As Aamir Khan Actor Laal Singh Chaddha and Akshay Kumars Raksha Bandhan In the face of calls for a boycott over the anti-Hindu tendencies of artists associated with said films, filmmaker Rahul Dholakia, best known for glorifying gangster Abdul Latif in his film Raees, took the opportunity to speak about the alleged downsides of such to talk about boycott campaigns.
In a tweet aimed at criticizing Laal Singh Chaddha and Raksha Bandhan’s boycott campaigns, Dholakia tweeted, “Trolling a movie because the ideology of the cast or crew members is different from yours is unfair to the other hundreds who are watching.” worked hard to make the film. They also pinned their hopes on the success of the film to make their dreams come true. Spare yourself a thought.”
According to Dholakia, having hundreds of people working on a film is unfair to them if the film trolls the differing ideologies of the cast or crew members of the unit. He added that making these people’s dreams come true is inseparable from the success of the films.
Why Rahul Dholakia’s Speeches About Boycott Calls Are Misguided
This is a classic case of psychological gaslighting, where victims are emotionally manipulated into believing their objection is financially harming others while defending the provocateurs accused of making offensive remarks. Dholakia essentially blames those who issue boycott calls after being hurt by the actors’ and performers’ offensive remarks against their cherished beliefs, and blames them if the film fails at the box office.
Dholakia’s reasoning is flawed on several levels. First, having a different political ideology is not an issue. Constantly insulting Hinduism and making unjustified comments about India. Aamir Khan’s Laal Singh Chaddha faces boycotts after the actor said he was considering leaving the country due to “rising intolerance”. Similar to Akshay Kumar Raksha Bandhan was recently embroiled in controversy after Hinduphobic tweets by its author Kanika Dhillon went viral. Several old tweets of Dhillon showing Gau Mutra pride and demonizing Jai Shri Ram had surfaced online, prompting calls for a boycott of the film.
Still, when filmmakers make a film, the cast always takes one position or another, which they represent through the film’s imagery. So if the cast and crew members can take a stand, why can’t the audience take a stand not to watch the film because their views don’t align with the cast’s ideology?
Second, callous as it may sound, audiences have no obligation to support the cast and crew working on a film. If that were the case, no film would have failed at the box office. People flock to theaters for entertainment, not to support the film industry. The entertainment quotient of the film ultimately decides whether the film will be a success or will end up being a disaster. So Dholakia’s claim that the dreams of hundreds of crew members are linked to the film’s success is nothing but nonsense.
Third, the Indian Constitution grants actors and crew members freedom of speech to ‘bastardize historical facts‘ To make them compatible with their contemporary political ideology, the same constitution grants audiences freedom of choice to decide which films to watch and which not to. Audiences have every right to call for a boycott of a film whose cast and crew never fail to poke fun at their faith and their country.
Perhaps the most fundamental flaw in Dholakia’s argument is that a film’s box office performance determines the fate of the hundreds of crew members associated with the film. Film pundits will tell you that when the film plummets at the box office, it’s always the producers, directors, and occasionally actors raking in the profits who bear the brunt of failure.
The hundreds of crew members Dholakia refers to in his tweets are already paid for their work before the film hits theaters. Therefore, the argument that the realization of their dreams depends on the success of the film is deeply misleading and patently false.
While moralizing about calls for a boycott of films by anti-Hindu artists, Rahul Dholakia launched a veiled attack on The Kashmir Files.
More importantly, coming from Dholakia to voice concerns for a film’s crew members, it’s a bit rich, as he didn’t feel that way when he was making one veiled attack versus ‘The Kashmir Files‘, a film chronicling the violence faced by Kashmiri Hindus at the hands of their Islamic abusers.
In March this year, Dholakia tweeted: “Hate sells. love earlier. Sleaze sold. Formerly melodrama. sold propaganda. fantasy sold. The truth never did. Follow the crowd. Flowing with the majority… the price of flowing, on the other hand, is high, it doesn’t sell. #Coincidentally.”
The tweet was posted on March 13, two days after The Kashmir Files was released, and left little doubt as to who it was intended for. So it wasn’t the first time critics launched an attack on Vivek Agnihotri’s latest film. Since he announced he would make a film about the genocide of Kashmiri pandits, various “liberals” and Islamists have been conducting exercises aimed at discrediting the film.
However, Rahul Dholakia had not bothered to ask the “liberals” to stop attacking the film at the time, as this film may also have had hundreds of crew members whose dreams depended on the commercial success of the film.
In a democratic country like India, which enshrines freedom of expression and freedom of choice, people have the right to exercise their freedom of expression to talk about anything, except of course certain forbidden things that can be attractive.Sar Tan Se Judah‘ chants and beheading shouts, viewers also have the right to choose which film to watch and which to boycott.