Shakeela talks on being exploited | They used to force me
Shakeela arrived in the 1990s like a storm in the world of Malayalam cinema, where men dominated the industry. Her ascent to fame challenged gender norms and traditional interpretations of the term. Shakeela, who mostly acted in softcore pornographic films in the 1990s and 2000s, broke preconceptions and redefined what a “heroine” in Malayalam cinema.
Shakeela, meanwhile, recently said that the Malayalam cinema business, which had previously turned her into a household name, was afraid to cast her at this time. At a session titled “The Myth of Morality” at the seventh Kerala Literature Festival (KLF) in Kozhikode, she stated, “Now they say that if they cast me, the film will be perceived differently,” according to The News Minute.
“I play the story, the heroine, and the hero in my movies. They have to finish the film if I make a demand before they start working on it. I won’t share my dates if not. I am aware that not many female performers experience it. Many of them are paid so little that they are embarrassed to acknowledge it in public, TNM reported her as saying.
The actor pointed out that, in spite of Kinnarathumbikal’s notable success, she was still subjected to financial exploitation (2000). There have been times when I went to shoot a movie, and they would sneakily force me to shoot scenes for other movies. My linguistic barrier meant that I frequently didn’t understand what was going on. I eventually began to inform them that I would no longer be filming in Kerala since they would be in charge here. I made the decision to shoot exclusively in Chennai going forward,” Shakeela declared, disclosing that roughly 65–70 bank checks from Keralan filmmakers bounced, forcing her to refuse checks entirely.
She addressed the issue of the orgasm gap, asking how many married women could genuinely say they had had an orgasm. “A lot of ladies are unaware of what an orgasm is. She said, “You shouldn’t be shy about it,” in reference to how she portrayed orgasms on screen.
Although she recognized the benefits of creating Internal Committees (IC), she had concerns about its applicability in the film industry. Do you believe that someone will still be employed if they go to the IC and submit a complaint? No,” the performer replied. In a contentious question, she questioned the #MeToo movement, questioning why it was necessary for women to publicly humiliate themselves and share their experiences with harassment when it would eventually lead to nothing. Furthermore, she claimed that India’s lenient rape laws rendered complaints about the crime seem pointless.
Rise to Fame and Agency
Shakeela, often described as “a woman standing outside the box of morality,” became a superstar in the cinema halls of south India with her bold performances. Despite the societal stigma attached to her roles, Shakeela had the agency to dictate her own terms for her films, which is a rarity in the male-dominated film industry. In her own words, “In my films, I am the hero, the heroine, and also the story.” She had the power to raise demands before signing a film, ensuring that her conditions were met. This level of control over her career was not something many women actors experienced, as they often faced low remuneration and exploitation.
Exploitation and Financial Challenges
While Shakeela had the power to negotiate her terms, financial exploitation was still prevalent in her career. She recalled instances where she was not paid fairly for her work. In one of her most celebrated films, “Kinnarathumbikal” (2000), she was only paid Rs 20,000 for five days of shooting. However, the film turned out to be a huge hit, showcasing the stark disparity between her remuneration and the success of her films. Shakeela’s financial situation improved when she started demanding higher fees. For example, she once asked for Rs 1 lakh per day and ended up receiving Rs 3 lakh for three days of work. Despite these improvements, she still faced challenges, such as bounced bank cheques from filmmakers.
Language Barrier and Exploitation
Shakeela also faced challenges due to her language barrier. She often had no knowledge of the scenes she was shooting, and filmmakers would make her work on multiple films without her consent. This lack of communication and understanding left her vulnerable to exploitation. To protect herself, Shakeela decided to limit her work to Chennai, where she felt she had more control over her career. Despite her efforts to safeguard her interests, she acknowledged that exploitation was prevalent in the industry, even if she personally didn’t face many instances of it.
The Myth of Morality and the Fear of Casting Shakeela
During a session at the Kerala Literature Festival (KLF), Shakeela spoke about the myth of morality in the film industry. She highlighted how Malayalam cinema once made a brand out of her bold image but is now hesitant to cast her due to the fear of public perception. Shakeela shared an incident where the authorities of a mall in Kozhikode denied permission for a trailer launch event she was supposed to attend. This incident exemplified the challenge she faced in being accepted by the industry despite her contributions.
Conclusion
Shakeela’s journey in the Malayalam film industry is a testament to the exploitation and inequality that exists within the entertainment world. Despite her success and agency in negotiating her terms, she faced financial exploitation, communication barriers, and the fear of being typecast. Her experiences raise important questions about the need for a more equitable and supportive industry, where actors, especially women, are treated with respect and fairness. Shakeela’s story serves as a reminder that behind the glamour of the silver screen, there are often untold stories of struggle and exploitation that need to be addressed.
