Why every actor now wants to play the villain in pan-India films

India Today

5 days ago

In a striking shift across Indian cinema, the boundary between hero and villain is increasingly blurred. With pan-India spectacles becoming the norm, a new casting trend has emerged: top stars, across industries, are willingly stepping into the shoes of powerful antagonists.From Yash's much-hyped portrayal of Ravana in 'Ramayana', to Bobby Deol's bloody rampage in 'Animal', and Kamal Haasan's haunting Supreme Yaskin in 'Kalki 2898 AD', the villain has never looked more glamorous and powerful.advertisementSome compare this to a Hollywood tradition, where major stars frequently take on supporting or antagonist roles without necessarily being the central protagonist. From ensemble classics to recent examples like 'Oppenheimer', it is a familiar format. And now, that playbook is being adopted widely in Indian cinema, especially across pan-India films.
But what is fuelling this surge of star-powered antagonists? And does it mark a fresh chapter in Indian storytelling or simply a marketing tactic dressed in dramatic grey?The rise of the star-villainThis trend of heroes turning villains isn't entirely new, it is rooted in Indian cinema's legacy. Legendary actor-politician Sr NTR played Ravana in 'Bhookailas' and again in his own production 'Seetharama Kalyanam', despite director KV Reddy's warning that such negative roles might clash with his divine image. In Tamil cinema, MGR took on a dual role in 'Ninaithathai Mudippavan', and Sivaji Ganesan played a rare negative part in 'Goondukili'. In Malayalam, Mohanlal debuted as a sadistic villain in 'Manjil Virinja Pookkal', while Mammootty's transformation as a ruthless landlord in 'Paleri Manikyam' was chilling and acclaimed. Even Rajinikanth built his early career on negative roles in films like 'Moondru Mudichu' and '16 Vayathinile'. But the modern wave, especially after 'Baahubali', has given villains a whole new cinematic weight. It has brought back the trend to the mainstream, but now with a different visual language and a new set of creative and commercial expectations.When villains take centre stageStarting with Rana Daggubati as Bhallaladeva, his character was arguably more layered than the titular role of Baahubali. His cold ambition, wounded pride and emotional contradictions made him a towering presence in both films. It is no coincidence that the writing of the character rose in scale because Rana was playing the role. 'Baahubali' didn't just make Prabhas a pan-India hero, it turned Rana into one too.Since then, star villains have become a strategic casting choice. In 'Master', Vijay Sethupathi's Bhavani opens the film, setting the emotional tone even before Vijay's JD enters. His performance oozes menace and tragic backstory, elevating what could have been a routine gangster role. Similarly, Fahadh Faasil's psychologically unhinged cop in 'Pushpa' offered an eerie counter to Allu Arjun's rustic charisma. In 'Maamannan', again, Fahadh's portrayal of an upper-caste antagonist became the emotional core of the film's political rage.And then there came 'Animal', where Bobby Deol's largely silent, blood-drenched villain became a national obsession. His screen time was brief, but the impact was thunderous. A comeback narrative emerged overnight, one that has since translated into major roles for him in 'Hari Hara Veera Mallu', 'Kanguva' and 'Daaku Maharaaj'. The same goes for Kamal Haasan's Supreme Yaskin in 'Kalki 2898 AD', brief but unforgettable.Why are stars choosing the dark side?For one, it is commercially viable. As pan-India films target multiple linguistic markets, producers need faces that resonate across regions. A Bollywood star playing a Telugu or Kannada villain instantly expands the film's reach in the Hindi-speaking belts. As per trade reports, many of these actors, like Saif Ali Khan in 'Devara' or Sanjay Dutt in 'KGF 2', command hefty pay for relatively short shooting schedules.Creatively too, the villain role offers room to break free from formulaic heroism. Actors are no longer confined to righteous leads. They can be morally messy, psychologically broken, and theatrically powerful, all without carrying the burden of redemption.For the viewer, it is a win. These face-offs between established stars have cinematic gravity. What could be more intriguing than Jr NTR clashing with Hrithik Roshan in 'War 2'? Or Ranbir Kapoor as Rama going up against Yash in 'Ramayana'? Or Prabhas crossing paths with Kamal Haasan in 'Kalki 2898 AD'? These aren't just rivalries, they are multi-layered battles of ethos, acting styles, and legacy.advertisement The multi-starrer pullThese casting choices also feed into the growing appetite for ensemble-led blockbusters. Take 'Kalki 2898 AD', where Prabhas, Amitabh Bachchan, Deepika Padukone, Kamal Haasan and Disha Patani all co-exist. Or the upcoming film 'Coolie', which brings together Rajinikanth, Nagarjuna and Upendra. In each case, the villain is not a throwaway baddie, but a carefully crafted piece of the puzzle.More stars in a film means scope to attract more markets. But more importantly, it allows the audience to witness their favourite stars in unexpected combinations. Fans don't just turn up for one actor, they show up for the clash of titans.The flip sideBut it all comes at a cost. As more actors are cast in stylised villain roles, the risk of typecasting increases. Sanjay Dutt, post'KGF 2', Bobby Deol after 'Animal', and Vijay Sethupathi following 'Master' have all found themselves featuring in similar roles - bloodied, generic but larger-than-life. While the success is undeniable, the range starts to narrow. Even Fahadh Faasil, who is celebrated for his versatility, is now being used repeatedly as the off-kilter antagonist in big-budget spectacles.advertisement There is also the question of sustainability. Bigger budgets to accommodate multiple stars mean smaller films are being squeezed out. When three actors co-lead one Rs 300 to 400 crore project, that is potentially three solo films not being made, leaving the theatres empty. The increasing budgets for giving that big-screen experience is also impacting other films, which are made considerably on lower budgets. The industry's middle layer, indie, mid-budget and small-budget cinema, is increasingly under pressure.Another concern is the rising trend of glorified violence. From Rolex in 'Vikram' to the final bloodbath in 'Animal', violence is now rendered with such style and bravado that it becomes seductive. The moral complexity is lost to slow-motion swagger. Are we now cheering brutality just because a beloved actor delivers it?Where does it go from here?This trend shows no signs of slowing down. Upcoming films like 'Ramayana', 'Coolie', 'The Raja Saab' and 'SSMB 29' are doubling down on hero-villain dualities featuring superstar pairings. The villain is no longer a secondary role. It is often the second lead, or in some cases, who forms the real emotional core of the film.advertisementBut audiences will not settle for style alone. For these star-villain roles to be impactful, the writing must evolve too. Not every villain can be Bhallaladeva and not every face-off can rest on legacy alone. The emotional architecture of these characters must rise to match the casting.The trend of heroes stepping into villainous roles has unlocked new space, for performance, for audience thrill, and for expanding the idea of pan-Indian stardom. It's where star power collides with story tension, and where anti-heroes stand shoulder to shoulder with traditional leads. But how long this lasts will depend on how smartly the industry evolves. The challenge isn't just casting bigger names, it's about writing stronger characters. And above all, it's about keeping the balance, and knowing when to push boundaries and when to pull back.- EndsMust Watch