For a long time, Kollywood behaved as if the Tamil audience was a lab rat: keep feeding it “message cinema”, sprinkle some Dravidianist ideology, sloganeering, add a few star cameos, and the box office would somehow cooperate.

For years, the audience also lapped up the garbage that was doled out in the name of ‘pure art’ and ‘absolute cinema’ and what not.

In 2024–26, the audience finally flipped the table. The clearest proof is how the same audience reacted to nationalistic films like Amaran and Dhurandhar, and how they have trashed Dravidianist ideology propagating films like Parasakthi.

Let us take a look at Amaran. The film was a biopic based on the life of martyred army hero Mukund Varadarajan. The Tamil audience that has been starved for such nationalistic films, films on real heroes lapped it up like crazy.

Fans of Sivakarthikeyan thoroughly enjoyed him in this avatar where he played Major Mukund Varadarajan. Here are some reactions.

While the film did have its shortcomings, it seemed to be a start in the right direction.

A year later, Dhurandhar was released – December 2025. Since it was a Hindi film, like with the rest of the country, there was no promotional activity, and purely through word-of-mouth, Tamil audiences cheered Dhurandhar too.

Come January 2026 and the Dravidianist ‘Parasakthi’ was released.

It faced a sharp and decisive rejection from audiences, turning from a heavily promoted Pongal release into a rapid box-office failure within days. After a fan-driven opening weekend, the film collapsed on its first Monday, with collections crashing nearly 70–80% from ₹10.1 crore on Sunday to around ₹3 crore, with some trade estimates placing it even lower. Its three-day India net stood at just ₹25–26 crore, far below expectations for a big-budget release.

Theatres across Tamil Nadu reported poor occupancy of around 18%, with empty screens and cancelled shows indicating a complete lack of audience “hold.” Negative word-of-mouth, citing a “preachy,” slow narrative and weak engagement further accelerated the decline. The film failed to attract family audiences and neutral viewers, relying only on an initial fan rush. What was projected as a prestige film has instead become a case study in how hype fails without audience acceptance.

And now in March 2026, we saw Dhurandhar 2. Tamil audiences are enjoying it even more – to the point of recommending people to watch it in Hindi for maximum impact!

Viewer reviews as they leave the cinema halls in Tamil Nadu have all been praiseworthy of the film, as it should be.

It is noteworthy that audiences were in fact cheering for most of the scenes, that one can never come across in non ‘mass’ films – especially when PM Modi appears on the screen.

That’s the real story here. Tamil audiences are not suddenly “right wing” because they liked Amaran and Dhurandhar, nor are they “ignorant masses” because they rejected Parasakthi. They are simply done subsidising lazy, agenda-driven filmmaking. They have lived through a decade of Kollywood using the theatre as a classroom – anti-this, pro-that, lecture after lecture, with craft as an afterthought. Now they have seen what it feels like when someone spends the same money and time on story, staging and performance instead.

So yes, the Tamil audience is celebrating Amaran and Dhurandhar – not out of blind nationalism, but because those films deliver what Kollywood has been refusing to deliver: story, craft, emotional clarity, respect for the viewer. And it is trashing films like Parasakthi because people are done paying to be lectured and bored in the same sitting.

If Kollywood still pretends this is “confused audience taste” or fan wars, that’s its problem. The viewers have already moved on.

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

The post The Silent Shift: Tamil Audience Celebrate Nationalist Films Like Amaran And Dhurandhar While Trashing DMK Propaganda Movies Like Parasakthi appeared first on The Commune.

On 10 January 2026, pro-DMK propaganda film Parasakthi, directed by DMK stooge Sudha Kongara was released. If one assumed that the film is a story based on true events, you are wrong. The film is a work of fiction for most part and scanty with the truth.

Kongara seems to have internalised the fiction part of it and is seen spreading the same distortions at interviews, public speeches and what not.

In line with this, she was interviewed by DMK mouthpiece Sun News and in this 40-minute interview too, she spews distorted history, speaks the same separatist language as the DMK and makes anti-central government comments.

Instead of limiting herself to artistic license, Sudha repeatedly makes categorical historical claims that collapse under the most basic scrutiny. Worse, she frames the story as a civilizational clash between “Tamil people” and the “Centre”, carefully stoking anti‑Delhi sentiment under the guise of defending Tamil.

