Consider this scene from a recent movie:
There is one guy who has been kidnapped and is being held at knife point, threatened with death and is being coerced for ransom. The lead character in that movie, I hate to term it hero for its hard core negative characterisation, suggests the kidnapper to use gun instead of knife, for its the "in" thing. By mistake the gun goes off and the victim gets shot. Blood spatters. If you guess the audience being mortified by this you couldn't be more wrong. What follows is peals of laughter and guffaws!!!
Consider this another scene from same movie:
The so called villain is about to kill a guy by chopping off his neck. Both the guys are screaming away to glory while the audience rolls around laughing!!
True. If you look at the entire movie, after almost 3 hours, you get to know the reason behind the above situations. It may or may not be still funny, which depends on betting your sense of humour versus social consciousness.
I've ranted on similar topic several posts back .Five decades ago, milky white complexioned MGR will fight dark colored villains. Even when Nambiar was as much fair skinned as MGR, the crooked look with the upturned nose on his face will always give out his sinister intent. It was a much easier depiction of the good guy and bad guy. In the language (??) of Newshour nonsense Arnab, MGR Never ever ever ever donned a negative role. He was the pristine pure jedi who fought the dark forces single handedly. In the next decades of Rajini and Kamal, the dark side fascinated them a bit and there were some dilly dalliances by Kamal, smitten by the success of Rajini. Rajini realised the aura it gave him after being villain and slowly and steadily when he donned the garb of hero, the audience saw in him a valmiki, sinner turned saint. Still there was a clear cut demarcation. Villain sometime and reformed permanently into a hero with no turning back. Unlike the villains of MGR, Rajini and kamal had to fight off villains, who were beginning to arise out of their own kith and kin. Evil men resided on hillock bungalows and were cruel zamindars at their closest to the society. There was always a chance for them to reform in the end. And in case when they got killed by the hero, the hero actually was shown being arrested, with a customary, "sila maathangalaukku piragu" message, after which their happily ever after life will begin. Cut to the current crop of movies. There is hardly any distinguishing factor between the good guy and bad guy. The storytellers have exhausted all sections of corruptions, be it politicos, police, judiciary, administration. Every pillar of the society has been tarnished on screen and the blockbuster success of such stories have emboldened the criminals as much as demoralizing the good guys.
In my father's times, police were a name that struck fear in the minds of common men. There were bribes and scandals and them being handy men of politicos -all such thing did exist. But the good guys were bit more strong willed and the bad guys still had fear of being shamed. Yes. SHAME. It was still a "virtue". How much ever the cinema men argue that their stories are mirrors of society, their movies have only made it worse is my opinion. Evaluate your psych after watching a MGR movie. You will definitely find it funny, considering how naïve the storyline is. But it will leave a feeling that good guys are strong and bad guys get thrashed more often than good guys. Watch any Rajini movie, it will still carry a similar message, but in a much diluted form. To cash in on his negative image, there will be as much harm done by him onscreen as compared to his villain counterpart. People began to believe that, there are bad bullets, which killed innocents, while good bullets that killed only villain. Police were relegated to last second appearance and taking law unto his own hands were being patronized. Vigilante justice began to take shape and precedence over law and order. With the era of economic liberalization, which eventually tore open the censor board, the villains began to enjoy better screen space. They can rape, pillage, loot for 2 hours and 15 minutes in a movie, only to be beaten to pulp in last 10 minutes. Heroes openly gave interview that playing villain was fascinating as it gives them different shades!! Literally, they wanted more screen space compared against the roles they were playing. Good guys were looked as dull. They were always shown as being weaklings and till the time their threshold broke, they would continue to bear all misery heaped on them by villains. It has gone to affect the psyche of movie watchers as well, to such an extent that, people began to fear bad guys for the first time. And having seen the success of such movies, bad elements in the society began to get ideas on how to escape punishment. Crime began to pay more and more and nowadays, its the ONLY steady source of income.
Like the favourite tagline of Dr. House, everybody lies and not just that. Nobody cares. Nothing is sacrilege. If you are a stickler to rules, which in itself is a oxy moronic statement for rule have to be adhered and not "stuck onto", you are labelled "rules ramanujam". Even the heroines rejects guys who directly propose to them and fall for those who land into their room in mid of night, breaking open their ceiling!! Smartness is rechristened as cheating without getting caught. Anyone who tries to be positive and straight forward, is dragged down to the filth, the vast majority is having fun frolicking with. Like the breaking point of weakling hero in the movies, the society is heading towards its own melting point.
We are at the edge of chaos and there is only one path left - the path of cleansing ourselves off all the crap we've surrounded ourselves with. Its going to be bitter and many are not going to like the solution, for the definition of good is not very popular at present. Anarchy may not be the answer to everything. But hopefully a new dawn should arise soon.