They say art is the response of the society as a whole to the changing times. Post independence, India gave rise to some of the linear viewpoints in politics, society, economy which were limited by the scope to register the diversions, and other micro paths that could have existed parallel to its belief. In the 60s and 70s slowly we got knowledgeable about happenings at the other corners of the wo...rld, mostly the west and started questioning many plots that were put down upon us.
Now in these 60 years span we can rate movies as the most popular and dominant art category (obviously in India). At first movies represented linear conflicts with good winning over evil, slowly it got into complex scenarios where it tried to show evil more powerful than ever. Later realised good should be the emotional variant and not the protagonist as a whole so started designing heroes with darker shades. Later they even delivered villains as the main protagonist. Then slowly we see Auteurs coming in, Indi films being developed.

This in a way can be seen as a chronological maturity being gained. On the other hand a voluntary shift to copy the West. Whatever may be the reason this shift not only affected the movies but all forms of art and all forms of social projections, and brought us to the 21st century. Now the rumble is to overtake the people whom we have learnt from. And we better be good at it.