Let us take a close look at what distortions she presents as facts in the interview.

#1 Says Congress Buried History, But She Buried The Martyrs, Projected Karunanidhi As Hero

She claims the history of how the then-CM functioned to suppress the agitation was removed from public eye and that there is nothing in the National as well as British archives, but she herself forgot to mention the true language warriors who gave their life for this struggle. Instead, she glorified Karunanidhi, who was a nobody at that time – he was nowhere close to Annadurai’s circle – it was MGR, Nedunchezhian and others who were in the picture and not otherwise.

But she chose to project Karunanidhi as a hero.

#2 The “Hindi Money Order” Fairy Tale

Sudha’s big claim is that the anti‑Hindi spark began when money orders to students were “suddenly changed into Hindi”, allegedly delaying hostel and exam fees for a month. She says, “The spark started from the Hindi money order issue. Those days, if you had to go to colleges, since there were no colleges in the villages. So, you had to go to the city. When in the city, you had to stay in a hostel. When in the hostel, money comes only by money order. At that time, for the grandfather, grandmother, mother, or father in the villages, mostly they didn’t know how to read or write. Definitely they didn’t know any other language. So, the money orders they sent every month were late. The spark started there. Students were not getting money for mess fees, exam fees. It was late for a whole month because suddenly the money orders were changed into Hindi. Even recently, bank forms changed to Hindi.”​

Standard works on the 1965 agitation including those she cites, like A Ramasamy’s Tamilan Thodutha Por and Baladandaiyudham’s Hindi Egathipathiyam – do discuss resentment over Hindi creeping into central forms and signage. But there is no documented evidence that money‑order forms were printed only in Hindi, or remittances to Tamil students were delayed or blocked for a whole month because “everything was changed into Hindi”. ​

What was, at most, a genuine fear about Hindi creeping into paperwork, is retold by Sudha as an accomplished policy that strangled money flow. She converts anxiety into “fact” – a classic propaganda move.

Interestingly, she says she met Justice Chandru – a Dravidianist, a card-carrying Communist and some of the names she mentions are all DMK Dravidianists to the core – so it raises the question whether a hard-core Dravidianist will be able to give a neutral retelling of events.

She says, “Professor Nannan, he has fought so much for the students. He stood right there in that protest. He was put in jail. If the government hadn’t changed in ’67. He would have been in jail for his whole life. For what? Simply for saying he wants to speak Tamil, for saying don’t impose Hindi. So this is a freedom struggle.”

Do note the over-the-top claims she makes here – Where is the proof that people were jailed just for saying they wanted to speak Tamil? Equating this to a freedom struggle is alluding to secessionism.

Inventing “First Time In World History” Atrocities

Next, Sudha segues to a point where she dramatically claims that during the 1965 anti‑Hindi agitations, it was the “first time in history of the world, a student was shot.” She says she interwove fact and fiction such that no one could tell it apart – “It is interwoven to the point where you don’t know what is fiction and what is real.”

This is demonstrably false. Even a school‑level understanding of world history shows this. Colonial police fired on student protestors in pre‑Independence India and elsewhere decades before 1965. Here are examples:

British colonial police opened fire on student-led or student-involved protests multiple times pre-Independence:

• 1942 Vidyasagar College protests (Calcutta): On September 10, students led by Sasadhar Ganguly attacked a police van; police fired, killing students in clashes amid Quit India Movement protests.
• 1922 Chauri Chaura (though not purely students): Police fired on Non-Cooperation Movement protesters (including youth), killing three civilians before the crowd retaliated.​
• 1925 Neemuchana peasant protests: State police fired on protesters against land revenue hikes, which included student agitators in princely states.

Similar incidents are documented in British‑ruled India, Egypt, Russia and other countries long before the Dravidian movement existed. Here is the list.

Egypt under British Occupation: In 1935, during anti-British student protests in Cairo marking “National Independence Day”, thousands of students marched, clashed with police; police fired warning shots and live rounds, killing two students (one in Cairo, one in Tanta) and injuring dozens, including police.​

Tsarist Russia: Russian imperial police suppressed student protests violently before 1917:

• 1901-1902 Kiev student strikes: Students from KPI (Kyiv Polytechnic) and universities struck against tsarist educational restrictions; police clashed with marchers, arresting over 100 and injuring participants on 2-3 February 1902. ​
• 1905 Bloody Sunday: While worker-led, it involved student radicals; police under Grand Duke Vladimir fired on demonstrators, killing over 100.

