top of page

By:

Rupak Bardhan Roy

17 March 2026 at 8:04:57 pm

The Market of Fear

Alfred Hitchcock made fear a sophisticated form of entertainment. Above, James Stewart in Rear Window (1954) and Cary Grant in North by Northwest (1959). Let us begin where discussions of this kind usually begin, the market. Leaving thriller novels and short stories aside, market analyses of audiovisual thrillers suggest that the global OTT and theatrical market was projected to reach $10 billion by 2026. Although the United States remains its largest consumer, the vast Asia-Pacific...

The Market of Fear

Alfred Hitchcock made fear a sophisticated form of entertainment. Above, James Stewart in Rear Window (1954) and Cary Grant in North by Northwest (1959). Let us begin where discussions of this kind usually begin, the market. Leaving thriller novels and short stories aside, market analyses of audiovisual thrillers suggest that the global OTT and theatrical market was projected to reach $10 billion by 2026. Although the United States remains its largest consumer, the vast Asia-Pacific region—including China and the Indian subcontinent—is not far behind in terms of compounded annual growth. India’s audiovisual thriller market has reportedly been expanding by more than 9 per cent annually, with an audience of nearly 60 million viewers a year. The reasons for this rapid growth are not difficult to comprehend: provocative subject matter, polished presentation and, as an additional post-pandemic stimulus, the increasingly common habit of spending substantial portions of the day at home. But is this at all a problem? If I choose to spend my days and nights watching thrillers in a free country, whose concern is it anyway? What I am trying to convey is: there are humanist and psychological burdens of too much thriller consumption. To make this thesis of mine more accessible let's start with the psychology upon which this enormous market has been built. The Market Psyche Nearly eight decades ago, the relationship between the consumer’s fascination with thrillers and the industry built around it was mapped with remarkable precision by none other than the maestro of suspense, Alfred Hitchcock himself. It’s that obvious right? Who better than Hitchcock - one of the principal architects of the modern thriller market and the director of such celebrated classics as Shadow of a Doubt, Rear Window, Vertigo, North by Northwest, Psycho, The Birds among other gems - to have understood its psychological machinery better? According to Hitchcock, when we watch a crime or psychological thriller, we observe an intensely personal horror from an impersonal distance. We temporarily project ourselves into the consciousness of the terrified victim or the frightening situation. Yet, beneath that identification, we remain aware of our own security. In his own words: “In our subconscious, we are aware that we are safe, sitting in a comfortable armchair, watching a screen.” The master also identified an indispensable method for manufacturing suspense: “Suspense can be created by allowing the audience to play God.” The audience may know who the murderer is, while the characters do not. Suspense then emerges from a different question: will the characters discover what the audience already knows, or will they be mutilated before the narrative culminates? The spectator can therefore sit safely with a bucket of popcorn and think, “Poor creature—dead before realizing what was happening.” The audience possesses privileged knowledge and is allowed to observe the characters from an almost divine vantage point. The market recognizes this latent God complex, stimulates it and converts the spectator’s detached, sometimes disturbing pleasure into a saleable experience. In his essay The Enjoyment of Fear, Hitchcock offered another formulation combining identification with safety: “They identify themselves with fictitious characters who are experiencing fear … but … the price need not be paid … is the important factor.” To explain this, he referred to an analogy with roller coasters. For a few moments, the rider’s body, mind and senses might be thoroughly unsettled. Subconsciously, however, the consumer knows that an invisible structure of protection remains in place and that their life is not genuinely in danger. Do you see Hitchcock playing Frankenstein and we, his psychological creatures? The thriller market therefore rests upon two fundamental psychological conditions: An impersonal, almost God-like sympathy for characters in danger, a detached indulgence in their fear and psychological disturbance. Secondly, the temporary projection of oneself into uncertainty, accompanied by the subconscious assurance that one remains completely safe. A Cleveland Clinic discussion of media consumption and psychology suggests that women consume thriller content more frequently than men. Many women reportedly say that such content makes them more conscious of the dangers they may encounter within contemporary patriarchal societies and consequently encourages greater caution. Nor does the research claim that prolonged exposure to thrillers necessarily makes a person criminally inclined. The more credible concern is that the thriller market may reinforce existing prejudices and intensify social insecurity. In the United States, popular thriller narratives involving Black characters have often perpetuated racist stereotypes associating Black communities with criminality, addiction or sexual misconduct. In many Asia-Pacific societies, excessive consumption of thrillers may similarly contribute to an atmosphere of suspicion, insecurity and distrust. The possible consequences include greater instability in personal relationships and a broader culture of social intolerance. In a country like ours where intolerance has already become a serious feature of civic life, the concern is that thriller mania may add further fuel to it. The problem, therefore, is not the existence of thrillers or the experience of fear as entertainment. It is the transformation of that experience into habitual consumption. An endlessly expanding market repeatedly invites us to encounter other people’s fear, pain and vulnerability without paying any corresponding emotional or material price. From the security of our armchairs—the invisible shelter described by Hitchcock—we consume dramatized versions of other people’s struggles, anxieties and everyday suffering. Their danger becomes spectacle; their vulnerability content; and our psychological distance from their reality becomes the commodity being sold. This does not mean that watching thrillers automatically turns either you or me into criminals or morally corrupt individuals. The more relevant question concerns psychological well-being and social responsibility: how much is too much? (The writer is a Lead Process Engineer with GE HealthCare in France and a columnist with four books to his credit. Views personal.)

