SC refuses urgent hearing on plea for protection of theatres screening 'Thug Life' in Karnataka
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to grant an urgent hearing on a plea seeking protection against alleged threats over the screening of
Kamal Haasan
's film "Thug Life" in Karnataka theatres.
A bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan asked the theatre association from Karnataka to approach the
Karnataka High Court
instead.
A lawyer, appearing for the petitioner, referred to open threats from fringe groups opposing the screening of the film in Karnataka, and said "there are open threats by fringe elements and they are saying theatres will be set on fire."
Justice Mishra, while refusing to grant an urgent hearing, said, "Install fire extinguishers" and asked the petitioner to move the high court.
"Thug Life" released in cinema halls across the country on June 5.
Live Events
The Tamil movie, which reunites the 70-year-old actor with filmmaker Mani Ratnam after 1987's "Nayakan", could not be released in Karnataka after Haasan's comments about Kannada language sparked a major controversy.
It was also released in
Telugu
, Hindi and Malayalam.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
34 minutes ago
- India Today
What went wrong with Kamal Haasan and Mani Ratnam's Thug Life?
'Thug Life' marked the legendary and most ambitious collaboration in Indian cinema by bringing Kamal Haasan and Mani Ratnam after almost four decades. Their gangster saga promised an epic exploration of gangsters, violence and betrayal in the trailer sparked curiosity, evoking memories of Mani Ratnam's classic gangster films like 'Nayakan' and 'Chekka Chivantha Vaanam'. With a strong cast including Silambarasan TR, Trisha, Joju George, and music by AR Rahman, expectations were once the film ended, one question remained: what went wrong with a film that had everything going for it? Spoiler alert...!The story wants to be everything, and ends up being nothing'Thug Life' tells the story of Rangaraya Sakthivel, an ageing gangster seeking revenge on those who betrayed him, including his brother, his own gang members, and Amar (his right hand and adopted son, played by Silambarasan). It is also a tale of mistrust and power struggles, with Sakthivel willing to destroy anyone he suspects of threatening him. The film also explores a morally murky subplot: Sakthivel's extramarital relationship with Indrani (Trisha Krishnan), a social media influencer. He casually calls the act of infidelity his 'disorder'.On paper, 'Thug Life' is rich with ideas: it aims to be a dark, psychological crime drama in the vein of 'Nayakan'. But in execution, it tries to be too many things at once. With multiple subplots competing for attention, characters feel underdeveloped and scenes rushed. While 'Nayakan' also juggled complex narratives, it did so with organic flow and emotional depth, something 'Thug Life' gangster drama feels like the final instalment of a franchise film, packed with too many characters and motives, yet without the benefit of prior films to build toward this so-called final arcs and unclear motivationsPerhaps the most unexpected shortcoming is the lack of clear motivations, surprising from a legend like Mani Ratnam, known for emotionally complex characters. For instance, Sakthivel names Amar as his successor as he goes to prison. Amar conquers and calls himself the next Rangaraya Sakthivel. Also, there's a secret regarding Amar's father's killing that affects his bond with Sakthivel. What makes Amar the potential leader? What does he contribute to the gang? The film offers no satisfying answers. If the gangsters' own activities are unclear, it is unrealistic to expect a well-defined motivation for Indrani is another missed opportunity. After her nuanced role as Kundavai in the 'Ponniyin Selvan' series, here she feels vague and ornamental. Is she a lover, muse, or distraction? The film never gives her enough space or clarity. With better writing, she could have anchored the shifting dynamics between Amar and Sakthivel, much like Nandini's character in 'Ponniyin Selvan'.Silambarasan's Amar lacks