Movie Review: The Girlfriend
The Girlfriend is a South Indian film that attempts to explore themes of childhood neglect, romantic relationships, patriarchy, and female independence. While the film raises important questions, it also presents several disturbing and illogical narratives that deserve closer scrutiny.
The story begins by portraying the female protagonist as a motherless child with an emotionally distant father. A key childhood scene shows the young girl—around nine or ten years old—asking her father for food while he continues sleeping, forcing her to drink water to suppress her hunger. This single scene is clearly designed to make the audience immediately judge the father as cold and negligent, thereby justifying every future action of the daughter, whether right or wrong.
However, this portrayal is inconsistent. The girl grows up, attends school, and later gains admission to college—something impossible without years of care, food, and financial support. The film conveniently ignores this contradiction, using selective storytelling to manufacture sympathy rather than presenting a realistic background.
The narrative becomes more troubling when the college setting is introduced. Shockingly, male students are shown freely entering a women’s hostel—walking into rooms at will, sitting on beds, and even sleeping with female students. For anyone familiar with Indian hostels, this is not just unrealistic but deeply irresponsible. Hostels exist to provide safety and dignity, especially for young women who often dress casually and treat the space as their home. Portraying them as unrestricted spaces for romantic encounters normalizes dangerous laxity and raises serious questions about institutional accountability.
The film does, however, briefly acknowledge this issue when the father discovers his daughter in a compromising situation. He confronts the college authorities and angrily questions how men are allowed into a women’s hostel. The professor’s character is portrayed as passive and complacent—more interested in drawing a salary than enforcing rules—highlighting administrative negligence. Unfortunately, this critical thread is not explored deeply enough.
As the relationship progresses, the boyfriend’s true nature unfolds. The heroine realizes that she has been reduced to a domestic helper—cleaning his room, washing his clothes, feeding him in the canteen, and catering to his emotional and physical needs without commitment. This realization intensifies when she meets his mother, a silent, subdued woman who has lost her vitality after years of domestic abuse by her alcoholic husband. This encounter becomes a turning point, revealing how normalized female subservience passes from one generation to the next.
When the heroine finally breaks off the relationship, the boyfriend’s reaction exposes his entitlement. Unable to accept her independence, he retaliates viciously by circulating posters portraying her as a woman of “loose character,” publicly shaming her. In one of the film’s stronger moments, she confronts him boldly, stating that if she is labelled immoral, then he too is equally responsible—challenging the hypocrisy of moral judgment placed solely on women.
The film concludes by showing the woman as an independent professional, working in an office and earning her own living. While this ending is meant to signify empowerment, it also subtly reinforces a problematic message often promoted by mainstream cinema: that live-in relationships, unrestricted physical intimacy, and emotional disposability are natural steps toward “liberation,” while the consequences—emotional damage, exploitation, and character assassination—are glossed over.
Final Verdict
The Girlfriend attempts to address gender inequality and female autonomy but does so through exaggerated scenarios, selective morality, and questionable social normalization. Instead of offering a nuanced critique of relationships and responsibility, it risks endorsing a culture where boundaries dissolve, accountability vanishes, and emotional damage is justified in the name of freedom.
The film raises valid questions—but often provides deeply flawed answers
Leave a comment