In an industry notorious for headlessly moving from one weekly release to another, Bollywood’s guarded diplomacy was disrupted by two news pieces last month. An actor exited a popular franchise, prompting the co-actor to sue him for crores of rupees. And then, reports of a famous actress dropping out of an upcoming film started swirling in media circles. None of these are extraordinary events, but in the curated times we have come to inhabit, where perception is reality, disagreements unravelling in the public domain felt rare – reminiscent of a time when celebrity spats and reunions were documented for posterity. This feeling of nostalgia was sealed when the embittered filmmaker criticised the said actress on social media. The year is 2025, but who can tell?
In the early weeks of May, several media outlets reported that Deepika Padukone was to play the female lead opposite Prabhas in Sandeep Reddy Vanga’s upcoming pan-India film, Spirit. What seemed like a conjecture awaiting confirmation fell through spectacularly in the next couple of days. The same websites carried a follow-up. Padukone was no longer part of the project. Multiple reasons were cited: her alleged ask of Rs 40 crore with profit sharing, refusal to work for more than six hours and speaking Telugu dialogues. The filmmaker deemed these demands “unprofessional” and dropped her.
The Usual Vanga Script
Although the actress issued no statement before or after the news broke out, Vanga took only two days to confirm Tripti Dimri as the female lead of his film. Fan clubs fought it out on social media and Vanga struck again. He took to X and put out a more elaborate comment, this time accusing Padukone of playing “dirty PR games” and leaking the plot of the film. “I put years of hard work behind my craft & for me, filmmaking is everything. You didn’t get it. You won’t get it. You will never get it,” read a part of his tweet. No names were mentioned, but the identity was laid bare. Maintaining silence still, Padukone shared a short clip on her Instagram, talking about the importance of being authentic. It was from an event she attended, but fans were quick to point out that Vanga was the target audience.
Since then, noise around the matter has only amplified. Social media is clogged with opinions; a journalist who had extensively reported on Spirit, including some extraneous plot details, had to tweet that his reportage was informed by his own sources and not anyone’s PR. The incident has assumed such dramatic inflexions that it could be straight out of Vanga’s films, all of which feature volatile male protagonists unable to handle rejection. Sample the premise: slighted by a woman, man rages in public.
Media, on the other hand, is busy assigning sides. In promotional events, actors and directors are being queried about the feasibility of working shorter shifts, and many (including actor Ajay Devgn and filmmaker Mani Ratnam) are rallying behind the practice. The consensus is this: Padukone is a young mother (having birthed her daughter in September last year) and right in seeking work-life balance.
Only Love For Men
But gauging the rationality of her requirements feels superfluous. Nothing Padukone asked for hasn’t been asked before. Top actors in Hindi cinema, as do elsewhere, have stakes in the film’s earnings in addition to their fees. The arrangement works on the assumption that being brands themselves, they confirm returns. Equally familiar is the conversation around time. Many Bollywood actors openly speak about the stringency – or not – of their schedules. Akshay Kumar’s early-morning shifts and his co-actors working around it is a widely known fact, as is the one that Shah Rukh Khan arrives late on sets.
On chat shows, particulars of their routine are shared as anecdotes. Kumar is lauded for being disciplined, while Khan is treated with an indulgence one would reserve for a child. The adoration remained undimmed even when the actor brought in Atlee, who hitherto made Tamil films, to direct Jawan (2023). Khan, also the producer, spoke in Hindi, as did Nayanthara, a superstar down south. The Telugu and Tamil versions were simultaneously released, but his portions were dubbed. Granted, a filmmaker is within their rights to be specific about their wants of an actor, but such a plethora of precedents normalises Padukone’s demands, revealing them to be reiterations. Then what makes the actress “unprofessional” and her male counterparts agreeable? Presumably her gender.
It’s The Market, Silly
The Hindi film industry, like most workspaces, is deeply stratified. Gender disparity manifests in women having less screen time, being offered decorative roles and paid less than the male protagonists. Exceptions exist, but in the last couple of years, Bollywood has leaned on hyper masculinity with fuller force. Every time actresses have spoken up against the system and narratives prioritising men, ‘well-meaning’ actors and producers have argued that it all boils down to bankability and market forces. In an old interview, Aamir Khan had famously said that the day an actress can fill in more seats than him, she will be paid more. Bringing together a pan-India superstar and a global icon, albeit not the first time, Spirit could have been the litmus test.
Remember Padmaavat?
Padukone is the brightest star today in the firmament of Indian cinema. In her close to two-decade career, the actress has achieved everything there is to be achieved. Films headlined by her have done exceptional business, and so have those in which she featured with other actors. She has been consistently successful for a decade; she has been successful even when others around her haven’t. In 2018, her lone face featured on the poster of Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Padmaavat, a practice so rare that it only made sense when reports confirmed she was paid more than the two male leads. The film earned approximately Rs 550 crore worldwide, a practice that Padukone’s later outings have only perpetuated. For instance, her last three features have done business of Rs 2,000 crore and more.
She also endorses a litany of national and international brands. She is the brand ambassador of global luxury brands like Cartier and Louis Vuitton, and in 2022, served as one of the jury members at the Cannes Film Festival. All this might read like Wikipedia entries, but they affirm her indisputable market viability.
For context, this is the actress who put forth certain demands and a filmmaker known for appeasing the bruised male egos of the country, turned her down. Padukone, with her enviable box office record and extensive appeal, asked for things that men have been asking for decades, and Vanga, maker of three films comprising one remake, was unhappy enough to be vocal about it. The discourse, therefore, should be less about dissecting the morality or technicality of Padukone’s wants, and more about discussing the possibility of women wanting things. The question should not be if the actress, with a baby at home, was right in wanting to work for six hours and be paid for extra labour, but if there will ever be a right time for actresses to want things? How more successful do women need to be for their demands to be deemed adequate and not excessive? More crucially, is inequality a problem that can be solved or a reality being actively glossed over?
None Of This Matters
If there is inherent prejudice in the way things unfolded, it only intensified when Vanga outraged in public. His complaint of Padukone and her PR disclosing the plot of Spirit, though impossible to ratify, holds little water. All that is known is that it will be an A-rated action film, which is as much a spoiler for a Vanga project as is John Abraham playing a male saviour in his next outing.
But in the larger picture, none of this matters. Not the veracity of his claims, nor the specificity of Padukone’s contract. Their names don’t matter and nor does the fate of Spirit. What is critical is this fresh but not by any measure the first evidence of bias in an industry that allows women to break the glass ceiling but not shatter it; enjoy their success but not earn dividends on it.
The year – I keep forgetting – is 2025.
(Ishita Sengupta is an independent film critic and culture writer from India. Her writing is informed by gender and pop culture and has appeared in The Indian Express, Hyperallergic, New Lines Magazine, etc.)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