​By upgrading a tragic but local episode into a never‑before‑seen global atrocity, Sudha converts history into melodrama. The goal is obvious: inflate the victimhood narrative around the 1965 agitation to mythic proportions, unmoored from evidence.

Blurring Fears And Facts On IAS Exams And Railways

Another pair of claims from the interview – “The IAS exams might have been changed to Hindi.” “The advertisement for Railway jobs didn’t come in Tamil papers but only in Hindi papers.”

Yet UPSC exams of the period remained in English with regional‑language options; there was no policy to conduct IAS only in Hindi. ​

Railway recruitment notices historically appeared in English‑language and several vernacular papers; a deliberate “Hindi‑only” policy for ads in Tamil Nadu is not supported by accessible records. ​

Here again, fears voiced by agitators 60 years ago are retold as if they were enacted decisions – a subtle but dangerous distortion, because it converts speculative “if this goes on, they will…” rhetoric into retroactive “this is what they did”.

Attempt To Brainwash Young Minds With Separatist Ideas?

She says she wanted to keep it in a palatable, entertaining form so she couldn’t keep it raw. She said, “Saying it very raw is also a thing, then you will get an ‘A’ rating. I desire for children – 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, young minds to see this. That is when their minds are forming.”

So has Sudha accepted that her goal was to brainwash teenagers with false/distorted history?

“North Indian Dialects Are Dead” – Another Casual Falsehood

Sudha goes on to claim that various Hindi‑belt dialects are now “dead, they are gone.” She says, “Now there are so many dialects of Hindi in the North. So many. None of that is there now. They are dead, they are gone. It would have been like that here too. It is a fact that many, many languages are dead. There is no doubt about it. Like that, why do we want the oldest language in the world to die? If you destroy our language, how will we think? What is our future?”

Basic linguistic data contradicts her:

Bhojpuri, Awadhi, Maithili, Braj and others each have millions of active speakers, thriving folk music, films and print cultures.  Claiming these languages are “dead” is not a slip of the tongue – it is part of a script: exaggerate “Hindi imperialism” so aggressively that facts become expendable.

“TN Would Have Had No Language Had 1965 Agitation Not Occurred”

Sudha asserts: “If that language struggle hadn’t happened… Tamil Nadu would have been without a language.”

She adds, “We might be speaking in Hindi. Or we might be without jobs. Or we may have been in a small position. Because only if you know a language and are an expert in it can you advance. In such a situation, how many years would it take for us to become experts in it? That’s what is said in our film: it took me 200 years to learn English because I was a slave.”

This flies in the face of the Constitution she claims to defend:

• Tamil is in the Eighth Schedule; Part XVII dealt with the Union’s official language, not the abolition of Tamil in Tamil Nadu. ​
• Article 345 explicitly allows states to choose their own official language(s); nothing in the 1965 framework could have legally erased Tamil from use in the state. ​

In other words, Sudha’s line is not just wrong, it is constitutionally impossible. But by insisting “we would have been without a language,” she reinforces the separatist trope that New Delhi was one step away from linguistically liquidating Tamil society – a paranoid narrative with zero legal basis.

Turning A Multi‑Party Agitation Into A DMK Monopoly

The interviewer confidently declares that, “Everyone who led the student protest comes from a DMK background—most of them.”

Serious documentation of the 1965 agitation shows:

• DMK‑linked student fronts were crucial, but
• Congress, CPI, SSP, independent student unions and local caste/community outfits also played significant roles across districts.

She says the film shows a student’s viewpoint of Karunanidhi or Annadurai but the fact remains that Karunanidhi was nowhere near Annadurai in those days. (refer image above)

Sudha has not even mentioned the real language warriors or their families. All those who died have been forgotten, all those who were harmed are forgotten to this day – the entire film is nothing but a propaganda piece for the ruling party in Tamil Nadu.

​Such statements retrofit history to today’s DMK‑centric political narrative. The student movement becomes a one‑party property, conveniently amplifying the ruling party’s moral capital while erasing others.

