When did Bollywood stop telling Middle Class Stories?
Mainstream Hindi movies seem to have succumbed to an identity crisis, where the lives of their target audience are no longer represented in their films. At the box offices today lies an odd tale, where older films and failed cinematic productions of the past return to screens, getting more appreciation and money in their second round than when they first hit the big screen. This is not a case of simple nostalgia by the viewers but rather a desperate craving for a portrayal of lives which once knew the complexity of everyday existence. This strange development reflects the artistic crisis within the Indian Hindi film industry. The silver screen is steadily failing in creating genuine middle class stories, replacing reality with unrealistic dreams and aspirations which drive away those people whose life had been shown in every frame.
The flaw in mainstream Hindi cinema is not merely in the disappearance of middle class protagonists but in the way that middle class lives are now increasingly being presented through the prism of poverty and upward social mobility. Finances are now being used to signify shame, lower salaries are juxtaposed against extreme riches, and personal satisfaction continues to be associated with breaking out of one’s current situation. Such an attitude towards middle class living presents it as nothing more than an interim area before a much better lifestyle becomes accessible to the people there, ignoring the many social connections, compromises, desires and other aspects of middle class life which should make it interesting enough to be shown on screen.
Theatres are proving to be an interesting source of insight here. Both Laila Majnu and Tumbbad, released in 2018, have found new audiences through theatrical re-releases, with more successful runs than their original releases. Nostalgia may partly explain this renewed interest, but there is perhaps something more at play. Audiences are connecting with stories that did not receive the recognition they deserved initially, suggesting that a film's initial commercial performance does not necessarily reflect its emotional depth or lasting appeal. This makes one wonder whether mainstream Hindi cinema has lost its ability to find compelling stories within the realities of everyday life.
Class was rarely ever presented as something that the middle class would actively want to avoid in older movies. The love life of a working woman was presented as a complicated situation in Rajnigandha. The pressure to be ‘decent’ was used as an element of comedy in Gol Maal, and Katha provided a glimpse into the petty aspirations and hidden meanness within a housing society. While money, jobs, reputations and families were all factors which played a role in how each character behaved in their love lives, lied, fought and daydreamed, it wasn’t the whole of who they were. They were often silly, self-centred and uncertain but this didn’t make them deserving of sympathy.
Modern stories often have a very specific take on class. Shows like Cubicles show exactly how much money the character has in their bank account right down to the last rupee before payday. Panchayat mentions the character’s low income to contrast with their friends high earning job abroad. While this can be useful to show how worried they are about their money, if it’s just there to gain sympathy then it can cause issues. The middle class becomes a group of people who are defined by what they can’t afford. They become a group who constantly compare themselves to someone wealthier. There is no humour, pride, paradoxes or little victories. The struggle with money becomes significant only because it’s a step towards becoming wealthy. It seems like they won’t be happy until they’ve escaped their current lives.
This creates complications for realism. A salary wouldn’t really explain the world they live in. A small room doesn’t mean much without knowing why they were forced into it. Real social storytelling considers how their jobs, housing, family and unequal opportunities influence their decisions. They also understand that they aren’t defined by their poverty and aren’t there to inspire those with more. Using hardship as a tool for aesthetics can cause realism to become a more prestigious version of a spectacle.
Not only does this affect the script but also the production side of film making. Producers work within an industry which has large budgets, big openings in the cinema and can have consequences if the film isn’t commercially successful. If a horror comedy proves to be a success then the industry will look for another. If action spectacles are dominating the box office, then scale starts to seem like a safer option. Writers have mentioned that they have been approached with ideas which are based on trends rather than original ideas. If the story creators don’t have much say in what gets commissioned, then the storytelling can become influenced by the opinions of those funding and packaging the film.
However, this does not mean that the industry must stop focusing on entertainment. However, a restrictive budget will impact the entertainment value of any film. A small scale, family drama will have to be made to fit within the preconceived notions of films having the largest opening weekend being the best. It will be harder to create a story around late pay, difficult relationships, everyday work life and average neighbourhoods. The industry will start to miss what people want to watch.
A change in tone stems from how creative control is distributed within the industry. Writers and indie filmmakers find their freedom constrained by executives, financiers, and agents who decide what reaches the screen. Modern producers lean on established formulas, favoring short-lived trends over grounded human drama. As explored in Culture Gully's analysis of Bollywood's decline, this reliance on inherited privilege and rigid formulas creates high barriers for fresh perspectives, stripping mainstream cinema of its creative edge. Writers face commercial pressures that simplify complex social issues for easy consumption. In the process, uncomfortable realities of inequality, regional identity, and economic hardship are softened or ignored. Films attempting to portray subaltern or lower middle class lives often slip into poverty porn or offer sanitised, middle ground depictions tailored for privileged urban audiences. There have been many realistic films in Hindi cinema. Piku shows us how funny and sweet getting old and taking on family responsibilities can be. Tumhari Sulu focuses on a housewife and her ambitions, Badhaai Ho focuses on an unplanned pregnancy but shows us the embarrassment, love and family expectations. 12th Fail shows how money issues, renting rooms and wanting to go to school were central to the protagonist's journey. This complicates the idea that middle class stories are dead. However, they are not always present. Whilst individuals have had success, the industry as a whole needs to take a risk and believe in the lives of everyday people.
Regional cinema reminds us that stories can be realistic, romantic, funny and political. Films like Thangalaan and Vaazhai show how they have connected with real social issues. No film industry is free from formulas but this shows us that we do not have to choose between entertaining stories and socially complex ones.
The past was far from perfect however there are plenty of stories to tell in the present. What mainstream Hindi cinema risks losing is the belief that a life without luxury can still be ambitious, ridiculous, romantic and impactful. We do not need every film to be about money and crowded buses. We just need characters we can relate to.
The average person was never average. There was always drama. Until Hindi cinema believes in it again, the clerk will continue to wait by the bus stop, practising his confession.
Comments