Hypo'critics' — Woke Critics With Different Strokes For Different Films Are A Problem

The recent Tamil breezy family drama Kudumbasthan was well received by the fans as was reflected in its good theatrical run, and now it is said to have good numbers after its OTT release.

The film, which deals with the hassles of money of a young middle-class family man, is already featured among the 'hits' of this year in Kollywood, which otherwise is enduring another RCB-like season with nothing majorly working for it. 

In the film, a newly married man is driven from pillar to post as financial responsibilities become too heavy for him to bear. Kudumbasthan, directed by debutant Rajeshwar Kalisamy, and headlined by Manikandan and Saanve Megghana, largely got favourable reviews with most critics praising the film's realism in invoking the right family dynamics.

But one aspect that had the critics of a certain type squirming was the way the heroine's character, who is from an SC community, is treated by her in-laws in the story.  

It is a fact that the hero's mother and relatives do make snide and spiteful remarks drawing attention to the heroine's caste in the film. But, in the narrative, they are flawed individuals and are prone to use such unpalatable language. That is the point of 'realism' on screen. The film does not endorse their approach, it merely presents them as warts and all.

But the critics couldn't stand those lines. One of them wrote, "a subplot involves Naveen’s family taking constant jabs at his wife for belonging to the oppressed community. While the film’s attempt to honestly portray the issues of a woman within an intercaste wedding is commendable, some “jokes” at this expense leave a bad aftertaste."

Another one termed the newly-wed couple living in the same house with his parents as *ahem* 'problematic living arrangement', and said, "they share space with his parents who bitingly point out the woes of having an SC daughter-in-law."

In the woke world, elderly fathers and mothers staying with their sons get to be marked as trouble. 

Incest? No, it is just a boundary-less feeling 

So what is acceptable in the liberal landscape? 

For that, our example will be the recent Malayalam flick Narayaneente Moonnaanmakkal. This is also another intra-family story with three brothers and their families with less than amicable ties coming together as their mother is on the deathbed.

Its box-office performance, going by news reports, was okayish. But critics couldn't stop gushing at Narayaneente Moonnaanmakkal, especially for its restrained portrayal of the strained relationship between three brothers, one of whom had eloped and married a Muslim woman. 

His return with his family (wife, a grown-up son, and a young baby) to the last days of his mother sets off the movie. The eldest brother is the caustic one. He is married and has a daughter who after her engineering is doing MA (Social Work). The other brother is unmarried.

Indeed, the film gets the mood of the moment and the exchanges between the dysfunctional brothers spot on. In the flow of the story, the son of the youngest brother and daughter of the eldest brother, who are meeting for the first time in the story, start opening up to each other. 

He, around 20 years of age in the film, is coming out of a break-up. She is a much more sorted character. As it happens, the two cousins—and at one place, he even asks her whether he should address her as chechi (sister)—develop 'feelings' for each other. And they also try to explore each other physically.

Straight cousins—offsprings of blood brothers—getting intimate is all kinds of moral grey. But most societies don't approve of it. Some states in the US have banned it. So has Norway. A law to stop cousin marriage comes into effect in Sweden next year. The UK is mulling a law for the same. In India too, it is unacceptable in many communities and religions.  

Topsy-turvy woke world

Both science and traditions do not favour such a problematic relationship. Of course, a filmmaker is at liberty to explore such edgy ideas. And to be fair to the director of Narayaneente Moonnaanmakkal, Sharan Venugopal, he doesn't let slip the flow into gross or titillating territory. 

But the critics who are only too happy to flag as 'troublesome' anything politically incorrect on screen (even though it may have been organically part of the film's progress) did not mind this decidedly 'red rag' relationship in Narayaneente Moonnaanmakkal.

One writer said, "... the film mostly views the family through the eyes of the younger generation—Athira (Garggi Ananthan) and her cousin Nikhil (Thomas Mathew)—who tries to make sense of simmering tensions within the family, while also struggling with their own boundary-less feelings and past traumas... The screenwriter handles the situation somewhat adeptly by turning it into a gentle call for better understanding between humans, a call that especially goes out to the grown-ups in the film."

A wrong relationship, in the woke world, is 'boundary-less feelings' and is a call for better understanding between humans. Okay.

Another critic elaborated, “While the elders go about creating tension in the dysfunctional family, Nikhil and Viswan's character Athira start developing an intense bond that crosses societal boundaries. Sharan Venugopal handles the relationship with a poignant approach that's bold and beautiful at the same time”.

A taboo connection is beautiful, huh!

One more wrote, "The younger perspective of Narayaneente Moonnaanmakkal comes from Thomas and Garggi’s characters. The audience would immediately connect with them and both the actors represent today’s youth with all their conflicts, struggles, and little joys." Terming the film as 'feel-good', the critic claimed that "... in the case of this film, you could leave it as a better person – if you let yourself soak in it."

A story that involves an incestuous, forbidden physical connection gets a feel-good tag.

Dubious critics

The point is not about the director choosing such a topic. Any creator has the full liberty to showcase a movie in the way he or she wants to. Here too the film is not problematic. The real point of worry is the dubious liberal critics.

For them, one kind of political incorrectness, even as a part of a fictionalised story, is not kosher. But unacceptable, and even illegal, physical liaisons are no problems. Not one critic had the gumption to call the physical spectacle involving notional brother-sister as ‘creepy’. 

This shows that their gaze is not even. It is filled with murky colours that conveniently shade their views. And it is not a one-off. There is a pattern to their jaundiced ways.

Take another popular web series of recent times, Dabba Cartel, where a bunch of women get into drug running. The series has again garnered mostly appreciative responses and the women helming the dangerous drug cartel have been talked up as spunky, enterprising characters. Well, they are, but their being involved in a dangerous drug cartel is glossed over. 

This kind of cherry-picked critiquing is actually representative of the woke clique. In their topsy-turvy world, a man asking for food from his daughter-in-law is toxic, but a young boy coveting his elder cousin is a celebration of love. A liberal worldview is not a crime. But selective liberalism is a disservice to all. 

Art is never a problem. Its interpreters are.