Pollachi “Mass Burials” Without A Shred Of Proof

On Pollachi, Sudha goes even further, claiming that: “Many more died there than what they showed… They took them to the Army camp itself and buried them.” ​

Yet academic histories and contemporary press archives record police firing and deaths in Pollachi, but in single digits, with named victims. None of the standard sources – including Dravidian‑sympathetic writers – document any secret mass graves in an Army camp or wholesale disappearing of bodies.

When asked about how she got the data for Pollachi deaths, she quotes anonymous elders, saying “I went to Pollachi and spoke to people of that age, in their 80s, 70s, what they said was, “We heard it like crackers bursting somewhere far away.” We didn’t know so many were dying or it was happening like this. As it happened, they cleaned it up immediately and left.”

What Sudha presents as a matter‑of‑fact truth is, at best, unverified oral lore dressed up as history. In effect, she accuses the Indian state and Army of a cover‑up without producing any documentary proof – exactly the kind of narrative that fuels long‑term suspicion of national institutions.

Using Tamil Brahmi As Code

In the film, she shows the use of Tamil Brahmi or Tamili as a code language. She says, “Bharathidasan (who wrote these lines) was the greatest revolutionary poet of that time. He was someone who fought for the language. He has written so many. This seemed very apt to me. So we used it.”

Historians have called this claim historically untenable. Tamil Brāhmī was barely known in 1964. While KV Subramanya Iyer conducted pioneering work in the 1930s, it was not pursued systematically. Serious academic focus began only in 1961, when K A Nilakanta Sastri encouraged Iravatham Mahadevan to take up the subject.

Mahadevan published his first major findings only in 1965–66, based on the Pugalur and Mangulam inscriptions. Even then, Tamil Brāhmī did not enter wider academic or public consciousness until the 1990s, when Mahadevan resumed extensive research.

The idea that Tamil Brāhmī was being widely understood,or covertly used as a “code” within government circles in 1964, has no historical basis. This scene exemplifies propaganda-driven storytelling, where symbolism is prioritised over facts.

When propaganda takes centre stage, facts tend to go missing. Tamil Brāhmī was barely known in 1964. Although K. V. Subramanya Iyer had carried out some pioneering work in the 1930s, it was not pursued systematically thereafter. It was only in 1961 that K. A. Nilakanta Sastri… https://t.co/uADqanxGna

— 𑀓𑀺𑀭𑀼𑀱𑁆𑀡𑀷𑁆  (@tskrishnan) January 5, 2026

Indira Gandhi Reduced To A Caricature

The film also has Indira Gandhi’s character in 3 scenes. Sudha claims, “For those three scenes… the one who came as Indira Gandhi also—she spoke exactly like Indira Gandhi. You see, Mrs. Gandhi will talk like this. She will keep her hand like this. She did all that. Her walking, walking fast on that stage. She never had time for anybody. Impatient. She would go like that.”

But in reality, the Indira Gandhi character looked like a joke.

A 1991 film called Maanagara Kaaval had a more dignified looking Indira Gandhi.

Anti‑Centre Framing Straight Out Of A Separatist Playbook

Underneath these factual problems lies an unmistakable ideological through‑line. She openly compares her project to The Kashmir Files, positioning Parasakthi as a necessary retelling of “genocide‑like” oppression by the Union.

When asked if she was stirring up something among the public, she says she told the censor, “We must learn from history. If some things happened, if a genocide happened, it should not happen again. That is why I am talking about it.”

Taking the example of Dhurandhar, she says, “Now, you are doing a Dhurandhar, you are taking a film about are you going to war with Pakistan or drop a nuclear bomb on them? We are taking films about freedom, 1947. Then do we take the film so that we should go and fight with them? You have taken The Kashmir Files. Why have you taken The Kashmir Files? A genocide happened. It happened 100%. You are telling that. Now, are you taking it so that two religious factions should fight? No. This happened in history. This must be known to people so that it doesn’t happen again.”

She is wrong about the fact that while Kashmir Files is based on true events and shows the truth, Parasakthi, in her own words, mixes fiction and non-fiction too much.

