When Mani Ratnam and Kamal Haasan collaborated in the late 1980s, we got the much-acclaimed Nayakan. The director and the actor have joined hands once again and have now given us Thug Life, in which one can find little traces of Nayakan. There is a boy who loses his father to bullets. A son who shows interest in his father's crime business. We also have that son who decides to kill the man responsible for killing his father. In Nayakan, these two sons were distinct characters. In Thug Life, they are the one. The Mani Ratnam of 1987, however, was a young, energetic, passionate filmmaker. The Mani Ratnam of 2025, unfortunately, seems to have surrendered to the algorithm and the idiotic appetite of the mass audience. Both Mani Ratnam and Haasan are undoubtedly cinephiles. But in Thug Life, they stoop down to the level of a "Twitter Cinephile." He's someone who posts the most generic hero-entry scene or a violent sequence and showers praise on the film, the star, and the director. Thug Life is a 163-minute celebration party for Kamal Haasan. He gets his "star moments," "actor moments," and "action hero moments." During the song "Jinguchaa," as soon as Haasan begins to dance, the music becomes louder. The movie invites - no, encourages - fans to dance along with the actor. But if early reviews suggest anything, it's that no one is dancing in the theaters. The filmmakers are clearly trying to attract a younger audience. I mean, just look at the title. Thug Life, though, has nothing new, nothing modern, nothing exciting to offer to young audiences. Directors like Sukumar and Sailesh Kolanu have satisfied their craving for "macho violence" in films like HIT: The Third Case and Pushpa. What Mani Ratnam achieves in the second half of Thug Life looks feeble in comparison. And since the general verdict on Twitter is that Thug Life is bad, the empty-headed "movie buff," who does the job of PR, is also not praising Thug Life's violence and hero moments (this, however, could change at any moment).
Mani Ratnam's gangster drama opens with Rangaraaya Sakthivel (Haasan) in a field, challenging some goons to come fight with him at some location. For a brief moment, we seem to be in a fantasy land. Sakthivel says that he has been dodging yamraaj for years, and his words further give the scene a fable-like, poetic atmosphere. This is the best and most promising moment in the entire film. As soon as we move to 1994, Thug Life starts to collapse. The first sign of weakness happens to be the young Sakthivel's introduction. Mani Ratnam asks you to applaud the CGI/makeup/whatever for making Haasan appear young. The result is more distracting than admirable. The scene even slows down a bit—and becomes jittery—so that we can fully appreciate the filmmaker's efforts. It's all pretty ridiculous, though nothing feels more laughable than watching Sakthivel romancing Indhrani (Trisha Krishnan). These "romantic portions" are almost unbearable; some blame should also be attributed to the Hindi-dubbed dialogues, which are ear-bleedingly vexatious. I usually don't care about the whole age difference thing, but watching Haasan and Trisha together made me a bit uncomfortable. The age gap is just too evident, and there is no chemistry between the actors to help us overlook this problem. Haasan and Abhirami are more bearable but not any better. They, too, don't share a convincing chemistry together, which seems shocking considering their performance in Virumaandi. I think it's safe to say that both Nayakan and Virumaandi are infinitely better than Thug Life, which merely leaves you with a feeling that it could have been something else.
The father-son angle isn't properly developed. It's suggested that Sakthivel is getting jealous of Amaran (Silambarasan) - an interesting notion that's dismissed as soon as it's brought up. Indhrani complains that Amaran "fed on her like an animal," which just means he had rough, violent sex with her. But when we look at Amaran, we don't see the animal. There is no lust in his eyes - no love either. This Mani Ratnam film is filled with bland performances. No wonder, then, when we watch Haasan, we think we are watching someone doing an acting exercise. Haasan vigorously moves his facial muscles. Rajshri Deshpande and Ali Fazal, on the other hand, participate in the Who Can Make The Best Sour Face competition. You keep on waiting for Deshpande's character to assert her dominance, but, like everybody else, she goes out with a whimper. Even pawns have more personality than these flat characters, so when we get to the weepy climax, we get the urge to walk out of the movie theater. It's hard to believe that the director who made Ponniyin Selvan made this action drama. Thug Life has no beauty, no radiance. At the time of writing this review, the movie is banned in Karnataka due to Haasan's comments that the Kannada language is born from Tamil. India, of course, is a perfect, crime-free, corruption-free country, and this is the matter that needs to be given the utmost importance. I would have felt sorry for the people of Karnataka, but as someone who has watched Thug Life, I can say to them, "Hey, you aren't missing out on much."
Final Score- [2/10]
Reviewed by - Vikas Yadav
Follow @vikasonorous on Twitter
Publisher at Midgard Times