⚡ Auto Brief: This content is part of our real-time syndication stream.
Zeeshan Ayyub rose to fame after portraying an antagonist in 2011’s ‘No One Killed Jessica’. In a recent interview, he discussed concerns about Sandeep Reddy Vanga‘s movies encouraging violent themes following the ‘Animal’ debate and addressed issues like PR strategies, hate speech, and the duties of filmmakers.Zeeshan Ayyub shares views on films propagating violenceSpeaking to Bollywood Bubble, Zeeshan talked about whether it is fair for Sandeep Reddy Vanga’s films to propagate violence and if such films should be made, Ayyub explained that it is a somewhat complicated question. He honestly expressed that simply saying yes or no would not change anything; it would only spark controversy and attract attention. He tried to clarify his perspective by saying that there is no ban on making such films, and people are free to create them. However, his concern arises when the creators get angry at criticism. He further added that the way creators react reflects their personality. He said that he wants to show who he truly is, no matter what others say, even if it is about the worst things someone wants to make a film on. He gave an example of someone wanting to make a film on Hitler, which is generally accepted without controversy. Even if that person says Hitler was an amazing person, they still want to make the film.Zeeshan Ayyub on freedom of expression and criticismAyyub continued by saying that now there is no one stopping you from making the film. The real issue arises when people start criticizing it harshly, saying things like the film is very bad or wrong, and even suggesting violent reactions, accusing you of supporting someone like Hitler. In such cases, you cannot play the victim. While you have the right to freedom of expression, so does everyone else. The problem occurs only if the film is made with some hidden agenda, and in that situation, he disagrees.Zeeshan Ayyub’s personal experience with related filmsThe ‘Tanu Weds Manu’ actor said that he will talk openly because he has not watched ‘Kabir Singh’ but saw ‘Arjun Reddy‘. He mentioned that he wasn’t able to watch more than half of the film. Honestly, he enjoyed the first half in some aspects and thought it was quite good. However, midway through, he wondered why certain things were done, questioning the necessity of treating the character a certain way. Since he already felt he was living that character, he decided to stop watching. For him, boasting about watching the film outside does not make sense.Zeeshan Ayyub stresses society’s role in minimizing film impactThe ‘Sam Bahadur’ actor added that the important thing is to educate society enough so that the film’s impact on them is minimal in the first place. He also acknowledged that the question of whether such films should be made is valid. However, he believes it is not just about current PR tactics that fuel discussions on anything that becomes big news. He clarified that he is not referring to just one director, as many people are involved and contributing to this issue.Zeeshan Ayyub explains the line between freedom of speech and hate speechZeeshan said that if a film propagates hate, it cannot be justified as freedom of speech. He further explained that the concept of absolute freedom is very debatable. Referring to Malcolm X, he mentioned that many may disagree with this view, but Malcolm X stated that if your speech demeans or threatens the basic existence, survival, community, or identity of others, then it is not freedom of expression but hate speech. He emphasized the importance of being cautious about this. Films should be made with this in mind—if they cross into hate speech or deny others the right to survive, then it is indeed problematic.Zeeshan Ayyub concludes on controversy and filmmaking responsibilityConcluding, the actor expressed that he hopes the audience understands where he is coming from. He mentioned that he deliberately stopped watching the film early on. Recently, he called out a specific person by name, who did not even realize the impact. He clarified that it is not just about this film— the director made the film on their own accord. Whatever games, including PR strategies, happened caused distress to those involved, but the film became a blockbuster. They earned money and moved on peacefully.Zeeshan Ayyub on future controversies and societal resilienceThe ‘Chhalaang’ actor added that the director will make another similar film, which will create more controversy and generate more earnings. Meanwhile, their lives continue comfortably, while people like him and the audience keep discussing it—this will not change anything except perhaps bring a few more viewers next time. Therefore, gaining fame or name recognition through such means has no real significance. The key idea, according to him, is that if a film is spreading hate speech, we must make our society capable enough to identify, understand, and prevent it from happening and also ensure that society is not affected by it. He emphasized that this is an important aspect.Zeeshan Ayyub highlights the debate sparked by ‘Animal’‘Animal’ generated widespread debate due to its intense portrayal of violence, the reinforcement of toxic masculinity, and its representation of female characters. Despite doing well commercially, the film faced harsh backlash for seemingly endorsing damaging behaviors and unhealthy relationship dynamics. This controversy also sparked an important conversation about the balance between creative freedom, the ethical duties of filmmakers, and the broader societal impact of movies.
Source: Times of India
📝 We use smart aggregation to bring you top news in real-time.
