VM Radhakrishnan,the author
By VM Radhakrishnan
Once upon a time, theatres that screened films with explicit scenes openly marked their posters with a bold ‘A’ for Adults Only.
The warning was clear — such films contained sexual content and were not meant for family viewing. Families stayed away, and the boundary between public decency and private conduct was largely respected.
Today, however, that line appears to be dangerously fading.
Recent reports in visual and print media have revealed a disturbing trend: private, explicit acts taking place inside cinema theatres — both government-owned and private — are being secretly recorded and circulated on pornographic websites. Police have reportedly registered cases and launched investigations into these incidents.
Though I have not visited theatres in Kerala in recent times, my experiences in cinemas in Bengaluru and Chennai tell a troubling story.
Within darkened halls, acts that belong strictly to private spaces are being carried out in full public view.
This goes beyond mere nudity — there have been instances of unnatural sexual acts and even intercourse during screenings.
For many couples, it seems the objective is no longer to watch a film but to use the theatre as a covert venue for satisfying sexual urges.
Worryingly, such behaviour is not limited to metropolitan cities. Given prevailing social trends, it would be naive to assume that Kerala’s theatres are immune to similar misconduct.
Online seat-selection systems even allow people to pre-book “convenient” seats for such activities.
During a two-hour film, the focus shifts entirely from cinema to physical relations, with little regard for others seated nearby. People from multiple age groups have been noticed engaging in such behaviour.
The real victims in this situation are ordinary viewers — especially families who arrive with children. For them, the experience can be deeply disturbing and humiliating.
Cinema theatres are public spaces, not private bedrooms. Indecent acts in such spaces amount to public nuisance.
Viewers who buy tickets to watch a film are forced into an impossible dilemma: should they focus on the censored images on screen, or the uncensored, live “adult scenes” unfolding beside them? Human instinct makes it impossible to ignore what is happening in one’s immediate vicinity.
Ironically, the current legal focus appears to be largely on the violation of privacy of those whose obscene acts were recorded and circulated.
But what about the rights of law-abiding viewers? Do families and children have no legal protection against the imposition of live obscenity in a public venue?
If people commit such acts openly in a public space, can they still claim privacy when the evidence surfaces?
These individuals were not recorded inside locked rooms but in places filled with paying audiences. Yet, the narrative increasingly paints them as victims, while those who exposed the misconduct are portrayed as offenders.
Law enforcement may face limitations in monitoring such behaviour inside theatres.
But does that justify forcing families to endure such scenes? If public exposure and the fear of being identified become deterrents, perhaps such behaviour will finally decrease.
It is also important to note that those indulging in these acts are rarely with their own spouses or families.
That is precisely why exposure frightens them. Yet, on social media, some activists and self-proclaimed cyber vigilantes are portraying the offenders as “victims.”
For the sake of public decency, child safety, and the right to dignified entertainment, such acts must be openly condemned.
Parents, especially those with young children, must take this matter seriously. Society must recognise that even in dim theatre lighting, high-quality visuals can now be captured — and what happens in secret today may surface in public tomorrow.
Public spaces must remain decent. The fear of public exposure, if nothing else, may finally impose some restraint.
