Animal starting wave of violence against women - Page 3

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

Jhanvis done like 7/8 films. I think I only saw like 2 of them

My BP - Right now. 130/190

Breathe Cari Breathe..... It's okay.. Do not think about hiring RanVijay's multi gun, machine to hit Maroony with.... Easy.. take it easy...

https://giphy.com/gifs/indian-gun-machine-YM3it81MQHtP666SVr

Highly entertaining, violent, commercial-action film for the theaters

Originally posted by: carisma2

Most people will know that what is shown in the movie is wrong and they are not to enact that. I also agree there are immature people who will feel inspired. I was talking to a friend earlier today and she said apparently this guy was harassing and stalking a girl. When the case went to court he said 'This is how the guys in the movies get the girl', that's where I learnt it from.

The courts let him go.

There are reasons, why even English films are refused and movies are certified, because they carry a chance of influence especially on the younger minds. But there are adults with immature minds and cannot differentiate the difference because of their own sadistic nature.

I think we can watch a movie, if we can handle it. I do not think the movie should have been promoted this heavily, which indicates that this is a 'thumbs up' all good movie.

They can let go off the violence shown in western movies and are less likely to get influenced compared to movies made within their own culture and closer to home, taking it as something acceptable.

Imagine if a movie like profile was made by Hindi cinema and people were promoting it. I think people would look at it more differently. profile was a good movie, but we cannot support the male lead and support the concept shown. In the same way, same rules apply to violent and objective films.

That' how I balance it.

Originally posted by: Jazzkapur

bold- what r u saying? How can court let him go? If this really happened, I blame the judge, not the filmmaker. That judge literally gave the impression to that guy "if u does something wrong, just blame the movies, I'll let u go" this is insane. Movies r fiction but reality influences more than movies. That judge is in reality leaving the bad influence on that guy. Now what is That girl supposed to do? The court had let Her stalker go. Should she carry a knife with her so that she can kill that guy in self defense? Then she can also say in court to the same judge '1stly u didn't leave a choice for me, 2ndly i learnt it from a movie'

Yeah apparently that's what my friend was telling me regarding that case. This is the whole problem because the enforcements and the judiciary system is unfair, they want the filmmakers to support the social cause to cause less influence. Television is a medium that was used to relate information and educate from the early days in India, and that notion has stayed and not only in India. Sometimes, television is the only source of education there, good or bad.

I do believe, even as someone putting something up in a forum, we have to take some form of social responsibility. That's how I see it. Watching a lot of psycho movies and psychological thrillers is not healthy for the mind. The brain operated in a calculated way, when it is constantly thrown with subjects of no sense, it can flip in some ways. Especially this movie showed bad prevailed over bad, but bad still left further bad behind. The ending remained glorifying the bad, just so people can anticipate the next movie.

I know I am anticipating the next film, have my hands dirty now watching the first one - so might as well just see it till the end of the franchise.

What I think annoys most of the people, who do not get influenced and are mature and educated, when people question their choice of watching it. It's one thing condemning the movie for x,y,z reasons. but then to moral police people and judging their characters for it is the issue.

However I say, such films that are not providing a good social message - avoid watching in the movies and hitting up the BO ratings. That was the producers will be forced to re-think.

Originally posted by: carisma2

Yeah apparently that's what my friend was telling me regarding that case. This is the whole problem because the enforcements and the judiciary system is unfair, they want the filmmakers to support the social cause to cause less influence. Television is a medium that was used to relate information and educate from the early days in India, and that notion has stayed and not only in India. Sometimes, television is the only source of education there, good or bad.

I do believe, even as someone putting something up in a forum, we have to take some form of social responsibility. That's how I see it. Watching a lot of psycho movies and psychological thrillers is not healthy for the mind. The brain operated in a calculated way, when it is constantly thrown with subjects of no sense, it can flip in some ways. Especially this movie showed bad prevailed over bad, but bad still left further bad behind. The ending remained glorifying the bad, just so people can anticipate the next movie.

I know I am anticipating the next film, have my hands dirty now watching the first one - so might as well just see it till the end of the franchise.

What I think annoys most of the people, who do not get influenced and are mature and educated, when people question their choice of watching it. It's one thing condemning the movie for x,y,z reasons. but then to moral police people and judging their characters for it is the issue.

However I say, such films that are not providing a good social message - avoid watching in the movies and hitting up the BO ratings. That was the producers will be forced to re-think.

Originally posted by: MaxMayfield

People need to purify themselves by watching Sooryavansham and Vivah..Animal ke paap dhul jaayenge ...incidentally Vivah was on TV the other day and I went back to offering Jal to my Swami pati dev and saying stuff like...aap zaroor safal hongey..the shuddh Hindi is so cute in that movie who said movies don't have influence

How long did that fad last- offering jal to the pati dev? All of 5 minutes i guess.

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

How long did that fad last- offering jal to the pati dev? All of 5 minutes i guess.

Alphas protect

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/eCS6F2MDkBg

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8dWLclwtOpo

Non-triggered 'Alpha' moment

There is this clip of Abbas Mastan talking about Baazigar. They are reacting to theatre crowds cheering Shahrukh Khan throwing Shilpa Shetty from the rooftop. They are shocked and wonder how the audience can react like that.

The scene depicted violence against women. The audience cheered violence against women. However, the makers did not intend to glorify violence. They realized the impact was not what they intended and have always maintained that it was an evil act that should not have been cheered.

Animal has multiple scenes of violence and misogyny. But Sandeep Reddy Vanga has refused to criticize the actions of the hero. Instead, he doubles down in his justification of the hero. He goes as far as to mocking critics who dislike the hero.

A movie is just one aspect of things that encourages certain actions. But the second aspect is society and people - whether we reinforce that action or not. And herein lies the difference - Animal is just the cinematic representation of behavior SRV is reinforcing in society.

https://giphy.com/gifs/indian-gun-machine-YM3it81MQHtP666SVr

https://youtu.be/zqGW6x_5N0k

Vanga delivered an Indian action-packed commercially entertaining good film