It took the spilled blood of an Odisha migrant worker in Tiruttani — hacked by a gang of drug addicts —for Pa Ranjith, a propaganda filmmaker who has monetised caste aesthetics, to come out of his cocoon and preach at length. He wrote of a “heart trembling” at the inhuman cruelty, blamed the state’s “negligence” on drug culture, invoked the holy trinity of the Constitution – Liberty, Equality, Fraternity – and condemned the “dangerous trend” of othering the “Vadakkan” (North Indian).

திருவள்ளுர் மாவட்டம், திருத்தணியில் நடந்த மனிதமற்ற கொடூர செயலை கண்டு நெஞ்சம் பதறுகிறது!

அண்மைக்காலமாகத் தமிழகத்தில் அதிகரித்துவரக்கூடிய போதைப் பொருள் கலாச்சாரத்தைத் தடுக்கத் தவறிய ஆட்சியாளர்களுடைய மெத்தனப் போக்கே இதுபோன்ற சம்பவங்களுக்கு முக்கிய காரணம். இத்தகைய குற்றச் செயல்கள்…

— pa.ranjith (@beemji) December 30, 2025

It was plain performative wokeness, a sanitized, state-approved version of anguish that carefully vacuumed out any trace of his own industry’s and his own artistic projects’ complicity in creating the very hellscape he now pretends to mourn. Pa. Ranjith can be considered one of the factors in driving the Pullingow culture.

What Is This Pullingo Culture?

The word Pullingo gained prominence after a Gaana song “Enga Pullingo Ellam Bayangaram” went viral a few years ago.

This has evolved into a distinct subculture with a massive online presence, sustained by countless social media profiles. Offline, this identity is often signalled through flashy hair colours, customised motorcycles particularly Dio scooters, and tight-fitting jeans.

Today, the term is commonly used to describe youths associated with rash driving, disruptive street conduct, and exaggerated social-media bravado—traits evident in the attackers of the Odisha migrant worker.

Pa. Ranjith, An Enabler

To lecture these drug-addled, morally vacant teenagers on “constitutional values” is like preaching to a pack of rabid dogs. The assumption that these youths possess a framework to understand fraternity or liberty is a fatal fantasy. They are products of a culture that has systematically dismantled all traditional frameworks of morality – family, religion, community restraint -and replaced them with a curated, cinematic rebellion that glorifies the very anarchy Ranjith now condemns. They don’t quote Ambedkar; they mimic the swagger of the gangsters in the films his cinematic universe has normalized.

And herein lies the rotten core of Ranjith’s contradiction. For years, he and his cultural ecosystem have weaponized “subaltern art” as a political cudgel. In the name of elevating the oppressed, they have aggressively mainstreamed a few Gaana artistes. Let’s drop the pretense: a significant portion of this musical genre’s popular lyrics are a cesspool glorifying rowdyism, drunken bravado, misogyny, women sexualization, substance abuse, and a violent, anti-establishment posture. Yes, there are sprinklings of social justice – a thin veneer of political correctness over a thick core of decadence. Ranjith’s films, while narratively advocating for the oppressed, are visually and auratically drenched in this very macho of the marginalised, often romanticizing the outlaw as the only true revolutionary.

You cannot spend a decade aestheticising ghetto rebellion, painting the “rowdy” as a tragic hero fighting a corrupt system, and then act shocked when boys in a real ghetto, devoid of your narrative’s political scaffolding, enact the style without the substance. You gave them the costume, the attitude, the soundtrack of violence, and then feign horror when they wear it. His cinema, and that of the ‘gangster-genre’ wave he indirectly legitimised, didn’t just reflect a culture; it actively designed its wardrobe.

His sermon’s most nauseating part is the sudden, convenient invocation of “Constitutional values.” This from a strand of activism that has made a sport of demonizing a particular way of life as “Brahminical.” Carnatic music? Oppressive. Bharatanatyam? Brahminical. Academic merit? A sly tool of caste exclusion. The relentless push isn’t to add, but to replace; not to elevate the subaltern to classical platforms, but to tear down the classical and declare the rubble as liberation. The goal seems less about empowerment and more about inverted majoritarianism, where whatever the perceived “oppressor” caste does must be vilified, and whatever the “oppressed” does must be celebrated, even when it is morally and socially degenerative.

The tragic result is what we see: a generation being severed from aspirational disciplines (arts, sciences, meritocracy) and fed a diet of corrosive “counter-culture.” This isn’t liberation; it’s a trap. It swaps one hierarchy for another – exchanging the possibility of excellence for the prison of perpetual, stylized grievance. It tells a young man that becoming a doctor is “their system,” but becoming a local tough with a slick reel is “authentic.” Social media has then turbocharged this, turning the gaana-gangster pose into a viral currency.

So, when Ranjith piously calls for “fraternity,” one must ask: Fraternity between whom? His entire political project is built on highlighting difference, historical grievance, and separateness. His films, for all their final-frame unity messages, are two-hour journeys through the anatomy of division. To now preach a sudden, generic “Indian fraternity” after the bloodshed is the height of directorial duplicity. It’s a post-credit scene that rings hollow after the main feature’s relentless focus on conflict.

Very diplomatically, without naming the government or the actual culprits, he says, “Issues like drug culture, weapons culture, and social division should not be approached as isolated factors. All of these are interconnected.”

