"Too Risky": Karnataka Distributor Refuses To Release Kamal Hassan's 'Thug Life'
Bengaluru:
Will not release Kamal Hassan's 'Thug Life' despite Supreme Court's order because I don't think it will do good business here two weeks after it was released across India, said Venkatesh Kamalakar, the distributor of the film in Karnataka on Wednesday.
'Thug Life', directed by Mani Ratnam, released across India on June 5. In Karnataka, the film is yet to release due to the controversial statement made by Haasan that 'Kannada was born out of Tamil'.
On a petition filed by a Bengaluru resident seeking the release of the film in Karnataka, the Supreme Court had on June 17 held that it is the duty of the state to ensure that a film is released in theatres once it gets a Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) certificate.
Speaking to PTI, Mr Kamalakar said it also does not make sense to release the film considering that Kannadigas' sentiments were hurt by what Haasan had said about Kannada language.
"But mostly it is because it is not a good business decision to release the film now. His previous film 'Indian 2' also did not do well here in Karnataka," said Mr Kamalakar.
The distributor said Mr Haasan's 'Vikram' did well in Karnataka, but he does not have a fan base here that will blindly go to his film, no matter what.
"When it comes to his films, the success depends on how good it is. 'Thug Life' is generally considered as not a good film by many. So, it is too risky," said Kamalakar, who distributes mostly big budget Tamil films in Karnataka.
According to industry sources, the distributor had already paid about Rs 9 crore as advance.
Mr Kamalakar agreed he did pay an advance amount without disclosing the amount, but said he is not anticipating any difficulty in getting it back.
"It is not like it is our fault. Things turned out the way it did and when there is no profit, which theatre owner will agree to showcase the film," he asked.
Meanwhile, many pro Kannada outfits in Bengaluru have allegedly asked the theatres not to showcase the film despite SC's directive.
On Wednesday, Bengaluru Police posted notices on the houses of several pro Kannada activists. They informed the activists that they are not allowed to protest anywhere other than the designated protest site of Freedom Park.
But Praveen Shetty, one of the very vocal protesters of the statement, and who has his own faction of Kannada Rakshana Vedike, had allegedly refused to accept the notice as well as responsibility for any protests.
Earlier, speaking to PTI Videos, Mr Shetty had said that he is yet to receive the notice from the police.
"But Kannadigas will not surely watch that film," he added.
RT Nagar Police, under whose jurisdiction his house falls, finally posted the notice in front of his house.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Supreme Court backs 'Thug Life' release in Karnataka, Warns against mob censorship
The Supreme Court on Thursday recorded the assurance given by the Karnataka government to give "protection and security" for the release of 'Thug Life', a film by veteran filmmaker Mani Ratnam and Kamal Haasan in the state's theatres. A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan told the Karnataka government to take legal action if any individual or group prevents the release of the movie or resorts to coercion or violence. The Justice Bhuyan-led bench was hearing a plea alleging that the Karnataka government has prevented the film's theatrical release through "oral instructions and police interference" despite certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). During the film's audio launch, Kamal Haasan claimed that "Kannada is born out of Tamil", sparking strong reactions in Karnataka. After the actor's refusal to issue an outright apology, an "extra-judicial ban" was imposed on the film's release in Karnataka, prompting M. Mahesh Reddy , a Bengaluru resident, to file a public interest litigation (PIL) before the top court. In an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Karnataka Home Department stated that it has not imposed any restriction on the release of the movie. It added that in the event the producers of the film decide to release the film in Karnataka, the state government will give "protection and security for such release and for the people connected therewith, including the cast, director, producers, the exhibitors, and the audience". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Mannheim: GEERS sucht 700 Testhörer für Hörgeräte ohne Zuzahlung GEERS Undo The affidavit said: "It is the duty and responsibility of the State Government to uphold fundamental rights of its citizens and in maintaining the 'Rule of Law' in the state. [I]t is submitted that, in the event the movie is released and screened in the State of Karnataka, the State Government, as is duty-bound, shall take all necessary steps to maintain law and order, and provide security to all the citizens concerned and other stakeholders. " On Tuesday, the Justice Bhuyan-led Bench made scathing remarks in the matter and said that it cannot allow mobs and vigilante groups to take over the streets. "Rule of law demands that any film which has a CBFC certificate must be released, and the state government has to ensure its screening. It can't be that, at the threat of burning down the cinemas, the film can't be released. We are not passing an order that people come and watch the film. But the film must be released," it remarked. "We cannot allow mobs and vigilante groups to take over the streets. The rule of law must prevail," the apex court told the Karnataka government's counsel.