a clear personality or emotional grounding. His choices appear impulsive without adding intrigue. If his confusion was deliberate to explore inner conflict, it might have worked, but instead it feels like the film itself is unsure of who he is. Consequently, key moments like Amar's betrayal or Sakthivel's revenge lack the emotional impact they the large cast, only Inspector Jai Royappa (Ashok Selvan) carries emotional weight. His motivations are clearer, and his past is explored enough to make him compelling. But even he cannot hold together a film where most characters feel half-formed and much telling, too little showingMani Ratnam is celebrated for his visual storytelling. Iconic scenes like the sun shot in 'Thalapathi' or Shaila's pregnancy-reveal in 'Bombay' communicate volumes without words. 'Thug Life', however, leans heavily on exposition. Key developments like Amar's rise, Sakthivel's exile transformation, the gang's collapse, and what happened to Jeeva (Sakthivel's wife) are relayed through rushed dialogue and montages. Instead of giving these moments emotional weight, the film tells us what happened without letting us feel example, Amar supposedly restructured the gang's operations in two years, but what exactly did he do? How did the world change during Sakthivel's absence? Why does Amar's rise make sense, or does Sakthivel's influence wane? None of this is shown; characters just talk about it. The story feels disjointed, important moments are described rather than highs and flat revealsThe trailer's standout line, 'Inimel inga naan dan Rangaraya Sakthivel (Here on, I am Rangaraya Sakthivel),' hits hard in promos but barely registers in the film. It is not due to Simbu's performance, which is strong, but because the build-up is missing. Mani Ratnam's best films rely on emotional highs: Remember the mirror scene in 'Nayakan', the train departure in 'Alaipayuthey', or the press conference in 'Guru'? In 'Thug Life', many emotional beats arrive without proper setup or feel hastily key interval reveal, intended as a pivotal twist, falls flat. The issue is not the twist but the missing emotional groundwork. If Amar was told early on that the gang was responsible for his father's death, what motivates his sudden switch at the interval? The manipulation by Manikkam (Nasser) is unclear, and the strength of Amar's bond with Sakthivel is not explored. The scene feels gimmicky and unconvincing. Similarly, confrontations like the beach scene between Sakthivel and Jeeva or Amar's final showdown with Indrani aim for gravity but come off sluggish and under the weight of its own legacyA major factor behind the mixed response to 'Thug Life' is how it was promoted. Marketed as Kamal Haasan's grand return to the gangster genre, with heavy callbacks to 'Nayakan', from the character's name to interviews where both Kamal and Mani Ratnam evoked their earlier works' emotional and cinematic weight, expectations soared. The stage was set for a profound character drama rich with tragedy and 'Thug Life' leans heavily on the aesthetics of those classics without capturing their emotional soul. The title, tone, and visuals suggest depth, but the world it builds lacks real stakes. The final product: a gangster saga with no real danger, a father-son conflict without emotional rupture, and a betrayal that feels the film excels. But this beauty often feels disconnected from the storytelling. At times, the music, composed by AR Rahman, overwhelms rather than supports key emotional scenes. The expectations set by its legacy and marketing created a bar so high that the film struggled to reach. 'Thug Life' is not without merit. There are moments where the film shines, especially in the performances of Sakthivel and Amar, and the early scenes between them that carry Mani Ratnam and Kamal Haasan's signature craft. But instead of building on these strengths, the film often chooses style over substance. It is not a bad film, but one that feels stuck, caught somewhere between honouring the past and finding a new voice. This unresolved tension leaves the film feeling distant when it should have been deeply engaging.