This is a masterful dodge – a statement so broadly true it is meaningless, allowing him to nod sagely at societal collapse without ever specifying the links in the chain he himself has helped forge. For the crucial, unasked question remains: What is the cultural engine that interconnects them? Who provided the aesthetic that bonds the drug, the weapon, and the divisive identity into a single, seductive package of “cool”? Who filmed the slow-motion sequences where substance abuse looks like rebellious ecstasy and the gleam of a weapon signifies power? Who packaged the outlaw life, steeped in this toxic trifecta, as the only authentic form of resistance? The connection he hints at is not an abstract social phenomenon; it is a product. And its most influential mood boards have been the very films that he and his cinematic school have produced. The blood in Tiruttani has a hue that matches the colour palette of this gritty, grim, and glorified violence.

The final insult is his call for police to act against violent reels. This from a filmmaker whose heroes defy the police as a matter of principle, where the khaki uniform is often the villain. You cannot spend your career painting the state’s punitive arm as intrinsically oppressive and then, when your aesthetic spawns real monsters, call upon that same arm to clean up your mess.

The tragedy is doubled. A migrant worker is attacked in this case; more news is coming out that at various instances migrant workers ended up dead. And the Tamil boys, who should have been his brothers, are his assaulters, (and in the other case, their murderers) their minds poisoned by a cocktail of cheap drugs and cheaper cinema masquerading as political art. Pa Ranjith’s sermon is not a solution; it is a sequel – another performance, designed to absolve the performer. But the audience is no longer buying it. The screen has broken, and the real violence is now playing in our streets. The director, for once, doesn’t get to yell “cut.”

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Pullingo Menace And Pa. Ranjith’s Sermon appeared first on The Commune.

The already volatile Thirupparankundram Karthigai Deepam dispute has taken an ugly communal and casteist turn, with the social media wing of prominent Dravidianist filmmaker Pa Ranjith’s banner, Neelam, launching a direct and inflammatory attack on Madras High Court judge Justice GR Swaminathan and the broader Hindu community.

On its official handle, ‘Neelam Social,’ the organization shared an image with text that read: “In a secular country, singling out and praising one particular community alone is the remnant of Brahminism! For a judge to express that in his ruling is the height of indecency!”

ஒரு மதத்தினை
மட்டுமே தூக்கிப் பிடித்து
துதி பாடுவதென்பது
பார்ப்பனியத்தின் எச்சம் !#neelamsocial #neelamculturalcentre #religión pic.twitter.com/zzDmDhqFkH

— Neelam Social (@NeelamSocial) December 4, 2025

The post appeared in response to Justice GR Swaminathan’s order directing the State to permit the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at the Deepathoon in Thirupparankundram and criticising officials for failing to obey the court’s instructions.

Context of the Legal Battle

The controversy stems from the Madurai Bench’s order allowing Hindu devotees to light the Karthigai Deepam at the Deepathoon, which the district administration blocked using Section 144, leading to a contempt hearing. Justice Swaminathan had summoned the District Collector and SP, questioning the failure to implement the court’s order which the police refused to implement once again.

The Neelam Social post appears to be a direct response to this judicial scrutiny, reframing it as majoritarian bias.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Thirupparankundram Deepam Row: Dravidianist Director Pa Ranjith’s Neelam Org Unleashes Anti-Hindu Hate, Spews Casteist Venom At Justice GR Swaminathan appeared first on The Commune.

The controversy surrounding the October 7 altercation near the Madras High Court took a political turn, with Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) leader Thol. Thirumavalavan alleging a “planned conspiracy” against him, implicating the RSS and BJP. The incident, which involved a minor collision between Thirumavalavan’s car and lawyer Rajiv Gandhi’s scooter, escalated when VCK cadres allegedly attacked the lawyer. Despite video evidence showing the VCK vehicle hitting the scooter, Thirumavalavan maintains that the episode was orchestrated to provoke him. Kollywood director Pa Ranjith has now buttressed this “conspiracy” claim of the VCK chief, calling for government protection, further fueling the political narrative.

In a statement posted on his official X handle, Thirumavalavan said, “It has come to light that the incident on October 7, where my car was obstructed in front of the Tamil Nadu Advocates Association near the High Court, was not a random occurrence but a planned conspiracy. It has been confirmed through our investigation that members of the RSS and BJP are behind this. Therefore, we urge the Tamil Nadu government to register a case regarding this matter and conduct a thorough investigation. The conspiracy behind it must be uncovered. Furthermore, we demand that the private television channels that broadcasted this incident be immediately and thoroughly investigated without any bias.”

உயர்நீதிமன்றம் அருகே தமிழ்நாடு வழக்கறிஞர்கள் சங்கத்தின் முன்பு கடந்த அக்டோபர் -07 அன்று எனது காரை வழிமறித்த நிகழ்வு ‘தற்செயலாக நடந்தது அல்ல; திட்டமிட்டசதி’ என்பது தெரியவருகிறது.

ஆர்எஸ்எஸ் மற்றும் பாஜகவினர் இதன் பின்னணியில்உள்ளனர் என்றும் எமது விசாரணையில் உறுதிபட தெரிகிறது.…

— Thol. Thirumavalavan (@thirumaofficial) October 10, 2025

What Actually Happened

The altercation took place when lawyer Rajiv Gandhi, who was riding his scooter near the High Court premises, came into contact with Thirumavalavan’s car. Video footage from the scene shows a group of VCK members surrounding and attacking the lawyer after the collision.

Rajiv Gandhi later filed a complaint alleging that he was assaulted by VCK cadres at the instigation of Thirumavalavan. His scooter was also damaged during the scuffle. Despite the allegations and available video evidence, the Esplanade police have not yet registered a First Information Report (FIR) in connection with the incident.

