Despite SC relief, distributor reluctant to release 'Thug Life' in Karnataka
The distributor Venkatesh Kamalakar has been quoted by the Indian Express as saying that the movie has not done well even in Tamil Nadu. He also said that for any movie to well when it comes to gross collection, the first two weeks are important.
"I will not release the movie, and I have many reasons. I bought the Karnataka distribution right, and today, if any movie has to earn money, it happens only within two weeks. It has been more than two weeks since the movie was released, and it has not done well even in Tamil Nadu," Venkatesh Kamalakar was quoted as saying by the Indian Express.
Thug Life was released in all centres, except in Karnataka, on June 5, 2025
The release of the Kamal Hassan-starrer was stalled in Karnataka following outrage over the actor's remark that "Tamil was born out of Kannada."
The Supreme Court on Tuesday came down heavily on the Karnataka government for the stalling of the movie in the state. While directing that the film be screened in the state the Supreme Court noted that mobs and vigilante groups cannot be allowed to take over the streets.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
18 minutes ago
- India.com
BIG relief for Imran Khan from Pakistan's Supreme Court: Ex-jailed Prime Minister granted bail in THIS case, will he finally step out of jail?
पाकिस्तान के प्रधानमंत्री भी बने Former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan got some relief on Thursday as the Supreme Court granted him bail in several cases linked to the 2023 attacks on military installations. The information was confirmed by court records and Khan's legal team. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi overturned an earlier Lahore High Court decision that had rejected his bail pleas in eight related cases. However, the Supreme Court added a condition to his release that Khan can only walk free if he is not wanted in any other case. Since he has already been convicted in a corruption case, this ruling does not mean his immediate release from prison. The former cricketer-turned-politician faces numerous cases, ranging from corruption to terrorism, but he has repeatedly claimed that all the charges against him are false and politically motivated. He has been in prison since 2023, serving a sentence in a case related to state gifts, and is also serving a sentence in the 190 million pound case. Which case Imran Khan is granted bail for? Imran Khan was arrested in May 2023 in a corruption case, which triggered massive protests across Pakistan. During these protests, some demonstrators attacked several military installations, including the Army Headquarters in Rawalpindi. Following the violence, serious criminal cases were filed against Khan and many leaders of his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Several senior PTI leaders and lawmakers have also recently been convicted in similar cases. Add as a Preferred Source Will Imran Khan be released from jail after bail? Despite the relief from the Supreme Court, Imran Khan's legal troubles are far from over. He will remain in jail because of other convictions and pending cases against him. Khan has been lodged in Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi since August 2023. Meanwhile, PTI welcomed the Supreme Court's decision, calling it a 'victory for Imran Khan' in a post shared on X (formerly Twitter). HIGHLIGHTS Pakistan's Supreme Court granted bail to former prime minister Imran Khan in eight cases linked to riots in 2023. The protests broke out on May 9, 2023, when Khan was first briefly arrested by the national anti-corruption agency in a land bribery case popularly called the Al-Qadir trust case. Khan is charged with inciting the violence, among other cases related to the riots. He denies all charges. Khan has been in jail since August 2023 when a court sentenced him to three years in prison for illegally selling state gifts while he was PM.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
New book on judicial impeachment revisits ‘corruption' controversy around former Calcutta HC judge Soumitra Sen
At a time when a motion has been admitted in Parliament to remove Allahabad High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma over corruption allegations, a recent publication dissects a past controversy surrounding an impeachment motion against a former Calcutta High Court judge over alleged misappropriation of funds. In a book titled 'Justice Denied Justice Lost', released in Kolkata on August 13 this year, journalist-turned-author Kanchan Chakraborty raises questions on the role of the judiciary, particularly of the Supreme Court's 'in-house procedure', in addressing complaints against sitting judges. The book takes a deep dive into the prolonged controversy surrounding corruption charges against former Calcutta High Court Judge Soumitra Sen from 2006, till his resignation in 2011. 'There are some constitutional questions to be raised in erstwhile Justice Sen's case, especially at a time when another sitting High Court judge is facing the possibility of impeachment. The Calcutta High Court Division Bench in 2007 had pronounced him innocent, but the inquiry committee formed by the Parliament and the Supreme Court's in-house report found him guilty. How both can co-exist in the eyes of law is the question,' the author, Mr. Chakraborty, told The Hindu. For context, a single Judge Bench of the Calcutta High Court in 2006 had passed an order stating that erstwhile Justice Sen had misappropriated money worth ₹33.2 lakhs, which was deposited in his bank accounts as a receiver in an earlier civil suit while he was still an advocate. Mr. Sen could not contest the case on account of being a sitting Judge of the High Court at the time, Mr. Chakraborty recalled. A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court exonerated Mr. Sen of the charges in 2007. But in the following year, the in-house procedure conducted by the Supreme Court held that Mr. Sen had misappropriated funds and misled the division bench. For context, the 'in-house procedure' was adopted by the Supreme Court in 1999 to examine complaints against sitting judges. 'Charges against a court-appointed receiver who was an advocate then, turned into accusations against a judge of the High Court. In Mr. Sen's case, questions also arise in the involvement of the erstwhile Chief Justice of India in the removal process and whether that bypasses the Constitution,' Mr. Chakraborty said. He referred to provisions under Article 124 and Article 217 of the Constitution that empower only the Parliament and the President of India to remove a High Court or a Supreme Court judge from office. In February 2009, 58 MPs of the Rajya Sabha had moved a motion to impeach erstwhile Justice Sen. Consequently, he appeared before the Parliament and delivered a 90-minute long speech to defend himself, in an instance that Mr. Chakraborty described as historic. 