The Oscar Wilde quote “Life imitates art far more than art imitates life” finds mention in the Hema Committee report which rocked Malayalam cinema. How Kerala and its film industry reacted to the shocking actress abduction and assault case in 2017 could also be extrapolated to the dictum.
In the aftermath of the case, a state constantly fed on a diet of patriarchal and male chauvinist films over the decades was split down the middle. Worse, Kerala’s actor fraternity, represented by the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA)—the abbreviation ironically translates to ‘mother’ in the Malayalam vernacular—was at the vanguard to defend Dileep, the actor accused in the case.
The Women in Cinema Collective (WCC)—a small group of women actors formed in the aftermath of the incident—lobbied with the state government to institute a committee to study the issues faced by women in the Malayalam film industry. The release of the committee’s report—headed by retired Justice K Hema—almost five years after it was submitted (albeit a redacted version), has been revelatory.
There is a marked difference in the public response to it compared to 2017. It has also engendered a belated #MeToo movement in Malayalam cinema with many prominent actors and technicians in the industry at the receiving end of harassment and rape charges.
The tide has finally turned in favour of the members of the WCC. Not too long ago, they were lampooned for demanding basic rights by fellow actors and the public at large. A paradigm shift has occurred in the last few years. People now recognise the need to be politically correct and there is no more tolerance for such transgressions.
The collective stepping down of the executive committee of AMMA—headed by Mohanlal—after prominent members were accused of sexual harassment—is a direct result of the #MeToo revelations following the Hema Committee report.
How things got here
Malayalam cinema wasn’t always like this. From the 1950s to the 1970s, Malayalam films were primarily identified with the banners producing them. Kunchacko’s Udaya Studios and P Subramanyan’s Merryland Studio were the leading lights of this era, along with smaller banners like Manjilas Cine Enterprise.
The period featured big stars like Sathyan, Prem Nazir, Madhu, and Sheela, but none of them exercised control over the industry. The producers generally called the shots and the actors could not dictate terms to directors.
By the 1970s, there came about a gradual change as young men and women who were fascinated with films began to make their way to Madras (now Chennai), where most Malayalam films were shot.
Women’s exploitation and ‘casting couch’ became prevalent in those days and the narratives about such incidents made their way into the plots of films such as KG George’s Lekhayude Maranam Oru Flashback (1983). However, this was considered more an aberration than the norm. And there was certainly no ‘power group’—consisting of some 15 members of the fraternity—as recounted in the Hema Committee report.
Despite the prevalence of middle-of-the-road and award-winning films that regularly vied with Bengali cinema for national awards, the gradual emergence of superstar culture in the Malayalam film industry in the late 1970s and 1980s also saw its share of male chauvinistic films. This became a norm by the 1990s when filmmaking shifted from Madras to Kochi and Mammootty and Mohanlal were firmly entrenched as the entities controlling Malayalam cinema.
When AMMA was established in 1994, it was dubbed as an effort to protect the interest of artists, as a check and balance to the Kerala Film Chamber of Commerce founded in 1956.
Instead, it only went on to strengthen the grip of the superstars over the business of cinema. The Malayalam Cine Technicians Association (MACTA) was also floated the same year. Veteran actors MG Soman and Madhu were the founding president and general secretary of AMMA, but Mammootty and Mohanlal (initially vice presidents) have had a disproportionate say in AMMA since its inception.
The first-of-its-kind ‘ban’ was enforced by AMMA on veteran actor Sukumaran in 1995, which was amicably settled through Madhu’s intervention. Curiously, Sukumaran’s son Prithviraj was at the receiving end of a ban by AMMA and the producers’ association in 2012—which finds prominent mention on page 127 in the Hema Committee report.
Also read: Hema Committee tears down Kerala’s progressive image. Malayali men are still just men
Emergence of Dileep
At the turn of the millennium, actor Dileep emerged as the most bankable star, delivering a string of hits when established stars like Mammootty, Suresh Gopi, and Jayaram saw a blip in their stardom. Mohanlal was churning out films where he played larger-than-life roles while Dileep became a hero who could deliver an initial run at the box office.