Rajiv Gandhi has been admitted to a private hospital for treatment. His family has alleged that since the night of the incident, the lawyer has received over 500 threatening phone calls, and his personal phone number was circulated online by VCK supporters who allegedly encouraged further harassment.

Following public outrage, Thirumavalavan released a video claiming that the incident was an attempt to provoke him. According to his account, the lawyer deliberately tried to block his car and instigate a confrontation.

However, the lawyer’s brother refuted this version, stating that the available footage clearly shows Thirumavalavan’s vehicle hitting Rajiv Gandhi’s scooter. He said Rajiv merely approached the car to question the driver about the collision when he was attacked by VCK men.

The video of the assault quickly went viral, sparking widespread criticism.

Pa Ranjith Buttresses VCK Chief Thirumavalavan

Pa Ranjith, Kollywood director and DMK stooge who claims to speak up for the Dalits through his films and initiatives, endorsed Thirumavalavan’s post and wrote, “The incident of blocking the car near the Tamil Nadu Advocates Association in front of the High Court on October -07 did not happen by accident; it was a premeditated conspiracy, said the leader of the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi party, Annan Thiru. Thol. Thirumavalavan
@thirumaofficial, Taking this into consideration, I request the Tamil Nadu government @CMOTamilnadu to immediately provide protection!!”

உயர்நீதிமன்றம் அருகே தமிழ்நாடு வழக்கறிஞர்கள் சங்கத்தின் முன்பு கடந்த அக்டோபர் -07 அன்று
காரை வழிமறித்த நிகழ்வு ‘தற்செயலாக நடந்தது அல்ல; திட்டமிட்டசதி என்று
விடுதலைச் சிறுத்தைகள் கட்சியின் தலைவர், அண்ணன் திரு.தொல்.திருமாவளவன் @thirumaofficial அவர்கள் தெரிவித்துள்ளார்,
இதை… https://t.co/KWDlSwMr0S

— pa.ranjith (@beemji) October 10, 2025

While Thirumavalavan and his supporters like Pa Ranjith portray the incident as a premeditated attack, the available video footage and eyewitness accounts contradict their claims, clearly showing the VCK vehicle making contact with the lawyer’s scooter. Rajiv Gandhi and his family continue to face harassment, including threatening calls allegedly circulated by VCK sympathizers. The case remains under investigation, but the involvement of prominent figures like Pa Ranjith in backing Thirumavalavan’s version highlights the increasingly politicized nature of the controversy, raising questions about accountability and the role of party influence in shaping public perception.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post VCK Hit & Run Case: DMK Stooge Director Pa Ranjith Comes To Buttress Thirumavalavan’s False Claims Despite Video Evidence Showing VCK Goons Thrashing Motorist And Vandalizing His Two-Wheeler appeared first on The Commune.

Dravidianist and Kollywood film director Pa. Ranjith was granted bail following legal proceedings initiated after a tragic accident on the set of his film Vettuvam. The incident, which occurred during filming in Keezhayur, Nagapattinam district, involved the death of stuntman Mohanraj, who reportedly died after falling while performing a high-risk action sequence. Authorities initially suspected lapses in safety protocols, leading to a case being filed against the director and three crew members.

The accident halted the production of Vettuvam, a film backed by Ranjith’s banner, Neelam Productions. Reports suggest that Mohanraj suffered a fatal heart attack after falling from a vehicle during a stunt. Although he was taken to a nearby hospital promptly, he could not be saved.

Following the incident, the Keezhayur police filed a case against Pa. Ranjith, along with crew members Rajkamal, Vinoth, and Prabhakaran, citing negligence in enforcing safety measures on set. While the three crew members secured anticipatory bail earlier, Pa. Ranjith appeared in person at the Keezhayur court on 31 July 2025 to submit his statement and was subsequently granted bail.

Despite the controversy, filming has recently resumed. Vettuvam stars Arya and ‘Gethu’ Dinesh in lead roles and features several well-known actors in significant parts. In a gesture of support, Ranjith provided ₹20 lakhs in financial aid to the family of the deceased stuntman. Additionally, members of the Tamil film fraternity have extended their condolences and support to Mohanraj’s family during this difficult time.

(With inputs from Times Of India)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Dravidianist Director Pa. Ranjith Gets Bail After Stuntman’s Death Halts ‘Vettuvam’ Filming appeared first on The Commune.

The “triple flop” Dravidianist director Pa Ranjith, known for his ideologically-driven cinema, has once again stirred controversy this time at the Verchol Dalit Literary Festival—by expressing apparent resentment toward the rising success of Mari Selvaraj. In a noticeably bitter tone, Ranjith revisited his association with director Mari Selvaraj, claiming that he was the one who introduced Selvaraj through the critically acclaimed film Pariyerum Perumal. He lamented that, despite being the producer of the film, he has not been duly recognized for its success—an unusual complaint, as industry norms typically celebrate the director as the creative force behind a film’s success or failure.

Ranjith appeared to express envy over Mari Selvaraj’s rising acclaim and attempted to reclaim part of that credit by emphasizing his role in launching Selvaraj’s career. However, Mari Selvaraj has carved his own path through impactful, socially resonant films that have earned both public and critical praise, without relying on ideological narratives as heavily as Ranjith.

Rather than self-reflection, Ranjith used the platform to rationalize his string of underwhelming releases, attributing lack of recognition to others instead of acknowledging potential flaws in storytelling and audience disconnect. He went further to suggest that he has been the sole torchbearer of Dalit-focused cinema and workplace inclusion, seemingly demanding acknowledgment for championing such causes.

