top of page

By:

Bharati Dubey

17 May 2026 at 1:38:10 am

After Don-3 controversy, Ranveer’s next film goes on floors

Mumbai: After months of attention surrounding his reported exit from Don 3, Ranveer Singh has finally moved on to his next major cinematic venture. The actor’s ambitious survival spectacle Pralay has officially gone on floors in Mumbai today, marking the beginning of filming on one of the most ambitious and scale-driven projects in Indian cinema. Headlined by Ranveer Singh and directed by Jai Mehta, Pralay is an original end-of-the-world action thriller that promises to take audiences into a...

After Don-3 controversy, Ranveer’s next film goes on floors

Mumbai: After months of attention surrounding his reported exit from Don 3, Ranveer Singh has finally moved on to his next major cinematic venture. The actor’s ambitious survival spectacle Pralay has officially gone on floors in Mumbai today, marking the beginning of filming on one of the most ambitious and scale-driven projects in Indian cinema. Headlined by Ranveer Singh and directed by Jai Mehta, Pralay is an original end-of-the-world action thriller that promises to take audiences into a world on the brink of annihilation. Produced by Ananya Birla’s Birla Studios, Hansal Mehta and Sahil Saigal’s True Story Films, and Maa Kasam Films, the film combines large-scale spectacle with a deeply human story of survival, courage and the instinct to fight for what matters most. The film marks Ranveer’s next major motion picture following Dhurandhar and Dhurandhar – The Revenge, which emerged as the highest-grossing film of all time. With Pralay, the actor once again ventures into unexplored cinematic territory, taking on a disruptive new concept that demands both physical intensity and emotional conviction. Ranveer will also serve as a producer on the film. The project comes at an important point in the actor’s career. His reported exit from Don 3 had generated considerable buzz, particularly as he was expected to carry forward one of Indian cinema’s most iconic franchises. With Pralay, Ranveer now turns the page with an entirely original story rather than stepping into another established universe. Joining him is Lokah breakout actress Kalyani Priyadarshan, who plays a pivotal role in the film and brings together another exciting performer from the new generation of Indian talent. For Ananya Birla, Pralay represents Birla Studios’ ambition to push the boundaries of mainstream Indian cinema by collaborating with contemporary creative forces. For True Story Films’ Hansal Mehta and Sahil Saigal, the project reflects their commitment to disruptive storytelling and content-driven cinema. Behind the camera, Jai Mehta leads the ambitious project. His work on Scam 1992: The Harshad Mehta Story, which he co-directed with Hansal Mehta, and Lootere has earned widespread acclaim. With Pralay, he steps into a significantly larger canvas, bringing together an ensemble of creative and technical talent from India and around the world. Set against the unmistakable pulse and landscape of Mumbai, Pralay follows a relentless journey of survival against the terrifying possibility of an end-of-the-world catastrophe. The film aims to marry breathtaking spectacle with an emotional core, exploring what people are willing to do to survive when the world as they know it begins to collapse. The makers are shooting extensively at live locations in and around Mumbai, embracing the physicality and unpredictability of real-world environments. The approach is designed to add scale, texture and realism to the apocalyptic world while creating an immersive theatrical experience. The film had already undergone several months of highly technical and intensive pre-production before cameras began rolling. Its ambitious mounting and unusual premise have made Pralay one of the most talked-about upcoming projects in Indian cinema.

The Eye of the Beholder

Updated: Mar 17, 2025


Margaret Wolfe Hungerford wrote the line, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” in her 1878 novel, though several, including Plato, have explored variations of this theme. It is now a well-worn idiom for people agreeing to disagree on the appeal of something, be it a person, a melody, or a work of art. Is beauty inherent, is it perceived, does it exist at all, what is the relationship between art and beauty? Artists have long struggled with such questions.



Meidias Hydria, Athenian red-figure water vase, circa 420 BC
Meidias Hydria, Athenian red-figure water vase, circa 420 BC

The first hurdle lies in defining the concept of beauty. Reading philosophies of aesthetics as postulated by Aristotle, Nietzsche, and other empiricists and rationalists is enough to make one’s head spin. Is beauty a primordial truth contained within the Golden Ratio, which has been superimposed – sometimes inaccurately – on the Parthenon, da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man, and Hokusai’s Great Wave of Kanazawa? Is this math applied to works retrospectively a marker of inherent beauty, or merely an interesting, if flawed, coincidence? Johann Winckelmann, often considered the first art historian, believed that unity and simplicity are the two sources of absolute beauty which can only be achieved in man’s artistic creations and not in nature.


