Vineeta Singh (Shark Tank) Exposes ‘Real Problem’ with Animal: Allowing an Extremely Toxic Character to Get Away Unchecked

Vineeta Singh Unmasks the ‘Critical Issue’ in Animal: Allowing an Unchecked and Highly Toxic Character to Prevail

In a recent interview, Vineeta Singh, known for her role on Shark Tank India, voiced her concerns about the films Kabir Singh and Animal, both directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga. As the CEO of Sugar Cosmetics, Singh delved into her critique during a conversation on Ranveer Allahbadia’s podcast, addressing her discomfort with how the toxic protagonists in these films seemingly escape consequences for their negative actions.

Expressing her support for the exploration of dark themes in cinema, Vineeta Singh emphasized her belief in the importance of consequences, especially in the Indian cultural context. She acknowledged the artistic freedom to create fictional characters but underscored a key distinction in Indian storytelling traditions, rooted in the concept of karma and the belief that wrongdoing should be met with appropriate repercussions.

Vineeta Singh noted, “The only thing I agree with is this: in India, we’ve seen for so many years, bad guys lose in the end; they get what they deserve. The good guy always wins.” This observation reflects a cultural expectation deeply embedded in the Indian narrative ethos, drawing parallels to the moral framework often depicted in classics like the Mahabharata.

The central point of Singh’s critique revolves around the perceived lack of closure in both Kabir Singh and Animal. She argued that while these films may be visually appealing, they fall short in addressing the consequences that typically accompany negative actions. Singh emphasized the need for characters, even if fictional, to face the outcomes of their choices, aligning with the cultural narrative Indians have grown up with.

Comparing these films to the portrayal of dark characters in Hollywood, Vineeta Singh highlighted a cultural nuance. Vineeta Singh noted that in Hollywood, open-ended narratives may be more accepted due to the nuanced nature of the audience. However, in India, there is a prevailing expectation for narratives to conclude with a sense of justice or retribution, mirroring the traditional moral values ingrained in society.

Singh drew attention to the contrast with actors like Shah Rukh Khan, who portrayed dark characters but weren’t celebrated in the same way. She pointed out that Khan’s characters did not escape the repercussions of their actions, a critical difference that resonates with the Indian audience’s cultural sensibilities.

Sandeep Reddy Vanga, the director of Animal, has responded to criticism with defiance, suggesting a conspiracy to undermine his work. In post-release interviews, he dismissed concerns about morality and defended the film, asserting that if morality becomes the sole focus, filmmaking might as well shift to creating cartoons.

Animal, despite its controversies, has achieved significant financial success, grossing nearly Rs 900 crore worldwide and ranking as the third-biggest Indian blockbuster of 2023. The film’s A-rated classification and its box office performance have solidified its place as Ranbir Kapoor’s most successful venture.

In essence, Vineeta Singh’s critique opens up a dialogue not only about the artistic freedom of filmmakers but also about the cultural expectations and storytelling traditions that shape audience perspectives in the diverse landscape of Indian cinema.

Vineeta Singh’s outspoken commentary sheds light on a pressing concern within the cinematic realm, particularly in films like Animal. As the CEO of Sugar Cosmetics and a well-known figure from Shark Tank India, Singh carries a significant voice in the industry, and her remarks prompt a deeper examination of the portrayal of characters with negative traits in contemporary Indian cinema.

In her recent interview on Ranveer Allahbadia’s podcast, Singh expressed a nuanced perspective on the exploration of dark themes in movies. While acknowledging the artistic liberty to create fictional characters, she underscored the essence of closure in storytelling, particularly within the cultural context of India. Drawing on a cultural ethos steeped in moral values and the concept of karma, Singh articulated a sentiment widely shared among audiences in the country — the expectation of seeing justice served, even in fictional narratives.

Vineeta Singh comparison of Animal to Sandeep Reddy Vanga’s earlier work, Kabir Singh, highlights a recurring theme in both films — the apparent escape of toxic protagonists from facing consequences for their actions. This departure from the traditional Indian storytelling format, where antagonists are typically met with retribution, raises questions about the evolving dynamics of storytelling in the country.

The critique resonates with the wider audience’s belief in the importance of accountability and the fulfillment of moral narratives. Singh’s observation that the real issue lies in allowing such toxic characters to go unchecked adds weight to the ongoing conversation about the responsibility of filmmakers in shaping narratives that align with societal expectations.

The discussion also delves into the cultural nuances that distinguish Indian cinema from its Western counterparts. Singh’s acknowledgment of the acceptance of open-ended narratives in Hollywood, owing to the nuanced nature of the audience, points to the diverse expectations and sensibilities prevalent in the global film industry.

For more Bollywood news. click here.