the product claims with suspicion. The product failed. GM has since discontinued its production. There were other factors too.  When the product hit mainstream production levels, fuel prices had come down, reducing the demand. But I believe the main factor was that the rise of ‘Occupy Wall Street’ coincided with its rise in production, causing GM to be cited as an example of how big business succeeds at the expense of a common man. GM had produced its share of bad products, bad decisions; but its good product failed, due to its historical baggage.

I believe that has a parallel to the pushback against films such as LSC.

The article does not acknowledge that some folks may have felt uncomfortable with movies in the past, but had not reached the tipping point. The examples I can think of are in Tamil movies, where “soft target” segments of the population were shown as the bad guys. When stories (either from novel or real life) were pictured, the core nature of the players was changed to reflect the beliefs of the film maker. (Was about to write “zealotry”, but restrained myself). Examples for this are:

• “Soorari Potru”, where the social segment of the hero was changed due to reflect the social views of the filmmaker; and 
• “Malaikkallan” (1954) was made from a novel that had been a runaway success. Religion was a predominant theme of the novel. The script writer for the movie, Mu. Karunanidhi airbrushed religion out of the story and changed all positive characters to reflect his socio-religious views. 

This is not whatabotism. I’m citing these examples to show that people may have felt a certain way about messages being shoved down their throats for decades. Now they start seeing patterns everywhere. A good businessman sees this social change and walks a line, just as the moviemakers had done before the screening of Bombay in your example.

Here are some examples of some good decisions movie makers have made. 

• When Rajinikanth heard that the movie Ponniyin Selvan was being planned, he offered to play the role of Periya Puzhuvettaraiyar, a minor king who plots against Chozhas, Mani Rathnam is said to have rejected the idea. (“No thanks! Do you want your fanbase to curse me?”). He turned down Rajini’s offer!
• Cho Ramaswamy had heard murmurs that political opponents had instigated Muslim youth to cause troubles when his political satire, ‘Mohammed-bin-Tughlaq’ hit the screen. The story was that the crowd, with its with pre-conceived notions, was preparing to exercise the ‘hecklers'-veto’. Cho heard of it, and a pre-emptive move, opened the movie with a religious song (“Allah Allah”) that mollified the crowds instantly. The song went on to become a hit in its own right. 

When social changes take place, the pendulum never stops in the middle. There are examples from all walks of life. India’s brush with socialism ended up denouncing profit motive in businesses. The long overdue women’s rights movement caused some of its supporters to take offense at all perceived slights, and lash out, alienating its supporters. 

Like I said, a good businessman is sensitive to the trend and walks that line. Film-makers are not exempt from this. In fact, I would argue that they have a greater need to be sensitive, as they are more likely to benefit from a possible popularity wave than, say, carmakers.

Image Credit: Wikipedia.