Dileep’s films were laden with low-brow humour, meant to cater to the lowest common denominator. It didn’t take long for Mammootty and Jayaram along with a host of writers and directors to go down that route in the search for success, bringing down Malayalam cinema’s standing in the process.
Dileep started as an assistant director to Kamal in the Mohanlal-starrer Vishnulokam (1991). He was a mimicry artist who got his break as an actor in the mid-1990s. As he began to churn out hits in the early 2000s, he branched out more into the business side of filmmaking: production and exhibition.
Mohanlal and Mammootty followed suit, and AMMA allegedly became a puppet in their hands. And Dileep is said to have been pretty much pulling the strings from behind the scenes. This was also the phase when a ‘caravan culture’ began to change the collective functioning of film sets, with hierarchy becoming more pronounced.
It was a complaint registered against Dileep with MACTA by director Thulasidas in 2008 that went on to reveal the clout of the actor in the Malayalam tinsel world. Vinayan, then-general secretary of MACTA, took a position against Dileep. The actor refused to work with Thulasidas arguing that the director’s latest film with Mohanlal, College Kumaran (2008), had flopped. This was after taking an advance.
Dileep, who had now become too important in AMMA’s fundraising efforts—having produced Twenty:20 (2008) with an ensemble cast featuring Mammootty, Mohanlal, Suresh Gopi, Jayaram, and himself—managed to break MACTA in no time.
Those who left MACTA formed the Film Employees Federation of Kerala (FEFKA), hollowing out the parent body. And that is reportedly how the power group began to enforce bans and promote those who swung to their tunes.
Director Vinayan was the first target, followed by veteran actor Thilakan and Prithviraj, among others. Vinayan later approached the Competition Commission of India (CCI) against the AMMA and FEFKA, gaining a favourable verdict, resulting in the slapping of fines on AMMA and FEFKA office bearers.
Also read: Hema Committee report took 5 yrs to come out. Telugu film industry’s version still under wraps
The assault and its aftermath
The abduction and assault of the actress on the night of 17 February 2017 proved to be an eye-opener for the public toward the perverse functioning of the Malayalam movie industry. Manju Warrier, formerly married to Dileep, was the first one to raise a conspiracy angle to the case when the actors assembled in Kochi to express their solidarity with the survivor. This was also the backdrop to the formation of WCC.
However, the Hema Committee report suggests that Warrier was the only WCC member who continued to find substantial work in the aftermath of its formation, others were at the receiving end of unofficial bans. In all likelihood, Warrier’s public distancing from the WCC (while very much remaining its member) was designed more to appeal to the patriarchal public consciousness of Kerala than sucking up to the powers within the Malayalam film industry.
It is that very public consciousness that has undergone a massive change, going by the reactions to the Hema Committee report. For them, the WCC stands vindicated and their stars have been revealed to have feet of clay.
While Mammootty and Mohanlal initially maintained a studied silence (they finally addressed the situation over the weekend), two divergent voices emerged from AMMA in the form of Prithviraj and veteran actor Jagadish. It is another matter that Prithviraj could not bring himself to identify the ‘power group’ that had once enforced a ban on him. Perhaps he finds himself too entrenched in the power structure and can no longer afford to do so.
It is also a fact that there has been more democratisation in Malayalam cinema in the post-Covid-19 years, with OTTs becoming a bigger determining factor than satellite rights, breaking power structures in toto.
Like films that pick up the pace based on word-of-mouth after a poor opening, the WCC has become a hit. But it would be remiss to not recall the Jekyll-and-Hyde role played by the Pinarayi Vijayan-led Left government in Kerala.
While it was quick to take credit for constituting the Hema committee, the state government has been equally responsible for protecting the interests of the AMMA and perpetuating its power structure. But perhaps that discussion is best left for another day.
Anand Kochukudy is a Kerala-based journalist and columnist. He tweets @AnandKochukudy. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prasanna Bachchhav)