Why Kaala Was A Flop – A Pa Ranjith Narrative

Pa Ranjith, in an attempt to explain the commercial failure of his film Kaala, offered a string of justifications during his speech. He said, “What happened during the time of Kaala was that, immediately after Rajinikanth announced his entry into politics, everyone began to write that he was using me. Particularly, what Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi’s Ravi Kumar did then was…,” Ranjith paused mid-sentence, seemingly avoiding direct criticism, and continued, “Some people started writing that I was being motivated and funded by the RSS, that I was portraying Rajinikanth as an Ambedkarite and taking him to the slums. I didn’t know what to make of all this. Kaala is a film that openly opposed RSS ideology and stands till today. I presented that straight away. The conflict is black and white. In the climax, I had said that three colours should unify. I was confused and don’t know what more I was expected to take. I’m confused as to why the film was criticized so much.”

He went on to say that the entire Tamil community turned against Kaala after comments made by Rajinikanth about the Thoothukudi firing incident, claiming that those remarks triggered widespread negative campaigning against the film. Then he lamented that, “No one showed mercy that I was the one who directed it. ‘Ranjith was sold out’. That’s all that mattered. Many others have worked with Superstar Rajinikanth, but they were never sold-out directors, but I was the only one who was.”

Envy Towards Mari Selvaraj? Pa Ranjith’s Attempt To Overshadow His Protégé’s Success

In a later part of his speech, Pa Ranjith appeared to repeatedly downplay Mari Selvaraj’s success, claiming that Pariyerum Perumal—the film that launched Mari’s career—only came to be because of his backing. He seemed intent on reminding the audience that he produced the film and, in doing so, tried to shift the spotlight back onto himself.

Speaking at the event, Ranjith said, “We have made Pariyerum Perumal and released it—it became a huge hit. But what happened at that time was… Pariyerum Perumal was a movie that I invested my own money in. I’m its producer. While releasing the movie, I had previously given some money to my wife for savings. I got that from her and released the movie. But after watching the movie, I saw an article, I think it was Vikatan, they had not even mentioned that it was produced by Neelam Production, but had written that Pariyerum Perumal was awesome. A director wrote ‘Director Ram’s upbringing led to this film being made.’ I’m asking, what is wrong with you praising me? What is the problem with writing ‘Neelam Production’? When a good movie comes out, who is it being produced by?”

Ranjith went on to say that he had no clear expectations about whether the film would succeed. He admitted that only two scenes truly resonated with him. One was the moment where the character says, “I’m going to become a doctor.” After watching that scene, Ranjith told the team, “That alone is enough for me.” The other was the professor’s line, “If you back down in fear, will they spare you?”—a moment that ultimately convinced him to go ahead and release the film.

He concluded by subtly expressing resentment that, “Even then, everyone seemed to have an issue acknowledging that it was a Ranjith production. But fine, let it be. But a Mari Selvaraj rose from that, didn’t he? And now he’s reached great heights, hasn’t he?”

Ranjith Attempt to Claim Sole Ownership Over Dalit Representation Simply To Undermine Mari Selvaraj

Perhaps the most disappointing moment came when flop director Pa Ranjith appeared to craft a narrative positioning himself as the only true advocate for Dalit representation in cinema—while subtly discrediting director Mari Selvaraj’s contributions. In a surprising and divisive remark, Ranjith suggested indirectly a notion that Mari Selvaraj was not committed to offering opportunities or showing preferential support to Dalits in his film projects. He implied that, unlike himself, Mari was reluctant to prioritize the upliftment of marginalized communities in his work.

Ranjith said, “Mari Selvaraj came and asked me how many people have come to work in your production, how many have come to make films, and how many of them are non-Dalits. How many people are working with your movement, and when there are this many non-Dalits, how are you going to respond to the accusations against you? I said I don’t care about that. Yes, I am a Dalit. I live for Dalits. I will give a chance only to Dalits. I don’t care and I don’t understand. I know who I am. Why should I come to you and give a certification in written to trust me? I don’t need it.”

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Pa Ranjith Jealous Of Mari Selvaraj? Whines That Pariyerum Perumal Was Praised Without Recognizing His Banner Neelam Productions appeared first on The Commune.

Mohanlal, the giant of Malayalam cinema, recently showed the world what true humility looks like by apologizing for the anti-Hindu undertones in his film L2: Empuraan. Meanwhile, Rajinikanth, Tamil cinema’s so-called “Superstar,” remains a shameless enabler of anti-Hindu Dravidianist propaganda, refusing to utter a word of regret for his role in the vile Kaala — a film that spat on Hindu values and peddled propaganda against the BJP — and doubling down by aligning himself with directors who peddle the same divisive garbage.

Mohanlal’s Humility

L2: Empuraan, released on March 27, 2025, was meant to be a triumphant sequel to Lucifer, elevating Mohanlal’s legacy and Malayalam cinema’s global stature. Instead, it sparked outrage among Hindus for its depiction of communal violence—sequences that echoed the 2002 Gujarat riots but painted Hindus as merciless villains while conveniently glossing over the Godhra train burning that ignited the conflict. The film was nothing but a brazen anti-Hindu, anti-BJP, and anti-Modi propaganda thanks to its Communist Goebbelian director Prithviraj Sukumaran and writer Murali Gopy of caricaturing Hindu karsevaks as violent thugs and mocking sacred iconography with burning crosses and collapsing symbols.

