The Indian film industry is a riot of colours and emotions. While Indian cinema is renowned for its vibrant storytelling and cultural diversity, it is a field with explicit contrasts. Though it shines with great musicals and blockbuster movies, it often ignores movies with critical narratives for more commercial viability. It is undisputed that indie artists and filmmakers, despite their talents, struggle to find a space in the industry, which is always inclined towards conventional plots or predictable narratives. Further, the sector also struggles with problems like nepotism, lack of representation, and resistance to addressing societal taboos, which calls for reformations in the industry.
However, there’s a new battle emerging in the industry recently between Pushpa 2: The Rule, an Indian Telugu-language action-drama blockbuster movie featuring Allu Arjun, and on the other is All We Imagine as Light (AWIAL), an introspective gem by Payal Kapadia, which is set against the vibrant backdrop of Mumbai city. Pushpa 2 is an action-thriller movie that broke records across 4,500 screens and caused an atomic chain reaction in cinematic history with just a single slogan. On the other hand, AWIAL delves into capturing the city’s essence and complexities through bold, multifaceted characters and has been internationally recognised for its realistic trajectory. However, despite its recognitions, including the Cannes Grand Prix and the Golden Globe 2025, this movie has been placed, locked away in a cupboard, exposing the challenges that independent filmmakers face.
Pushpa 2 Redefines Screen Space Dynamics
The controversy was first ignited when Vikramaditya Motwane, the director of Lootera, publicly criticized the makers of Pushpa 2 through Instagram on December 10th, 2024, for forcing multiplexes into contracts that prevented them from showing any other films during the first ten days of its release.
This issue gained more relevance when an anonymous source from a popular multiplex chain revealed that showing any other film during this period could lead to penalties. Motwane explicitly shared his thoughts on Instagram, pointing out the irony that the multiplex chain was now being pressured as they had previously pressured smaller producers. Earlier, he criticized multiplexes for not screening AWIAL, though it was a film nominated for the Golden Globe. Motwane expressed concern that if other major films adopted this practice, it would create a harmful trend, limiting the genres of movies available in theatres.
The Monopoly of Mass-Market Films: The Threat to Indie Cinema
The ongoing controversy between Pushpa 2: The Rule and AWIAL raises critical concerns under competition law, particularly Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002, deals with anti-competitive agreements. The exclusive contracts allegedly forced on multiplex chains by Pushpa 2 could be considered a violation of Section 3, as these contracts prevent the screening of other films during the first ten days of the movie’s release. This practice restricts market access for indie films like AWIAL, limiting the variety of films shown and creating an unfair advantage for the blockbuster, thereby reducing consumer choice.
Also, Section 4 of the Competition Act, of 2002 prohibits the abuse of a dominant position in the market, which is highly relevant to the situation involving Pushpa 2 and its alleged monopolistic practices. Given the film’s immense success and its dominance by occupying over 4,500 screens, its creators possess significant market power. This position could be exploited to coerce multiplex chains into entering exclusive agreements that prevent screening other films, such as AWIAL. Such actions could be considered an abuse of dominance, as they unfairly limit market access for smaller films, restricting competition and undermining diversity in the cinematic space.
How To Balance Commerce & Creativity To Preserve The Essence Of Cinema?
While the legal concerns highlight indie films’ barriers, Motwane also brings attention to the broader creative struggle in balancing commercial success with artistic integrity. He isn’t calling for a battle between big-budget films and smaller, independent ones. Instead, he believes both are important and should coexist. The big films bring excitement and crowds, while the indie films touch people’s hearts and minds. If we must choose between them, we risk losing the diversity and richness that makes Indian cinema special.
According to Motwane, the real challenge is not competition but finding a way for both types of films to thrive together. This would ensure that every story, whether big or small, gets the chance to be seen, keeping Indian cinema exciting, diverse, and full of depth.
Source: Mahima Gupta, Smita Pandey & Nishita Neelanjana