Parasakthi – A Distorted Diarrhea That Turned Out To Be A Disaster

Parasakthi was marketed as a “textbook” on the language struggle. When the writer‑director herself promotes dramatic myths – “first time in world history,” “Tamil Nadu without a language,” “mass burials in Army camps,” “all leaders DMK,” “Hindi killed all northern dialects” – these narratives will migrate from cinema halls into classrooms, social media and political speeches.
​
​That is precisely how historical memory is captured: not by one slogan, but by thousands of repeated semi‑truths and outright falsities, all pushing citizens to see their own country as an enemy.

Sudha Kongara is entitled to make a political film. What she is not entitled to do is smuggle demonstrably false claims and unproven conspiracy theories into public discourse under the respectable label of “research” and “hidden history”.

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

The post Distorted Diarrhea Disguised As Cinema: After Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film Parasakthi’s Disaster, Sudha Kongara Doubles Down On Historical Falsehoods In Sun News Interview appeared first on The Commune.

“Director Is A Fool”: Congress Leader Trichy Velusamy Slams Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film Parasakthi, Says Kanimozhi Studied Hindi, Recalls How Karunanidhi Govt Shot Down Protesting Farmers

The film Parasakthi, by DMK stooge Sudha Kongara, which glorifies the arson during anti-Hindi agitation has been rubbished and trashed by Tamil audience at the box office.

The film has also widened the rift between alliance partners DMK and the Congress. The Congress party units in the state have vehemently opposed the characterisation of Indira Gandhi, use of specific vocabulary for Congress leaders and also for distorting history.

In this regard, Congress leader Trichy Velusamy denounced the film and the distortions in the movie. Speaking to a YouTube channel, he also called out the hypocrisy of the DMK leaders with regard to Hindi.

In the interview targeting Karunanidhi, he says, “The person who went around in the villages, provoking people saying, “Beat them up, kick them, do not study Hindi”, when his own nephew Maran was a minister in Delhi, a journalist asked him, “At such a young age he has a good name there, how?” At that time he replied, “He not only knows English, he knows Hindi very well too, that is why he is able to manage there in Delhi.” 

He also pointed out that Karunanidhi’s daughter Kanimozhi who is now a DMK MP knows Hindi very well.

He said, “Let me ask you one more thing directly. His daughter is Kanimozhi. Do you know that she has studied Hindi formally and she knows to read and write the language? Did her father teach her that, or did she learn it on her own? His daughter and his grandson, all of them are studying Hindi, that he has proudly said. But he told the people in the state that they should not study it at all. Which of these is right and which is wrong, this is left to the viewers to decide.”

It is to be noted that the anti-Hindi “Hindi Theriyathu Poda” T-Shirt campaign was initiated and publicized by DMK MP Kanimozhi back in 2020. In another incident, she claimed that she was asked whether she was an Indian by a Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) officer at the airport as the legislator supposedly did not know Hindi.

Today at the airport a CISF officer asked me if “I am an Indian” when I asked her to speak to me in tamil or English as I did not know Hindi. I would like to know from when being indian is equal to knowing Hindi.#hindiimposition

— Kanimozhi (கனிமொழி) (@KanimozhiDMK) August 9, 2020

But the fact of the matter is that when the Nira Radia tapes were made public, Radia can be heard speaking to Kanimozhi in Hindi.

Narrating a gory incident, he said, “I will now tell you one more thing; if you hear it, many people’s hearts will burn. When that agitation was at its peak, there is a place called Oothukuli, you know it, the place famous for butter, near Tiruppur. In that town, one day in broad daylight, around 12 or 1 in the afternoon, during that agitation, a police inspector’s hands were tied, and in broad daylight, public poured petrol on him and he was set on fire. He burned alive and died, screaming in agony. Everyone stood around and shouted slogans “Long live Tamil, down with Hindi”. The name of the inspector who was burnt like that was Ramasamy. His only daughter’s name is Tamizhselvi. ​He named her Tamizhselvi, but he was a ‘Hindi fanatic’.

Continuing, he said, “Afterwards, DMK came to power, they gave monetary compensation to the “language martyrs” like they give to freedom struggle martyrs, right? The people who burnt the ‘Hindi fanatic’ who named his daughter Tamizhselvi, weren’t they also given monetary compensation as ‘language martyrs’?  What a huge contradiction this is. If he had given her some other name, he could have given some other name, say Stalin; that is also a good Tamil name, no? Is Tamizhselvi not a good Tamil name?”