A disturbing scene shows a young Muslim boy calling for his father during an ambush, only to be brutally beaten to death by a Hindu man. This is followed by a group of Muslims seeking refuge in a Hindu household, where they are attacked once again culminating in a horrifying moment where a Hindu man rapes a pregnant Muslim woman.

The film promoted hatred against politically vocal Hindus and portrayed them as a threat to society, something that the Kerala’s pseudo-secular leftist parties do. The fictional Akhanda Shakti Morcha (ASM), a Hindutva party, is a thinly veiled BJP proxy. It’s the BJP and RSS in all but name, cast as barbaric vandals tearing apart Kerala’s “secular” soul. The film is all about painting Hindu nationalism as a modern-day plague.

Yet, Mohanlal didn’t dodge or deflect. On March 30, 2025, he issued a public apology, acknowledging the distress caused to his fans and vowing to excise the offending scenes.

Mohanlal took to Facebook to reassure his fans that certain themes would be removed from the film. In his message, he also expressed regret for any distress caused.

Writing in Malayalam, he acknowledged that some political and social elements in Empuraan, the sequel to Lucifer, had led to unrest. He stated, “I have come to understand that certain political and social themes in the film have deeply upset many of my dear ones. As an artist, it is my responsibility to ensure that none of my films promote hatred toward any political movement, ideology, or group.”

He further emphasized that the responsibility was shared by everyone involved in the film. “The Empuraan team and I sincerely apologize for the distress caused. Recognizing that this responsibility rests with all of us, we have collectively decided to remove such themes from the film,” he added.

Reflecting on his career, he concluded, “For the past four decades, I have been one of you in my cinematic journey. Your love and trust are my greatest strengths. I believe there is no Mohanlal beyond that… With love, Mohanlal. #L2E #Empuraan.”

The massive Hindu outrage has led to the film taking a serious hit at the box-office prompting the the filmmakers to voluntarily make 17 cuts to the film. Mohanlal’s legacy, though briefly tarnished, he had the humility to accept the mistake and express regret for being part of a propaganda film.

Rajinikanth’s Spineless Silence

Contrast this with Rajinikanth, a man who cloaks himself in spirituality but lacks the spine to confront the venom he’s helped unleash through his films.

His 2018 film Kaala, directed by the rabidly anti-Hindu Pa. Ranjith, was a masterclass in Dravidianist propaganda. The film cast Rajini as a Dharavi slum leader—a dark-clad “Ravana” figure—pitted against Nana Patekar’s white-clad, Ram-worshipping villain, a thinly veiled stand-in for the BJP. It flipped the Ramayana on its head, glorifying Ravana as a Dravidian hero while sneering at Rama as a symbol of “oppressive Hindu hegemony.” Hindu rituals were mocked, tilak-sporting villains strutted around with Ram idols, and Rajini’s character even threatened, “If stealing my land is your God’s Dharma, then I won’t spare your God either.”

Did Rajinikanth apologize? Did he distance himself from this grotesque distortion of Hindu faith? Not a chance. He stayed silent, letting the film’s bile fester unchallenged. This wasn’t a one-off lapse either. The Commune has chronicled how Rajini has repeatedly chosen scripts that demonize Hindus—think Petta, with its digs at Bajrang Dal, or Vettaiyan, another Dravidianist flop that smeared Hindus, lionized minorities, peddled DMK’s propaganda against NEET and glorified British colonialist Thomas Babington Macaulay.

In Lal Salaam, Rajinikanth plays Moideen Bhai, the good Muslim while another villain (Adithya Menon) is portrayed with a nice red tilak. The Hindu villains are shown as taking the guise of Muslims wearing skullcaps and are shown as instigators of riots. The narrative takes a distressing turn when the Hindu antagonist inflicts permanent harm on Moideen’s son. He even justified his daughter’s derogatory usage of the word Sanghi. Each time, he hides behind the excuse of being a “director’s actor,” as if his superstar status doesn’t give him the clout to reject such trash. For a man who claims devotion to Sanatana Dharma, his reel and real life reeks of venom against politically assertive Hindus and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The Dravidianist Puppet Strings

Rajinikanth’s complicity isn’t ignorance—it’s cowardice. The Dravidian ideology, with its roots in EVR’s separatist fantasies, has long sought to vilify Hindu culture, and Tamil cinema has been its megaphone. Directors like Pa. Ranjith and TJ Gnanavel—Rajini’s collaborator on Vettaiyan—wear their anti-Hindu bias like a badge of honor. The Commune has exposed how Kaala wasn’t just a film but a propaganda tool, aligning with the Dravidian narrative that paints Rama as an “upper-caste” tyrant and Ravana as a misunderstood icon. The so-called ‘spiritual’ Rajini, the one of the top film stars in India could have said no. Instead, he lent his iconic persona to amplify this poison, proving he’s less a superstar and more a puppet dancing to the tune of ideologues who despise the very faith he claims to cherish.

Mohanlal, by contrast, operates in a different league. When Empuraan stumbled into controversy, he didn’t let Prithviraj’s agenda define him. He took responsibility, faced the backlash, and acted decisively. Rajini, however, seems content to let Ranjith and his ilk drag his legacy through the mud, film after film, with no apology in sight.

A Legacy of Shame Vs. Redemption

Mohanlal’s apology wasn’t weakness—it was strength, a bridge to his fans that reaffirmed his bond with them. The Commune noted the film’s initial box-office success—crossing ₹100 crore globally in days—yet Mohanlal prioritized harmony over profit, ensuring Empuraan didn’t become a permanent stain. Rajinikanth, meanwhile, clings to his silence, his halo dimmed by every anti-Hindu jab he’s endorsed. His fans may still cheer, but for many, the “Thalaivar” they adored is now a hollow shell, a tool for Dravidian propagandists who laugh as they dismantle Hindu pride.