Why do Indian superheroes fail to impress the audience?

Bharati Dubey
Aug 2
4 min read

Mumbai: Spider-Man continues to enjoy phenomenal success at the Indian box office, highlighting the country's enduring fascination with Hollywood superheroes. But the craze also raises an important question: Has Bollywood missed the opportunity to build its own superhero universe?


India has produced memorable superheroes like Shaktimaan and the Krrish franchise, while Indian comics are home to several iconic characters. Yet, unlike Hollywood, the Hindi film industry has not consistently developed the genre into a thriving franchise business.


Trade experts Atul Mohan and Taran Adarsh believe the reasons are rooted in long-term planning, storytelling and sustained investment.


Trade analyst Atul Mohan says Hollywood's dominance in India is the result of decades of strategic effort rather than overnight success.


"The commercial success of Hollywood films in India, particularly within the superhero genre, represents a gradual, long-term market shift rather than a sudden breakthrough. It is the result of a long-term strategy of patiently building a market that was once considered only an emerging opportunity."


Audience Perception

Recalling how the market evolved, Mohan says Hollywood films were once limited to a few theatres in major cities before Jurassic Park changed audience perceptions.


"In the early ’90s, Hollywood was restricted to a few screens in major metros like Mumbai and Delhi. Everything changed with Jurassic Park—it was the definitive turning point that proved Indian audiences were ready for massive big-screen spectacles. Soon after, Sony Pictures introduced Spider-Man (2002), which became one of the widest Hollywood releases of its time and a runaway success. Since then, every new Spider-Man film has expanded its reach and strengthened its fan base."


He believes the expansion of multiplexes across the country further accelerated Hollywood's growth.


"The rise of Spider-Man coincided with the rapid growth of multiplexes in India. As exhibition expanded beyond the metros into tier-II and tier-III cities, Hollywood event films found a much larger audience. Franchises such as Fast & Furious, Transformers, The Avengers and the wider Marvel and DC universes steadily built loyal fan bases. Studios also invested heavily in wider releases, dubbed versions and stronger marketing campaigns."


Hollywood’s Presence

According to Mohan, this sustained effort transformed Hollywood's presence in India.


"When a market shows sustained growth, every global studio naturally wants a larger share of it. Hollywood has done exactly that. From a negligible presence three decades ago, English-language films today contribute nearly 25-30% of India's annual box-office collections in many years, driven largely by franchise and superhero cinema. That growth has not happened by chance; it has been achieved through consistent investment, localisation, aggressive distribution and strong support from the multiplex ecosystem."


He adds that every new Spider-Man release is the result of a strategy that has been nurtured for more than two decades.


"When a Spider-Man film lands in theatres today, it’s not just another superhero release – it’s a major market event that shifts the entire theatrical landscape. It reflects a strategy that Hollywood has followed successfully for over two decades—creating recognisable franchises, nurturing audiences across generations and treating India as one of its most important international markets. Judging by the response these films continue to receive, this trend is only expected to become stronger in the years ahead."


Unexplored Genre

Trade analyst Taran Adarsh believes the Indian film industry has simply not explored the superhero genre enough.


"I don't know why we've not really tapped into that market. There have been attempts in the past where superhero films have come out. Krrish franchise has done very well, I'm not denying that. Tiger Shroff did a superhero film directed by Remo D'Souza which bombed very badly."


For Adarsh, the audience is already primed for the genre.


"Basically, we've not really tapped into that market. This market has tremendous potential. As far as Spider-Man is concerned or any Hollywood superhero film is concerned, those films have actually, over the decades, have become a part of our moviegoing experience. And Spider-Man used to come on TV also in animation. We've seen those films, and we've really liked Spider-Man saving the world, saving people from enemies. That kind of stories still remain intact."


Asked whether Indian superhero films have a future, Adarsh is confident.


"There is huge potential! But we've not been tapping that market."


He also believes India has no shortage of inspiring characters.


"There are many! I won't really recall names, but there are so many comic book characters that we can take. And there are real-life people who are superheroes. Everyone doesn't wear costume and be a superhero. But there are so many people who can be superheroes in real life and be projected on screen. So why not?"


Audience Support

Adarsh is equally confident that audiences would support Indian superheroes if the films match Hollywood's standards.


"Yes, if they can patronize Hollywood movies then why not Indian films? Of course, Hollywood is backed by solid storytelling as well as visual effects, but we can also do that."


Spider-Man's record-breaking run in India once again underlines the audience's love for superhero stories. The challenge, the experts suggest, is not convincing viewers to embrace Indian superheroes, but giving them compelling characters, strong storytelling and world-class filmmaking to believe in.

Comments

bottom of page