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
Partho Ghosh, director of 100 days, Agni Sakshi and Dalaal, passes away at 75
Partho Ghosh , the man behind some of the most gripping Hindi thrillers of the '90s, passed away on Monday at the age of 75 due to heart complications. A filmmaker who often blended mystery, drama, and mainstream appeal, Ghosh carved a niche for himself in both Hindi and Bengali cinema . He was living in the Madh Island area of Mumbai and is survived by his wife, Gouri Ghosh. About Partho Ghosh's work Starting his film journey in 1985 as an assistant director on small projects, Ghosh got his big break with the 1991 psychological thriller 100 Days, starring Madhuri Dixit and Jackie Shroff. A remake of the Tamil hit Nooravathu Naal, the film's eerie plot about a woman with extrasensory perception left a lasting impression on audiences and critics alike. It was the unofficial adaptation of the 1977 Italian giallo film Sette note in nero and the American film Eyes of Laura Mars. He followed it up with a series of box office successes. Dalaal, headlined by Mithun Chakraborty, was among the year's top earners, while Agni Sakshi , starring Nana Patekar, Jackie Shroff, and Manisha Koirala, became a hit and is still remembered for its powerful performances and intense storyline. He belted out another major success titled Ghulam-E-Musthafa , which was a crime drama starring Nana Patekar and Raveena Tandon. Throughout his career, Ghosh directed more than 15 films, including Teesra Kaun, a Hindi adaptation of the Malayalam hit No.20 Madras Mail. His later works included Ek Second… Jo Zindagi Badal De? and Rehmat Ali. His final directorial, Mausam Ikrar Ke Do Pal Pyaar Ke , was released in 2018.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
‘Narivetta' writer Abin Joseph says the story was about tracking the lead character's journey
With Narivetta, Abin Joseph, yet another writer makes his feature film debut. The film, directed by Anuraj Manohar, stars Tovino Thomas, Suraj Venjaramoodu, and Tamil actor Cheran in lead roles. The film, a bildungsroman of sorts, follows the journey of an unemployed young man, Varghese Peter, as he finds himself over the course of the film. While Abin's short stories and novellas have been published in leading Malayalam magazines, Narivetta, he says, is the fulfilment of a long-held dream. Kallisseri Thesis, his collection of short stories, was awarded the Kerala Sahitya Akademi's Geetha Hiranyan Endowment (2and the Sahitya Akademi's Yuva Puraskar (2020). Edited excerpts from an interview with Abin. How did you come to write the story of Narivetta? I had an idea for a story about a young man with dreams and ambitions for himself but does not want to take on responsibilities. This person, at one particular juncture in life, has to take on a job that he does not like. Especially something like policing, which is a tough job. He lands up there at a point of crisis — a plot point — for which I thought of several options. But they were all typically investigations or murder mystery kind of storylines. Instead, I thought of weaving in a social cause. Thus I reached the idea of bringing in some kind of a social crisis and a cop posted at the site of a brewing conflict — in this case, strike by tribal people for land. How did you and Anuraj come to collaborate? I have known Anuraj before he made Ishq. He had called to ask if I had stories that could be made into a film. Though I was already a published short story writer I did not have any stories that could be made into a film. Nor did I seriously make any attempts to get into films. When he reached out after Ishq I was in the process of writing a couple of stories for films. But I did not have stories that were convincing enough either; so I did not call him back. In 2020, when my novella Koorginji was published in a magazine Anuraj called me and said let's make a film. We tossed about a couple of ideas. That is when I got the idea for Narivetta. We spoke and decided to go ahead with the project. You are a writer. How is this form of writing (for cinema) different from literature? How did you approach it? I have been primarily writing short stories and novellas; writing for films and scripting is very different. That said, there are similarities too. When it comes to writing, say a screenplay, one is writing with a clear idea of the form. There are technical aspects, and beyond that the 'size' [of the film] is important. A screenplay will have many 'moments' and characters, unlike a short story or a novella which may not have as many elements. A short story does not have to be a large canvas, it can be small, personal, without too much action. A screenplay, however, has to have action — that is the basic difference of form. I approach these with a clear notion of the medium (scripting), that this is to be made into a movie for an audience who will watch it and engage with it. A short story or a novel, however, does not have these restrictions. A writer can take liberties with the medium — keep the tempo slow and experiment with the narrative style. We can do the same with movies, but, at the end of the day, a movie still has to be engaging. Unlike literature, it does not demand that we keep the audience on tenterhooks with expectation. There is freedom. A script is all about 'what to shoot'. The 'how to shoot' is the director's vision. But what to shoot is on the writer. I approached it with a clear notion about how it should be. Then there are the dialogues. I enjoy writing dialogues, be it for short stories or films. However, the metre has to go with the story and the situation. Your approach vis-a-vis the subject. You were a journalist. Did that influence you or impact your research? Honestly, for Narivetta, I did not do a lot of