It is very difficult to find entertainment in Singam 2, for it is unashamedly racist towards the African community. It also advocates corporal punishment in school as a means of keeping students from crime in adulthood. Lines implying that sort of nonsense are mouthed in the film with utter conviction by Saravanan Sivakumar, better known as Surya. That Surya utters those lines certainly does not make them any less racist or regressive; but the star wattage of the actor, not to mention the sheer cartoonishness of the movie, might perhaps have marginally diminished the negative impact.
Surya, who turns 38 this month, is the son of Sivakumar, the nearly-man of Tamil cinema, who enjoyed some success in the 1970s as a leading man and then won acclaim playing older roles after being subsumed by the Rajnikanth-Kamalahaasan wave, setting those two in pole position like MGR and Sivaji Ganesan in the preceding decades.
In 1997, Surya debuted with his contemporary Vijay, already five films old, in S.M. Vasanth’s Nerukku Ner, produced by Mani Ratnam’s Madras Talkies banner. The film played out like a rehash of Ratnam’s Agni Natchathiram (1988) with Karthik and Prabhu’s warring step-brothers replaced by warring co-brothers-in-law (the males in a brother-sister ‘exchange’ wedding). Vasanth’s Poovellam Kettuppar (1999) featured Nassar and Vijayakumar as an estranged music-composer duo whose children (Surya and Jyothika) strive to bring them together. Surya eventually married Jyothika in 2006.
Unlike Vijay—the son of S.A. Chandrashekhar, a purveyor of pot-boilers who directed Surya in Periyanna (1999)—who has stuck to the crowd-pleasing ‘masses’ trajectory, untouched by any need of acting skills, Surya, guided by his father, an award-winning actor, chose the Kamalahaasan path of alternating between roles for the ‘masses’ and for the ‘classes’. He was fortunate in that his arrival coincided with the flowering of fresh new directorial voices. Bala had revived actor Vikram’s dormant career with Sethu, his directorial debut. Surya was next to benefit: in Nandha (2001), Surya’s portrayal of a convict trying to reintegrate into society won him best actor at the Tamil Nadu state film awards. The next year, debutant Ameer Sultan cast Surya in Mounam Pesiyathe, a successful romcom. Some years on, Surya’s brother Karthi debuted in Sultan’s seminal Paruthiveeran (2007).
Another new directorial voice, Gautham Menon, had arrived with the hit Minnale (2001) and its flop Bollywood remake Rehnaa Hai Tere Dil Mein the same year. For his next, Kaakha Kaakha (2003), he cast Surya after being impressed by his performance in Nandha. Surya’s lean-mean supercop in the film created the template for bigger, brasher versions. Surya and Menon would team up for the memorable Vaaranam Aaayiram (2008) where the actor played father and son. Surya’s first double role, however, was in Sasi Shanker’s Perazhagan, in which he played the twin roles of a hunchback and a college student. He won the Filmfare (South) best actor award. By then, awards were coming fast. He won the Filmfare best supporting actor for playing an ebullient conman in Bala’s Pitamagan (2003); he also won critical acclaim for playing a student leader in Mani Ratnam’s Aaytha Ezhuthu.
Though most of these films starring Surya were box-office successes, his public image was still on the ‘class’ rather than the ‘mass’ trajectory. What he didn’t get was the wolf-whistling front-bench appeal. It changed with A.R. Murugadoss’s Ghajini, in which Surya plays a violent man with short-term memory loss (the filmmakers say they were not inspired by Christopher Nolan’s Memento). Though Kaakha Kaakha was a hit, it was still seen as a different, thinking man’s film. Ghajini’s blockbusting success firmly banished those thoughts. And thus began the next phase of Surya’s character that continues to this day. The director Hari, who had served up the action cop drama Saamy (2003), starring Vikram, joined hands with Surya for Aaru (2005), in which the actor plays a Fagin-like—only much younger and fitter—leader of a gang of youth. It was the beginning of an enduring partnership. Pausing only to make the separated-at-birth action drama Vel (2006), the Hari-Surya team created Singam (2010). With the film’s roaring, fiercely moustached cop Doraisingam, who is endowed with superhuman strength—northerners, think only of the Devgan turn—Surya’s image joined the larger-than-life pantheon.
It hasn’t always been great going for Surya since then, his reteaming with Murugadoss in the sci-fi film 7aum Arivu (2011) saw him dormant for long stretches of the film and inexplicably, Shruti Haasan, clearly unable to carry the narrative weight, was placed front and centre. The film just about turned a profit. His experiment playing conjoined twins in K.V. Anand’s Maatrraan did not find much favour with the ‘mass’ audience but nevertheless made a small profit thanks to his loyal fan base.
This fan base has not thought fit to bestow Surya with an epithet. His contemporaries all have one: Vijay is Ilayathalapathy; Ajith Kumar is Thalai; and Vikram is Cheeyan. Surya is just Surya. Some fans call him Nadippin Nayakan, that manages to combine Sivaji’s Nadigar Thilagam and one of Kamalahaasan’s most famous roles, but it’s a title not widely used. Perhaps the star is content without a ‘mass’ title. He’s happy producing films and with his charity, which keeps him busy when he’s not acting.
The ‘mass’ element is clearly back with Singam 2, a film with enough appeal for the meanest of tastes and often specifically for them, and is loud enough to wake the dead, and clearly they have risen and made their way to the turnstiles, as the producers have reported a global opening weekend of Rs 50 crore. Singam 2 arrives at an interesting time for Tamil cinema. On the one hand, films like Murugadoss’s Thuppakki, starring Vijay, with its gross of Rs 180 crore, proves that there is a market for action. On the other, the recent success of low-budget, high-concept films with no big stars, like Pizza, Naduvula Konjam Pakkatha Kaanom, Neram and Soodhu Kavvum shows that the Tamil audience is hungry for alternative content. Surya—to a lesser extent Vikram—is the best placed star to exploit both. Gautham Menon’s Thuppariyum Anandan, a detective thriller set in the 1980s, is supposed to be Surya’s next film. Perhaps that could be the one that will straddle the two worlds.
Six Of The Best
(The writer is the author of Rajinikanth: The Definitive Biography.)
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
More anti-male negative sterotyping
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT