Since its inception, films are determined to encompass a plethora of complete human activities and are saturated with them. Human mind and its excellence at aesthetic paradigm evolve out with multiple hues at length while coming into the interface of any art medium. Films like any other art medium involve human mind in its creation, it displays human action and most importantly they are made to be comprehended and enjoyed by human minds as its audiences. Films are always considered as a wide form of art medium through which the manifestation of the striking moving images decorated with vibrant colors and sounds enables a connection between the film-makers and audience upon the matrix of celluloid and the senses enhanced through the pictorial description of emotions and actions.
The intensity of the influence which a film leaves on the minds of its audiences cannot be undermined at any level. Therefore, the sociological aspect of the film, or myriad social psychologies depicted through the medium of the films holds a very important space in the minds of the modern audiences. With the growing complexities of life, the films began to develop with foreboding complexities. Skip Dine Young in his book, “Psychology at the Movies” mentioned rightly, “The psychology of film can be unified by thinking of movies as symbols. Movies are symbols that have meaning; these symbols are created by ways do they infuse aspects of themselves into their creations? While it is probable that everyone who works on a movie brings something of him or herself to the activity, I focus on those artists whose individuality is in the foreground- the directors (who make the final choices about how a movie looks and sounds) and the actors (whose visual likeness is so vividly captured on the screen)” (Young, 2012). A latent symbolic framework does operate within the films upon which the complex social psychology depicted through various modern films gets manifested. “Boys Don’t Cry” as an independent American drama amazed the audiences in the year 1999 by depicting the story of Brandon Teena, a transsexual man and his predicament evoked the themes of desperation, insensitive attitude and the issues of empowerment and gender equality prevalent in the society of contemporary times. At the same time, the subtle display of psychology operating in terms of dealing with these issues in society forms the crux of the film. Social Psychology and Boys Don’t Cry In October 1999, the American drama, “Boys Don’t Cry” was first premiered which was based on a real life story. Being the reflection of a true incident, the film mirrored many intricacies and complexities of modern society at length. Directed by Kimberly Peirce and co-written by Andy Bienen, the film stars Hilary Swank in the role of Brandon Teena whose powerful acting paved the way for her receiving Best Actress in the Academy Awards. Brandon Teena was a transsexual man who was allegedly beaten up brutally, raped and tortured by his male partners after they discovered that Teena had a female by body. Depiction of this incident through the medium of film was not a piece of cake. The film did not hint at only displaying the content as a crime thriller. On the contrary, a very strong social message was inherent within the film which evidently develops its social psychology. A strong notion and social perception towards body of a woman specially develops the pivot of the film’s aspect towards prevailing psychology of the society. When America was vouching on the propositions of same-sex marriages and gender equality, the film, “Boys Don’t Cry” reinstated the hollow pursuits involved with the concepts of gender equality and rights of transsexuals in the American society. If America with its teeming American dreams could not secure the rights of its citizen within a social structure which is so liberal and cosmopolitan in nature, it is quite evident that the future of the minor sexual entities such as transsexual men or women is in