In a shocking turn of events, a Class 10 girl was attacked at Zilla Parishad High School in Raptadu, Anantapur district, Andhra Pradesh, which has currently become a widespread topic of debate. The accused is a 21-year-old man, identified as Hemanth who carried out the attack with an electric chainsaw, and the brutal attempt has now raised concerns over the safety of children in schools. The name of the girl attacked is Gopika who rejected his advances and hence he resorted to attacking her. This has also sparked a conversation on social media platforms, with many users comparing it to a particular scene in Sandeep Reddy Vanga's controversial film Animal which released in 2023.
The scene in question from Animal sees Ranbir Kapoor, holding a loaded gun, storm into the classroom of his sister's college to confront her bullies. It was one of the most talked-about scenes of the film when it released. The scene has now got another life after the Raptadu attack.
Sandeep Reddy Vanga today finally his broke silence on the controversy and took on his critics in a lengthy X post.
"When someone commits a heinous crime, the first response should be empathy & an attempt to understand the larger problem. Not finding a convenient scapegoat in cinema," he said, alluding to the Andhra chainsaw attack.
The filmmaker, who often stirs online debate through his films and opinions, said linking his movie to a real-life tragedy is his detractors' way to "settle personal scores".
It is becoming increasingly clear that your concern is not for the victims or their families, but that you're using a horrific tragedy as a dirty excuse to settle your personal scores. This is especially directed at those failed, frustrated, jobless male/female actors, few directors, producers & parasites, who suddenly appoint themselves as social reformers whenever an opportunity arises to take a dig at someone else's work. A tragedy deserves empathy, not opportunism. Learn the difference," he added.
When someone commits a heinous crime, the first response should be empathy & an attempt to understand the larger problem. Not finding a convenient scapegoat in cinema. It is becoming increasingly clear that your concern is not for the victims or their families, but that you're using a horrific tragedy as a dirty excuse to settle your personal scores. This is especially directed at those failed frustrated jobless male/female actors, few directors, producers & parasites, who suddenly appoint themselves as social reformers whenever an opportunity arises to take a dig at someone else's work. A tragedy deserves empathy 🙏, not opportunism. Learn the difference.
— Sandeep Reddy Vanga (@imvangasandeep) November 4, 2026
Internet Reactions
The Internet is of the opinion that filmmakers need to be more cognisant of what they show in films. There has to be greater consideration of how violence and dangerous weapons are represented in school settings in films that might have such a large impact. That cinema must understand that it's not only a medium of entertainment but also a mirror of society is an oft-repeated argument, something that rings true in the case of Animal. A section of social media users said films have a certain responsibility towards society and that violence should not be portrayed as heroic on the big screen.
Social media users have been accusing films like Animal and Dhurandhar for the rise in such crimes in real life too.
The criticism currently blowing up is not just restricted to Vanga. Other filmmakers who portray violence on screen are also being held responsible.