Mohanlal proved a star can rise above controversy with dignity. Rajinikanth, shackled by his own spinelessness, remains a cautionary tale—a giant reduced to a pawn, too timid to say “sorry” and too compromised to care.

When life makes you a superstar, be like Mohanlal and not Rajini.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post When Life Makes You A Superstar, Be Like Mohanlal And Not Rajinikanth appeared first on The Commune.

“L2: Empuraan,” unleashed on March 27, 2025, was billed as Mohanlal’s triumphant return, a sequel to “Lucifer” meant to hoist Malayalam cinema into the stratosphere. Instead, it’s a grotesque propaganda vehicle, steered off a cliff by director Prithviraj Sukumaran and writer Murali Gopy, with Mohanlal as Khureshi Ab’raam/Stephen Nedumpally reduced to a pawn in their sanctimonious game. What could have been a cinematic triumph is instead a shameless assault on Hindu sentiments, the BJP, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, delivered with the finesse of a drunk uncle ranting at a wedding. Much like Rajinikanth’s trash film “Kaala” which blatantly peddled anti-Hindu and anti-BJP propaganda, “Empuraan” swan-dives into the same cesspool, dragging Mohanlal’s legacy down with it in a spectacle of political posturing and betrayal. If the entire review has to be summarized in a single line – Empuraan is worth nothing except for the meaning you get when you misread the name in Tamil. For a detailed analysis read further.

Kaala:Rajini::Empuraan:Mohanlal

In Kaala, the anti-Hindu streak is blatant and unapologetic. Ranjith casts Rajinikanth as a Dharavi slum leader, a dark-clad “Ravana” figure pitted against Nana Patekar’s white-clad, Ram-worshipping villain, Hari Abhyankar, the leader of Navbharat Nationalist Party (a BJP stand-in). The film flips the Ramayana on its head, glorifying Ravana as a Dravidian hero while mocking Rama as a symbol of oppressive Hindu hegemony. Hindu rituals, like Ganesh Chaturthi, are sneered at, and the antagonist’s devotion to Krishna and Rama is framed as a jibe at Hindus. The messaging is clear: Hindu traditions are tools of the elite to crush the downtrodden, with Dalit and Muslim characters lionized as victims of this savarna savagery. It’s a sledgehammer approach—crude, in-your-face, and dripping with Ranjith’s disdain for anything saffron.

Empuraan, by contrast, takes a slicker, more insidious tack. The fictional Akhanda Shakti Morcha (ASM), a Hindutva party, is a thinly veiled BJP proxy. It’s the BJP and RSS in all but name, cast as barbaric vandals tearing apart Kerala’s “secular” soul. Prithviraj and writer Murali Gopy don’t just stop at political critique—they caricature Hindu karsevaks as violent thugs, while their foes, including Mohanlal’s shadowy protagonist, emerge as morally superior. The film’s symbolism, like burning crosses and collapsing “L”s, subtly mocks Hindu iconography, but it’s less about rewriting epics and more about painting Hindu nationalism as a modern-day plague. The reference to the 2002 Gujarat Riots where the Hindus are shown as merciless villains while Muslims are shown as the poor hapless souls, you know what this trash film is all about. Where Kaala screams its Hinduphobia, Empuraan smirks through a polished lens, cloaking its contempt in a veneer of sophistication.

Anti-BJP Stance And Secular Sanctimony

Both films frame the BJP as a villain, but their battlegrounds differ. Kaala ties its anti-BJP stance to Tamil pride, pitting the Navbharat Nationalist Party (a BJP stand-in) against Rajinikanth’s black-clad, tricolour-defying hero. The party’s lion symbol (a nod to Gujarat and Modi) and saffron imagery are ridiculed as alien impositions on Tamil soil. It’s a regionalist middle finger to BJP’s national ambitions, amplified by Ranjith’s blue-flag-waving Ambedkarite defiance. The film thrives on this us-versus-them clash, reveling in its rejection of Hindutva’s electoral dominance outside Dharavi.

Empuraan takes a broader, more sanctimonious swipe. The ASM’s infiltration of Kerala is less about regional chauvinism and more about a moral crusade against BJP’s communal politics. Prithviraj’s narrative oozes Kerala’s self-righteous secularism, casting the BJP as a predatory outsider disrupting a utopian social fabric.

The real threat to Kerala is from the Islamists who have made Malappuram a hot bed of radicalization threatening the unity and sovereignty of India. Love Jihad is a dreaded reality affecting both Hindu and Christian families in the state. Radical Islamists have carved out Pakistan-like enclaves for themselves. However, this ‘peaceful community’ is never shown in bad light but the film goes out of the way to slander vocal Hindus.

Propagandist Prithviraj

All this propaganda is thanks to Prithviraj, the self-styled auteur whose fingerprints are all over this debacle. His direction reeks of a smug, elitist disdain, turning a potentially gripping tale into a soapbox for his thinly veiled political biases. He’s not just a filmmaker here—he’s a pontificating crusader, using “Empuraan” to flex his woke credentials while thumbing his nose at Hindus. The ASM’s every sneer and saffron symbol screams anti-Modi venom, a cheap ploy that’s less subtle than a brick through a window. It rails against division while wallowing in its own stereotypes, reducing Kerala to a melodramatic cesspit for clout. Prithviraj’s posturing as a progressive darling is laughable—he’s less a visionary than a sanctimonious hack, peddling divisive tripe under the guise of art.