research. The reason was that neither were we recreating history nor were we documenting it. We were travelling with the protagonist, Varghese Peter, as he goes through life and arrives at this historical event, which we have referenced. I was more focussed on this character's journey — emotional and otherwise. I did not dig deep by way of research into what happened at the time because information overload would distract from the focus of the script, diluting the storytelling. So, I just stuck to basic research and because I wanted it to be a good film I have taken some cinematic liberties. That is all. How much time did you spend on the writing? Were there inputs from Anuraj? Anuraj is not the kind of director who discusses each aspect scene by scene. After listening to the story, he will tell you his directorial vision. It is not a scene or dialogue. Instead, he will tell you what he would like to get from a particular scene. He is a director who has a vision about the film, which is probably why he is able to communicate like that. What that does to a writer is that it affords you freedom and responsibility as well. Once I got an idea about the subject and the characters, it took six to seven days to write the first draft of the screenplay. A change we made before the shoot was making the narrative non-linear; the progression was linear initially. We added some scenes, did some rewriting, rewrote the dialogues to make them crisper — these are all part of the process of making a film. As a writer what was the difficult part of the process? More than writing a story or screenplay, the difficult part of the process is a project materialising and becoming a movie. You can write a story if you lock yourself up and sit in a room, but for a screenplay to become a film, you need a director, a producer or an actor. I am talking about commercial films. All these factors have to come together. Then once it releases after post-production it becomes a movie. That is the difficult part of the process. That is perhaps the challenge of making a commercial film. I don't know if 'academic' films face the same challenges. The journey of a commercial film is to collect for the producer. That is the difficult part, in my opinion. When did cinema become a part of your plan? Cinema has always been part of my wishes and aspirations. I was in school when I realised I wanted to be a writer; my stories were published in popular magazines, and during school youth festivals my short stories won prizes. Though at that point I wanted to be a writer, a part of me wanted to be a part of cinema too. But due to my circumstances, I could not chase that ambition. I worked as a journalist with newspapers; life was going on like this when I got the call to do my first film. I quit my job; at that point I had a few film stories and films which did not start. I could have done something else, you can write even if you are in another job. But I wanted to be part of the movies. I try to watch one film a day or at least an episode of a series. I was in Class II when we bought a television set in my house. This was the late 1990s, I would watch these black and white movies. I still remember watching these films. Cinema was a passion in those days. I would tell my classmates the stories of films I watched. Today when I look back I can't help but think that cinema has nourished the storyteller in me. Not everybody had television at home. Those days there were cassettes with the soundtrack of the movies, or on the radio. So it was a ritual to watch a movie and narrate the story to my friends. Maybe, it was through films that the idea of storytelling came to me. This could have easily become a documentary-type of a film. What precautions did you take? Honestly, we did not think of it that way. Like I said earlier, the storytelling was following the character that we had created. I have tried to bring, through my writing, the emotional journey of the character — his life as he faces and overcomes challenges and crises. Weave in the situations, build the other characters. That is all that I have tried to bring. I believe the film has an element of mystery that arouses curiosity. The attempt has been to approach the character and subject with utmost integrity. That I think is the most genuine and pure form of storytelling. We have not included anything for the sake of it, we have tried to keep it organic with the action following the hero's journey. Which, I feel, enabled a more organic filmmaking for the director. A writer's job is, usually, quiet and low profile while movies are more public…how are you handling the attention? (Laughs) That is a good question. We writers, generally, like to keep a low profile, inhabit a quiet space. I am 100% like that. Going out in public to meet people [in the context of films], interviews etc make me self conscious. However, as a short story writer, I participate in literary events and discussions. Film promotions were back to back, and that is part of cinema. At the end of the day, cinema is a product — we can talk about our politics and our emotions but eventually it is a product which is headed for the 'market'. We have to get the 'returns' within x number of days. Secondly, if we want the movie to reach new audiences we have to make the effort. That is the new way not just for films but also for books, I guess. But books don't have a shelf life unlike movies. A book's success might be inevitable, but we have to make the effort to promote a film. What next? What next? I have a couple of completed film scripts; Anuraj and I have have discussed a couple of stories. We would like to proceed with one of those. Then there are few others that I have thought about, made blueprints of those which I need to work more on. That is the plan for now.
