The politics of boycott Bollywood

Free speech should prevail in a democracy, as should free markets in an industry like commercial cinema. (Illustration by Suneesh K.)

What a self-goal! In the week leading up to the release of Anurag Kashyap’s Do Baaraa, in at least two television interviews, the director and the film’s star Taapsi Pannu made derisive fun of the social media campaign to boycott Aamir Khan’s Laal Singh Chaddha and asked for a similar drive for shunning Do Baaraa.

Pannu said that if Do Baaraa is not boycotted, “we will feel out of place. Please boycott our film. I think we should be in the league of Laal Singh Chaddha.” Kashyap said: “The only boycott I know is Geoffrey Boycott, best cricketer ever. So if you are saying, boycott our film, I’m thinking, hum log kya batting karnewale hain (we are going to do some great batting)!” In another interview, Kashyap, grinning directly at the camera, said: “Boycott me, boycott Taapsee, boycott Do Baaraa, boycott karo, boycott karo, please boycott karo!”

On Friday, Do Baaraa opened on 215 screens in empty halls with seat occupancies reportedly as low as 2-3%. First day box official collections were expected to be Rs 25-30 lakh (it eventually made Rs 72 lakh on Day 1 in theatres, with signs of an uptick over the weekend) and final total collections Rs 1.5-2 crore. This amount, plus whatever other revenue streams the film generates, such as sale to OTT platforms, is unlikely to cover even the fees that Kashyap and Pannu have charged. The producers will not be happy.

What were these two smoking?

The undeniable truth is that the boycott calls for Laal Singh Chaddha (LSC) worked. The proof is in the numbers. No Aamir Khan film has had a weaker opening day in the last 20 years—Rs 11.7 crore on Day 1. People just didn’t turn up. Even Khan’s last big dud, Thugs of Hindostan, had a first-day collection of more than Rs 52 crore. And among all the leading stars in Hindi films, he possibly possesses the best marketing brain.

However, it also seems certain that most of those who did turn up did not like LSC—there must have been very little positive word-of-mouth, that powerful weapon that can turn sleepers like the currently-running Karthikeya 2 or even Kashyap’s Gangs of Wasseypur into big hits.

Those supporting the boycott calls say this is their right to free speech. Those on the other side reject this, arguing that such campaigns are a violation of Aamir Khan’s freedom of expression. This debate—it’s more like a war now—will continue to rage, but let’s look at a bit of history.

The first boycott calls in recent years came after Akshay Kumar interviewed Narendra Modi during the 2019 Lok Sabha election campaign, almost certainly according to a pre-approved script. There were calls on social media from Modi-haters to boycott Kumar’s films and all products that he endorsed (it is of course ironic that Kumar’s Rakshabandhan has now been subjected to a boycott campaign by BJP supporters because of some tweets by the film’s scriptwriter that they found offensive).

The same year, the chief film critic of one of India’s biggest English newspapers announced publicly that he would not review Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri’s The Tashkent Files because of the director’s pro-BJP political leanings. This was quite extraordinary—this gentleman was openly refusing to do the job that he was being paid for. Instead of being a critic, he had assigned himself the role of censor.

Today, all those who tried to cancel Akshay Kumar and Agnihotri in 2019 and also Agnihotri’s The Kashmir Files just some months ago are furious at the LSC campaign. Though, as far as I know, none of them have protested against the equally widespread rejection calls for Rakshabandhan, which has also tanked at the box office.

Clearly, what we are seeing now is the so-called right wing using exactly the same cancel culture tools which were till now being weaponized by the left. The debate is not fundamentally about free speech at all. It is purely and simply a matter of explicit political belief.

It is possible—though not very probable—that Kashyap and Pannu were merely joking, but as the social media storm that ensued showed, their remarks were seen by many as arrogant. The comments were also perceived as an openly political challenge, since in the last few years, both of them have made no secret of their anti-BJP views. The statements were construed as: We don’t care if pro-Modi people don’t watch our films, sod off.

But a day before Do Baaraa released, Pannu was on Instagram, appealing to people to watch the film: “We know we made a film we are proud of, I hope you give us a chance.”

Free speech should prevail in a democracy, as should free markets in an industry like commercial cinema. The marketing strategies of Indian films have got significantly sophisticated over the last decade as communication technologies and advertising spaces have changed. Like any other product, films today try to get their hashtags trending on Twitter with carefully crafted posts. There is a small industry entirely devoted to these activities. But filmmakers need to accept that people could also try to trend rival hashtags.

It is finally the market which decides. Filmmakers have every right to make movies the way they want to and to tell stories the way they have imagined them. And the audience too is free to like or dislike or censure them.

What we have witnessed over the last few weeks indicates an important new factor in the Hindi film market—a political/ ideological one. Or, as some would say, overtly ideological. Because those who campaigned against LSC allege that ever since Independence, a powerful clique in the Hindi film industry has been subtly propagating “leftist” and “Hinduphobic” dogmas, so now it’s time to fight back—vote with the feet and the wallets.

The next one year will see some of the biggest-budget films ever made in India get released. Including some Hindi films, which are already being suspected of being “anti-Hindu”, and some south Indian ones, which are being accused of pushing the Hindutva agenda. It will be very interesting to watch how the market decides.