Published Apr 14, 2026 | 1:06 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 14, 2026 | 1:06 PM
A poster of the film 'The Kerala Story'. (X)
Synopsis: With the audience believing that films are impacting the Indian society, including the mirroring of the ideologies and habits of its characters, youngsters say filmmakers should reflect on the core messages of their films and what ideas are glorified through their films.
The seemingly underlying agenda of some recently released films in India has made it imperative to question the role of cinema in society. Is it viewed merely as a source of entertainment? Or does it have a broader impact on people?
Another question that arises is the opinion people in the film industry have regarding the social impact of cinema.
Speaking to South First, a 20-year-old student said that “films influence society and vice versa”. Historically, films influence people to act in a certain way, the student noted.
Several films have been known to have had a positive impact on society. While Taare Zameen Par (2007) brought to the forefront conversations regarding learning disabilities, Rang De Basanti (2006) emphasised the importance of youth in battling nationwide issues such as corruption and political failures.
Films such as Kaala (2008), Jai Bhim (2021), Article 15 (2019), and Sairat (2016), among others, have been crucial in depicting the social evil that is caste through cinema. Similarly, films including Thappad (2020), Queen (2013), NH 10 (2010), and English Vinglish (2012) have significantly boosted the cause of women’s empowerment in domestic as well as professional realms
On the flip side, certain films have been used as political tools, such as The Kashmir Files (2022) and The Kerala Story (2023). Films such as Animal (2023), Arjun Reddy (2007), its Hindi remake Kabir Singh (2019), and Pushpa (2021) have portrayed a rather exaggerated form of hyper masculinity, with violence playing a key role in the characterisation of the lead character.
In such films, the role of the woman is relegated to that of a character merely supporting the character arc of the male lead, without having one of her own.
The fact that the male leads in such films have no consequences for such behaviour leads to the glorification and, at minimum, the normalisation of it.
Speaking to South First, Yuvanprabu, 19, a second-year undergraduate student from Coimbatore, said that cinema is not merely a source of entertainment to him; it has much to teach about life and its various aspects. He also noted that films have a considerable impact on society as “they bring out culture, fashion, and question authority and reality”.
He said that films such as Interstellar (2004) and Super Deluxe (2019) have had an impact on him by piquing his curiosity about space and social segregation, respectively.
He and Shravan S (19), a second-year undergraduate student from Bangalore, also told the South First that MS Dhoni: The Untold Story (2016) played a role in motivating people, especially to pursue a cricket career. On the other hand, Yuvanprabu said that films such as Dhurandhar (2025) normalise jingoism and violence, implying that “nationalism is greater than individual existence and that killing someone for nationalist purposes is very easy”.
Another 19-year-old student from Bengaluru told South First that films are more than a source of entertainment and that they have broader social impacts. “In the long term, films can negatively impact those who take them at face value rather than further analysing them,” she said.
She added that those who engage with a film solely for the actor or its hype eventually “intertwine their life with certain dialogues or instances,” and “act similarly as shown in the movie without thinking twice”.
She also told South First that Arjun Reddy popularised “certain toxic behaviour” in relationships, leading men to want to become more like the male lead, and people also wanting a partner like Arjun Reddy. On the other hand, she noted that 12th Fail (2023) had a positive impact on society as it served as a source of motivation for several people.
Speaking to South First, a 20-year-old student said that “films influence society and vice versa” and that “a lot of times films influence people to act in a certain way and even propagate certain ideas about communities which need not be accurate,” acting on which, people develop distorted ideas of such communities and sometimes even harm people belonging to them.
She cited The Kerala Story as an example of negative cinematic impact, as it relies on inaccurate statistics. When people watch such movies, they believe it and, as such, will form a bias against Kerala and the people there, she added.
The nature of the impact that films have on society leads to yet another question. Do film industries acknowledge the kind of impact their work has on people, or do they consider it done solely for entertainment and business purposes?
Regarding this, producer and filmmaker Karan Johar, during the All India Management Association’s 9th National Leadership Conclave, stated, “What we project and what we say, we have to consider it with some amount of sensitivity because people take the spoken word very seriously,” thereby acknowledging the fact that cinema has a substantial impact on people.
Similarly, filmmaker Shankar noted that “When Mudhalvan (1999) was released, certain things were implemented. When Anniyan (2005) was released, people told me that they started following traffic rules. So, we need to keep imparting social messages in our films in the hope that it reaches people in the right way.”
While on the surface, it seems like film industries acknowledge the impact of their work on society and try to produce work that encourages positive social change, youngsters think otherwise.
Speaking to South First, Yuvanprabu said that while some people genuinely do not understand the power they hold, others acknowledge it but cater to their selfish motives, not accounting for the repercussions of their work.
Reflecting the same line of thought, a 19-year-old student said that actors and filmmakers should “reflect on the nature of impact their work has on society”. While another student agreed that a lot of film industries understand the impact they have on people, they “use this to their advantage to a great extent”.
Speaking to South First, Shravan noted a dichotomy within the film industries wherein directors such as Raj Kumar Hirani understand the kind of impact their films have on people, thereby making movies that act as a source of social transformation.
On the flip side, he acknowledged that directors, including Sandeep Reddy Vanga and Ram Gopal Varma, view their work as done solely for entertainment and business purposes, and that each of the views is right in their own sense, and neither can be disregarded.
(Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