India.com
18 minutes ago
- India.com
'Apne sath pujari rakhte the…'; This superstar's bright career got ruined after he kept close connections with..., fought on set with director, he is…
In the 90s, this actor's films were back-to-back sensations at the box office. Pahlaj Nihalani, who has produced many of this actor's films, has recently made important revelations about his career. Filmmaker and former CBFC chief Pahlaj Nihalani has produced many films directed by David Dhawan and starring this superstar. Although he and David Dhawan had a good relationship, in a recent conversation, he accused David Dhawan of instigating the actor against him. He also talked about the downfall of his career and blamed the company for the 'pundits' who kept him for it. Many shocking revelations were made about this actor's career Here we are talking about the Bollywood actor, Govinda. Speaking on Vicky Lalwani's podcast, Pahlaj said, 'Govinda was an all-rounder. He handled his career very well, but due to his weakness, he trusts people easily, and the environment around him is not good, so he goes astray. He keeps company with pandits (astrologers, soothsayers) and goes according to his surroundings and their beliefs. But people do not take those conversations seriously. Such conversations are detrimental to his career in the glamorous film industry.' Asked Govinda to be innocent, but he… Pahlaj described Govinda as naive and gave the example of his film Partner to explain this. He said, 'Govinda is so naive that David Dhawan wanted Govinda to play that character in Partner, but it was claimed that David and Salman helped Govinda during the downfall in his career. But Govinda got so emotional that he got so angry. He acted as if he was helping Govinda, but actually, he wanted Govinda to play that character.' Govinda and David Dhawan were working together for a long time and have given many great films to the industry. However, later there was a rift between them and the two drifted apart. Partner was released in 2007, which was a hit. This was the last film in which they worked together. Who was held responsible for Govinda and David Dhawan's friendship? Pahlaj also accused David Dhawan of poisoning Govinda's mind and instigating him against Pahlaj and said that this is the reason they stopped working together. He said, 'David Dhawan poisoned Govinda's mind against me.' Pahlaj said that David was angry with him because he felt that he had earned money for him in the 1993 film Aankhen, which had Govinda in the lead role. However, Pahlaj argued that he was the producer of the film, and it was also his story that was made into a feature film. He also said that Anees Bazmee had written the dialogues of the film and David Dhawan was its director, but claimed that he was like a 'dummy director'.
United News of India
31 minutes ago
- United News of India
SC closes plea on ‘Thug Life' ban; says films with CBFC OK cannot be stopped by mobs
New Delhi, June 19 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Thursday closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the unofficial ban on the Tamil film 'Thug Life' in Karnataka, after the state government assured the court that no official ban had been imposed and that full protection would be provided for the film's release if the producers chose to screen it. A bench comprising justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan recorded the Karnataka government's affidavit stating that it would ensure law and order during the film's screening and found no need to pass further directions or impose costs. However, the court strongly criticised the increasing trend of artistic expression being suppressed by protest groups. "Just because someone is offended, should a movie, a stand-up act, or a poem be stopped?" the bench asked during the hearing, expressing concern over rising instances of mob threats stalling lawful artistic work. The PIL was filed by Mahesh Reddy, who sought directions for the release of 'Thug Life' in Karnataka. The film, featuring and co-produced by Kamal Haasan, was withheld from release in the state after backlash over his alleged comment that Kannada originated from Tamil. Protest threats were reportedly issued by various groups, prompting the producers to delay the release. The court reminded the state that a film certified by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) cannot be prevented from release due to mob pressure. It added that such disruptions undermine the rule of law. While the state agreed to provide protection, the petitioner's counsel argued that no action had been taken against individuals or groups who issued threats. The state countered that there was no official ban, and hence, judgments related to state-imposed bans did not apply. Justice Bhuyan questioned the state's silence on threats: 'What action are you taking against those who issued threats?' The state replied that it was duty-bound to act and would do so. The Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC), which was also made a party, denied issuing threats and said it had only written to the producers highlighting the public protests and suggesting an apology. Justice Bhuyan sharply criticised the KFCC for not reporting mob entry into their premises. 'You succumbed to mob pressure. You are hiding behind them,' he observed. Senior advocate Sanjay Nuli, appearing for Kannada Sahitya Parishad, argued that language is an emotional issue and that an apology by the actor would help ease tensions. The court, however, firmly rejected the idea that artistic work must be subjected to such conditions. 'If someone is hurt, file a defamation case. You can't take the law into your hands,' Justice Manmohan said. Raj Kamal Films' counsel Satish Parasaran pointed out that a state minister had also made inflammatory statements and said the production company had suffered financial losses of around Rs 30 crore due to the delay. In its order, the court stated it was unnecessary to frame new guidelines or impose penalties in light of the State's assurance. However, it directed the Karnataka government to take swift legal action, both civil and criminal, against anyone attempting to block a certified film's release through threats or violence. 'The rule of law demands that any CBFC-cleared film must be released, and the state must ensure this,' the court said. It also transferred a related petition pending before the Karnataka High Court to itself for better coordination of legal proceedings. Though the petitioner's counsel urged the court to direct the state to act against those who had issued threats, the bench declined, noting that those individuals were not party to the current proceedings and that it could not pass orders based on media reports alone. The court also disapproved of the Karnataka High Court's earlier suggestion that Kamal Haasan should apologise. 'It is none of the business of the High Court to demand an apology. This is a matter of fundamental rights,' Justice Bhuyan said. 'The Supreme Court's role is to protect those rights and uphold the rule of law.' The film 'Thug Life' was released globally on June 5, 2025, except in Karnataka. The PIL had requested police protection for theatres screening the film and sought action against those issuing threats.