The visuals—jungle fights, Mohanlal’s grand entry—are undeniably slick, a testament to technical prowess that briefly distracts from the rot. But it’s lipstick on a pig. Prithviraj’s heavy-handed messaging turns every frame into a lecture, alienating ardent Mohanlal fans. His political grandstanding doesn’t elevate the film; it guts it, leaving a hollow shell that’s neither entertaining nor insightful.

Mohanlal Stoops Low To Become A Rajinikanth

Mohanlal’s fans are left reeling. After a string of flops, this was his lifeline, but Prithviraj’s insufferable agenda has turned it into a millstone. The superstar’s charisma shines through, yet he’s shackled to a narrative that betrays his roots, a man who was admired by people across the ideological/political spectrum has turned himself into a propaganda pawn now complicit in trashing Hindus.

A Propaganda That Should Be Trashed 

In the end, “L2: Empuraan” is a dazzling disaster—a propaganda-soaked mess that sacrifices art for ideology. Mohanlal’s star power can’t save it, and Prithviraj’s insipid political posturing only deepens the wound. Both Kaala and Empuraan wield anti-Hindu, anti-Modi, and anti-BJP propaganda. Like Kaala, it’s a film that spits on Hindu identity, demonizes nationalism, and grovels to anti-Modi dogma, all while its director preens like a self-righteous martyr. It is a shame that Rajinikanth and Mohanlal, titans of their industries, lend their stardom to these agendas.

A legacy tarnished, a fanbase betrayed, by becoming the pawns of pompous frauds.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer. 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Empuraan Review: Mohanlal Stoops Low Like Rajini To Peddle Anti-Hindu, Anti-BJP, Anti-Modi Propaganda appeared first on The Commune.

Vetrimaaran who is known for making leftist-Dravidianist propaganda films has produced a film under his banner Grassroot Films called ‘Bad Girl‘, that attempts to portrays the story of a Tamil Brahmin girl who wants to be rebellious, break the shackles of “Brahminical patriarchy“, chooses to live the “high” life and defies her parents and family.

The film being touted as a ‘coming-of-age’ drama about a Tamil Brahmin girl, glorifies her indulging in vice while her family is portrayed as being regressive.

The trailer features an elderly Tamil Brahmin woman, presumably the protagonist’s grandmother, angrily yelling at the teenage protagonist “Aye Peeda! Aathla Illiya Nee?” (Hey you filth! Are you have your periods?), a desperate attempt to demonize Tamil Brahmins and show them as despicable.

It also shows the teenage school going girl lusting over a boy from another community.

The girl then goes on to blackmail her mother saying that once school is over she will do whatever she likes with visuals showing montages of the girl having sex.

What is a Dravidioid film without peddling propaganda against the Narendra Modi government. The last scene of the trailer shows the protagonists family joining other members of their community banging their vessels and shouting “Go Corona Go!”, an apparent dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s clarion call to thank the frontline workers for their unparalleled service.

The trailer of this film ‘Bad Girl’, produced by Dravidianist director Vetrimaaran in collaboration with leftist, virtue-signaling filmmaker Anurag Kashyap, was shared by the notoriously anti-Hindu and flop-prone director Pa. Ranjith.

Happened to watch #BadGirl, and it’s truly a bold and refreshing film! Director #VetriMaaran deserves immense credit for backing such a daring story. The film powerfully portrays women’s struggles and society’s expectations through a unique new wave cinema style. Congratulations… pic.twitter.com/EanrwiDE2I

— pa.ranjith (@beemji) January 26, 2025

It was also shared by Dravidianist virtue-signalling actor Vijay Sethupathi.

#BadGirl teaser is here, Presented by @anuragkashyap72 & #VetriMaaran, this coming-of-age drama premieres at #IFFR2025! Watch the teaser now! Best wishes to the team!https://t.co/J8PRzdGgB4#BadGirlTheMovie #VetriMaaran #AnuragKashyap #AnjaliSivaraman #VarshaBharath… pic.twitter.com/2BuhkQHXWt

— VijaySethupathi (@VijaySethuOffl) January 26, 2025

There are some serious questions to be asked to these pusillanimous Dravidianists.

Will they be able to watch this film with their wives and daughters? Will Vetrimaaran or Pa Ranjith or Anurag Kashyap or Vijay Sethupathi raise their daughters like they’ve shown the protagonist? Will Vetrimaaran or Pa Ranjith or Anurag Kashyap show women of their families or community as ‘Bad Girls’ indulging in vice?

Why do these pusillanimous Dravidianist filmmakers always choose a Brahmin woman for their “progressive” and “bold” ideas? Why do they always go after the Brahmin woman’s flesh to satiate their fetish? Is it because they don’t find their own wives and women attractive?

Why don’t these pusillanimous social justice warriors show members of their community or any other dominant community as regressive? Why not show women of your own community to be “bold” and “progressive” breaking the familial shackles?

Why don’t you show a hijab-clad woman liberating herself to fulfill her desires?

Promiscuity is power only for Brahmin women and not for women of other communities? Will you allow your wives or daughters to be as promiscuous as you portray the protagonist to be? You want your wives and daughters to be “pathini” while you make Brahmin women as guinea pigs for your social justice experiment?

Dear Dravidoid cowards, Brahmin women are not your social justice trophies!