'For the first time a member of the judiciary appeared before legislators to defend himself. While the latter presented their arguments afterwards, Justice Sen was not allowed a rebuttal. The motion to remove him passed in the Rajya Sabha with a thumping majority. He resigned in 2011, instead of appearing before the Lok Sabha,' the author said. Notably, the original lawsuit against Mr. Sen was dismissed in September 2022. Prasun Datta, an additional public prosecutor based in Kolkata and 'a peer and colleague' of erstwhile Justice Sen said the book raises pertinent questions on the impeachment of sitting judges especially in light of the current impeachment motion against Justice Varma. The Supreme Court's in-house inquiry indicted Justice Varma after large amounts of cash was found in the storeroom of his official Delhi residence following a fire on the premises earlier this year. 'There is a set process outlined in the Constitution for the impeachment of sitting judges. In Justice Varma's case, questions remain over whether he was proven to be the owner of the recovered cash. There is provision for the Supreme Court's in-house report to be challenged at the apex court, which Justice Varma did already,' Mr. Datta said. It is worth noting that Justice Varma, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, in his plea to the Supreme Court had argued that the apex court's in-house procedure is an 'extra-constitutional mechanism' and that only the Parliament is empowered by the Constitution to remove a judge. However, the Supreme Court bench hearing the matter dismissed the plea on August 7 and held that the in-house committee undertakes a preliminary fact finding process and not a mechanism for the removal of a judge.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Rajinikanth and the cost of stardom
Rajinikanth is worthy of every bit of praise. Surviving, let alone succeeding, 50 years in the Tamil film industry deserves a celebration. But for what specifically? For acting in around 170 films in different languages, his screen charisma, his politics, his impact on the lives of his fans? Fifty years seems just like yesterday when Rajini's first film, Apoorva Ragangal (1975), launched him into history — although he was not the hero. He remade himself to suit the needs of others. His name was changed, he learnt a new language, and put on a new persona that was dictated by filmmaker K. Balachander's vision of what he saw in Rajini. Five decades ago, he started the journey of becoming a cult figure by legitimising rebellion, making it possible to talk about desires that were taboos, speaking for those who were invisible and on the margins of society, and began the first steps towards fashioning an image of himself. His latest film, Coolie, which released last week, commemorates these years. Much has changed, but much remains unchanged. What has not changed is that like back then, he is still trying to put on a new persona, trying to be what he is not. It is said that the greatest fear of superstars is ageing. While we celebrate their longevity, they seem to live in mortal dread of it. The real life picture of a bald-headed Rajini makes him look like our beloved uncle. In Coolie, he has a head full of lush hair and fights like a young man, although his eyes betray him. The same powerful eyes that Balachander commented on 50 years ago now lie hidden in deep sadness, perhaps reflecting the pain that he still has to do films like this in the name of superstardom. Perfecting the grey figure Rajini was never defined by his body. He was dark and slight, more like a Bengaluru bus conductor — which he was before he became an actor. He was a Marathi speaker too, who spoke Tamil with a different lilt. Rajini's strength and power came from what he spoke and stood for. He personified a simple but powerful truth: that those who are poor and disadvantaged have a greater moral sensibility than those who possess wealth and power. The vegetable sellers on the pavement, the daily wage earners, the coolies as well as the autorickshaw drivers exhibit far greater moral qualities than do feudal landlords, rich entrepreneurs or powerful leaders. He was loved because he embodied that grey figure between socially acceptable behaviour and individually regressive one. He could be charming even when he was being politically incorrect. His audience loved him because they knew that he was a moral being at his core. The coolie theme that was so crassly abused in his new film was one that invoked deep feelings in the working class whose voice he represented in films such as Mullum Malarum (1978, a villager in conflict with an urban engineer), Baasha (1995, an auto driver), Muthu (1995, a servant under a feudal landlord), and more recently, in Pa. Ranjith's hit film Kaala (2018) where he fights for slum dwellers. The younger Rajini acted like an older man, wiser, responsible, more socially attuned, and one who produced hope. Moral ambiguities Fifty years on, Rajini's morality has aged. He is not able to hide this even if he succeeds in camouflaging the ageing of his body. When he played a gangster in Thalapathi (1991), there was a sense of moral code in the world of criminals. But in Coolie, Rajini's moral sense disappears when he joins a young woman in a criminal act to justify making money to pay the fees for the medical education of the woman's sisters. He is not the Rajini that we saw in Bhairavi (1978) or movies like Aval Appadithan (1978), which catalysed a larger discussion on women's rights and roles in a society. Rajini was as famous for his dialogues as for his cigarette tricks because those dialogues did not age. They did not need an old man, trying to look young with a mop of hair, to deliver them. Rajini converted these dialogues in movies such as Arunachalam (1997), Baasha and Padayappa (1999), into social slogans. As long as Rajini speaks for the rights of the oppressed and the marginalised, his physical age does not matter. Being old is exhibited not in the way we walk or fight, but in the way we think, in the energy we have to fight for the benefit of others, and in the hope that we bring. Rajini, while still physically explosive on the screen, has aged mentally and morally, at least in his last few films. He seems to have lost the qualities that made him perennially young and relevant. We can't blame him. Perhaps he has become indifferent and tired. Just like us. The Bengaluru-based writer and philosopher's new novel is titled Water Days.
