“Animal” features Ranbir Kapoor, traditionally favored as a protagonist role, as a vehement villain, a chilling departure from standard Bollywood cinema. While the mainstream audience may anticipate a refreshing and unique cinematic experience, the potential societal implications raise alarm.
One of the major highlights of the film was the charismatic entry of Ranbir Kapoor, which was truly a memorable scene. The song “Dil Hai Chota Sa” accompanying his entry, infused with innocence and charm, significantly elevated the atmosphere and provided an emotional resonance that lingered long after.
But then…The movie attempts to manipulate familial emotions to justify Ranbir’s violent actions, fostering an unhealthy narrative. The prevailing report of boys mimicking the violent behavior portrayed in the movie testifies to the negative impact. A glaring example is the horrifying incident, now common knowledge- a minor vehicular clash on the Pune-Mumbai road resulted in a gruesome murder. The alleged perpetrator, styled with Ranbir’s signature long hair and beard from the movie, is almost symbolic of the undue influence the film has on impressionable minds.
Historically, in Bollywood, the protagonist emerges victorious from oppressive circumstances, inciting strength and courage. However, “Animal” depicts the lead actor as a murderer, presenting a skewed representation of justice. The empathetic storyline of avenging a father’s insult, coupled with the stylish and easily emulated on-screen appearance, increases the attractiveness of the character. This dangerously leads some young individuals to imagine themselves in a similar light, which can incite violence—case in point, another terrifying incident in Maharashtra.
During an interview, Ranbir Kapoor suggested that those negatively influenced should avoid such movies. However, such a stance is questionable, as such movies naturally attract like-minded individuals who are prone to imitation and inspiration.
The movie “Animal” seems to have been crafted with the express intention of wielding influence. Throughout its duration, it articulates numerous points, making it hard to believe that the director could overlook the potential negative impact on the youth of India – individuals who could unwittingly be led astray. It felt as though the director, despite having crossed the threshold of his youth, was intent on inspiring viewers to become alpha males. It begs the question, how could he commit such a blunder, knowingly or unknowingly guiding impressionable minds potentially in the wrong direction? The role and responsibilities of filmmakers are not to be taken lightly, and “Animal” appears to serve as a stark reminder of the same.
While art has the prerogative to mirror the different hues of society, caution must be exercised when creating content that can potentially incite violence. The portrayal of violence by the lead hero may not be the best influence, especially on impressionable young minds.
Therefore, with its lethal influence and questionable conflict resolution, “Animal” disappoints, earning a regrettable 1 out of 5 stars.