Immanuel Kant claimed that to the contrary, ‘true beauty’ can be found only in nature. Poets and artists have embraced this notion with exaltations to the natural universe.


David Hume suggested a complex relationship between the object, its perception, and its comprehension stating, "Beauty in things exists merely in the mind which contemplates them.” If it awakens pleasure or passion in the viewer, then that which is being viewed could be termed beautiful, be it a sunset or a work of art. And then there was Keats with his Ode on a Grecian Urn: “Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty. That is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know." If you’ve ever looked at a Grecian Urn in a museum, you’ve likely pondered some of these questions. Or perhaps it made little impact in comparison to the Khavda pottery from Gujarat, thought to trace its roots to the Indus Valley civilization. The eye of the beholder, after all.



Rummana Hussain, Earth Picture, 1993
Rummana Hussain, Earth Picture, 1993

The traditional ‘purpose’ of art was to transcend the banal and prosaic, to rise into being sacred and sublime. Statues of gods and goddesses whether Indian or Greek were representations of idealised beauty which was determined within the context of time, place, material, and culture. Cows imbued with metaphoric love in a Pichwai painting can evoke feelings of divine devotion, but only if you have knowledge of the lore. Notwithstanding the treatises of philosophers about the Platonic ideal and a priori truths, much aesthetic taste is a result of conditioning.


The women painted by Flemish artist Peter Paul Reubens in the 1600s have little in common with the women in scroll paintings from the Ming dynasty in China, which lasted until 1644. Whether voluptuous or stylized, each artist was creating what was considered glorious to them and their audience.


Though many even today continue to equate art with beauty, art gradually evolved into the portrayal of “real life,” which of course is not always beautiful, no matter which way you define it. Indeed, much modern and contemporary art would lead one to believe that beauty isn’t top of mind for most artists, no matter where they are in the world. Somnath Hore and Chittaprosad Bhattacharya’s drawings of the 1943 Bengal Famine are heart-wrenching.


Dissident Chinese artist Ai Weiwei says, “Life is art. Art is life. I never separate it.” Vivan Sundaram’s politically conscious art raised awareness about many “crises,” as he termed them, including communalism and migration.


Last week, an artist left piglets to starve in a cage at an art show in Copenhagen to make a statement about the mistreatment of animals. The elusive Banksy says, “Art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable,” his anti-establishment graffiti art presenting ironic commentaries on socio-political absurdities. Rummana Hussain’s broken terracotta pots are a response to the Babri Masjid demolition of 1992 – wouldn’t Keats’ ode to truth and beauty hold true for her work as well, even though the urn she depicts is shattered and in pieces?


The relationship between art and beauty is complicated. George Bernard Shaw said, “Without art, the crudeness of reality would make the world unbearable.” The joy and sadness of the human condition is what makes life magical, and art necessarily responds to both. We can lose ourselves in the dreamworlds of Sakti Burman as deeply as in the nightmares of Hieronymus Bosch. Dostoevsky’s Prince Myshkin declared, “Beauty will save the world,” but let’s not forget that he was The Idiot of the book title. Idiots, however, sometimes speak profound truths.


One could argue that art which moves viewers to reconsider their reality in any way offers salvation because, to quote acting teacher Stella Adler, “life beats down and crushes the soul and art reminds you that you have one.” Could there be anything more universally beautiful than rediscovering our humanity?


Vitruvian Man 


Great Wave of Kanazawa 

 

Khavda pottery 

 

Pichwai 

 

Reubens 

 

Somnath Hore 

 

Chittaprosad Bhattacharya 

 

scroll paintings from the Ming dynasty 

 

Sakti Burman 

 

Hieronymus Bosch 

 

(Meera is an architect, author, editor, and artist. Her column meanders through the vibrant world of art, discussing ideas, offering critiques, delving into theory and exploring everything in between and beyond.)

 

Comments

bottom of page