Vallavaraayan is a political writer.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Will The Pusillanimous Vetrimaaran/Pa Ranjith/Vijay Sethupathi Allow Women From Their Own Families Or Community To Go Woke And Be ‘Bad Girls’ Embracing Vice? appeared first on The Commune.

The upcoming Tamil film Bad Girl, directed by Varsha Bharath and produced by filmmakers Vetrimaaran and Anurag Kashyap, has drawn sharp criticism from director Mohan G Kshatriyan. The film, which will be premiering at the 54th International Film Festival Rotterdam (IFFR), has sparked a debate over its portrayal of Brahmin characters in Tamil cinema.

The teaser, which was launched on 26 January 2025 at an event in Chennai, follows a young Brahmin girl (played by Anjali Sivaraman) as she navigates the challenges of adolescence and societal expectations, particularly surrounding her relationships. The film highlights her struggles with criticism and shaming for her personal choices.

The film received support from Dravidianist director Pa Ranjith who wrote on his X handle, “Happened to watch #BadGirl, and it’s truly a bold and refreshing film! Director #VetriMaaran deserves immense credit for backing such a daring story. The film powerfully portrays women’s struggles and society’s expectations through a unique new wave cinema style. Congratulations #varsha. Anjali Sivaraman delivers an amazing performance—don’t miss this one! Check out the teaser: http://youtu.be/y87Jp5IPF-s”

Happened to watch #BadGirl, and it’s truly a bold and refreshing film! Director #VetriMaaran deserves immense credit for backing such a daring story. The film powerfully portrays women’s struggles and society’s expectations through a unique new wave cinema style. Congratulations… pic.twitter.com/EanrwiDE2I

— pa.ranjith (@beemji) January 26, 2025

However, it is the depiction of Brahmin families in the film that has drawn backlash from Mohan G Kshatriyan, known for his films like Bakasuran, Rudra Thandavam, and Draupathi. Slamming Pa Ranjith and the filmmakers for making such stale content, taking to his official X handle, film maker Mohan G Kshatriyan wrote a post on his X handle where he slammed the filmmakers, stating, “Portraying a brahmin girl personal life is always a bold and refreshing film for this clan. What more can be expected from vetrimaran, Anurag kasyap & Co.. Bashing Brahmin father and mother is old and not trendy.. Try with your own caste girls and showcase it to your own family first.“

Portraying a brahmin girl personal life is always a bold and refreshing film for this clan. What more can be expected from vetrimaran, Anurag kasyap & Co.. Bashing Brahmin father and mother is old and not trendy.. Try with your own caste girls and showcase it to your own family… https://t.co/XP8mtnaFws

— Mohan G Kshatriyan (@mohandreamer) January 27, 2025

Kshatriyan’s comments have fueled the ongoing discussion about caste portrayals in Tamil cinema, with many questioning whether such narratives are overly critical of one community.

The teaser introduces a Tamil Brahmin girl who is a rebel, defies societal expectations of being the “good girl” as she seeks to break free from the constraints of the usual trope of “Brahminical patriarchy”, and since this film is from the Dravidianist ideologue’s soil, it needs to show her embracing the identity of a modern, liberated woman.

The stale narrative in the teaser takes a snarky jab at those who continue to resist “progressive” ideals, contrasting them with the image of modern youth celebrating freedom and rationality, drinking away to glory, dancing in clubs with a triumphant “Cheers!” The deep-seated hypocrisy within the Dravidian male psyche has also been seen harboring a peculiar fetish for Brahmin women. This obsession only stems from an inability to appreciate their own caste people and family members/friends/partners, redirecting their lust toward the very group they claim to oppose.

Time and again the Tamil society has enabled this poison to take root and flourish, allowing the pervasive dehumanization and objectification of Brahmin women.

(With inputs from India Today)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Film Director Mohan G Slams Pa Ranjith And ‘Bad Girl’ Filmmakers For Negative Stereotyping Of Brahmin Family appeared first on The Commune.

Director and actor Gautham Vasudev Menon, whose latest film Dominic and the Ladies’ Purse is currently in theatres, recently shared his thoughts on the rising trend of caste-based “oppressed, depressed, suppressed” films that sow division among people.

In a recent interview to ‘Neeya Naana’ fame Gobinath, the filmmaker questioned the necessity of such films in today’s context, asserting that these stories lack relevance in the present day, which is why filmmakers often choose to set them in a bygone era.

“I don’t want to name the films and make it sound like I’m just sitting and saying something. But the division among the people, in terms of caste and such things, creating stories and movies around such themes, despite knowing they no longer reflect the current reality, and setting them in the 80s and 90s, is not something I resonate with. It’s getting to be a bit too much. These are not the stories that we’re looking for. I don’t think those stories need to be told anymore. It’s not necessary I feel. Since you can’t set such stories in the present context, you resort to setting it in a bygone era – saying this happened in 80s, this happened in 90s. You can’t tell a similar story in today’s context with the same effect. Nobody wants that.”, Gautham said.

Nobody wants caste related films ahm pic.twitter.com/zycRYOAJn3

— Villainism (@Karuppu_7) January 24, 2025

Gautham’s comments are seen as a jibe against the the likes of Dravidianist filmmakers like Pa. Ranjith and Vetrimaaran who often resort to making caste-based “oppressed, depressed, suppressed” films that pits one caste against another.

Incidentally, Gautham had starred in Vetrimaaran’s film Viduthalai Part 2 which is peddles the same propaganda.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “It’s Getting To Be A Bit Too Much, Nobody Wants That”: Gautham Vasudev Menon On The Surge Of Caste-Based Movies In Tamil Cinema appeared first on The Commune.