<div style=' background:#FFFFFF;color:#000000;font-family:Verdana;width:auto;padding:5px;max-height:100%;'><span><p>Sandeep Reddy Vanga, known for his distinctive cinematic style, has once again stirred controversy with his latest movie, "Animal." The discussions sparked by the film go beyond a mere slap, delving into the eulogizing of alpha males and the controversial traits portrayed, igniting debates on toxic masculinity and the portrayal of women in Vanga's films.&nbsp;</p><p>In the spotlight is Ranbir Kapoor's character, Ranvijay Singh, in "Animal." Shaped by daddy issues and an obsession with his absentee father, Balbir (played by Anil Kapoor), Ranvijay is portrayed as the prototype of an alpha male. The character's emphasis on traits like hunting prowess and providing for the family has raised eyebrows for its misogynistic undertones. The narrative, coupled with mentions of male genitalia, adds layers that dilute the concept of healthy masculinity.&nbsp;<br></p><p><br></p><p>Before going into the controversy surrounding "Animal," it's crucial to understand the concept of an alpha male. According to Red Pill praxeology expert Rollo Tomassi, the term is often misunderstood, particularly within the manosphere lexicon. In socialized animal groups, the alpha male is the most free to do as he pleases, not solely due to physical prowess but through a combination of potentially lethal force, power, social agreements, and political alliances.&nbsp;</p><p>In simpler terms, an alpha male, as per Wikipedia, is the top-ranking male in a mammalian social group. However, using this term to describe human behavior oversimplifies the complexity of human social dynamics, influenced by factors such as culture, personal experiences, and individual differences.&nbsp;<br></p><p><p>As societal views on masculinity and leadership evolve, the concept of an 'alpha male' is criticized for perpetuating rigid and harmful stereotypes about gender roles and behavior. This criticism sets the stage for the controversy surrounding "Animal."&nbsp;</p><p>This controversy raises questions about the broader impact of depicting negative roles and themes in films. It prompts a reflection on the potential negative influences on children and adolescents, who may perceive such characters as role models. The societal responsibility of filmmakers comes into focus, emphasizing the need for a nuanced approach when dealing with dark themes.&nbsp;</p></p><span></div><div style=' background:#FFFFFF;color:#000000;font-family:Verdana;width:auto;padding:5px;max-height:100%;'><span><p>The "Animal" wave has not only gripped the entertainment industry but has now reached the hallowed halls of Parliament. Chhattisgarh's INC MP Ranjeet Ranjan criticized the film for its content, expressing concern about its impact on the youth. She recounted her daughter's emotional reaction, stating that the film's excessive violence and mistreatment of women led her daughter to leave the theater in distress. Ranjan emphasized the role of cinema as a mirror of society, highlighting the influence it holds on the younger generation. She connected the portrayal of negative roles in films like "Animal" to the potential role modeling effect on teenagers. The MP lamented the prevalence of such themes in recent films, citing examples like "Kabir Singh" and "Pushpa." The controversy has widened to encompass historical inaccuracies in the film. Ranjan pointed out the misuse of a song, "Arjan Vailly," which depicts the history of Punjab. She criticized the film for distorting the historical significance of figures like Hari Singh Nalwa, the commander-in-chief of the Sikh Force, misrepresenting his contributions and legacy.&nbsp;</p><p><br></p><p>Renowned film critics like Anupama Chopra and Bhawana Somaaya have joined the chorus of disapproval, labeling "Animal" as overtly violent and misogynistic. The film's success at the box office has sparked debates about audience preferences and the responsibility of filmmakers to create content that aligns with societal values.&nbsp;</p><p>The controversy prompts a broader discussion on the impact of cinema on cultural perceptions and societal norms. It raises questions about the need for a more responsible approach to filmmaking, considering the potential consequences of glorifying toxic masculinity and portraying violence against women.&nbsp;<br></p><p>As the debate continues, it highlights the delicate balance between creative expression and social responsibility in the film industry. The influence of films on public opinion, especially the youth, underscores the need for a thoughtful and conscientious approach to storytelling.&nbsp;<br></p><span></div>