When the interviewer asks about the character played by Ravi Mohan – an IB officer asking for reinforcements from other states since he could not suppress the agitators with people named Tamil Pandian, Tamizhvaendan, Tamizharasan, Velusamy replies, “How can an IB officer ask a Chief Minister all this? The foolish and stupid director and producer must know this. Can an IB officer ask all this to a Chief Minister? Law and order is a State subject. No matter how bad the law and order situation becomes, only if the State government requests can Border Security Force or the military come in. If it is said that the IB officer asked for them, then he/she knows no politics, no law and knows nothing about the land.”

About whether the film had targeted the Congress party, Velusamy said, “You are still thinking that they are protecting Tamils in that film. After he came to power, after Karunanidhi became Chief Minister, within just two or three years, do you know that there was a farmers’ agitation? All over Tamil Nadu there was a big agitation. In how many places did police firing take place? You may not know because of your age. On a single specific day, in only two villages there was police firing and 25 people died. Those two villages are Pethanayakkanpalayam and Perumalnallur. Perumalnallur is a small village near Tiruppur, which might have grown a bit now. The other village, Pethanayakkanpalayam, is a small village near Attur in Salem district. At that time in the Assembly, from Pethanayakkanpalayam 13 or 14 people had died. In the Assembly, a Congress MLA said that in that village, farmers who were protesting had been wrongly shot dead. What the Chief Minister replied is still there in the Assembly records. He said, “The Congress party member is giving wrong information. The dead are not farmers; they are anti‑social elements. They came to attack the police station. To protect the station and themselves, the police fired back, and they died in that firing.” The funny part is, until that very minute there was not even a police station in that village. People who indulge in such fraud and thuggery, what qualification do they have to make this kind of film? Reality is something else.”

பராசக்தி எடுத்தவனுக்கு ஒரு மிதி… கருணாநிதியின் வரலாறு என்ன இப்படி நாறுது.. எத்தனை அப்பாவி உயிர கொன்னுருக்கானுங்க – @TrichyVelusamy உண்மையான காமராஜர் தொண்டன் pic.twitter.com/IUzd7ZmO0p

— priya (@PriyankaSmile01) January 13, 2026

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

The post “Director Is A Fool”: Congress Leader Trichy Velusamy Slams Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film Parasakthi, Says Kanimozhi Studied Hindi appeared first on The Commune.

The box office story of Parasakthi has unravelled with stunning speed. What was aggressively projected as a prestige Pongal release has now turned into one of the fastest collapses ever witnessed for a big-ticket Tamil film during the festive week.

After a fan-driven opening weekend on 10 January 2026, the film suffered a brutal reality check on its very first Monday, exposing the complete absence of audience “hold” and confirming that neutral viewers had decisively rejected the film.

From Double Digits To Disaster In 72 Hours

On Monday, 12 January 2026, Parasakthi managed to earn only ₹3 crore, a catastrophic 70–80% crash from Sunday’s ₹10.1 crore collections. The film’s highest single-day earnings remain its opening day figure of ₹12.5 crore on Saturday; a peak it never came close to again.

According to Sacnilk, the film’s total India net after three days stands at approximately ₹25–26 crore, with multiple trade estimates placing Monday’s actual net below ₹2 crore.

In box-office terms, this is not just a drop – it is a collapse.

Major Pongal releases typically face a 50-60% weekday decline. Parasakthi plunged by nearly 80%, failing the most basic industry benchmark: the first weekday test.

Empty Theatres, No Family Audience

Monday occupancy in Tamil Nadu reportedly stood at a dismal 18.05%, confirming what exhibitors feared, the film exhausted its entire audience within the opening weekend itself. Once the fan-driven rush evaporated, theatres were left empty.

This sharp fall makes it clear that Parasakthi failed to attract family audiences, repeat viewers, and neutral moviegoers.

In short, anyone beyond a narrow ideological and fan base.

“Prestige Project” Turns Liability

Starring Sivakarthikeyan and directed by Sudha Kongara, the film was touted as a politically charged period epic on the 1960s anti-Hindi agitation. Instead, audiences responded with indifference or outright rejection, citing dull and preachy screenplay, sluggish pacing, heavy-handed political messaging.

Trade circles are already calling it one of Sivakarthikeyan’s weakest Pongal performances in recent years, despite the festival advantage.

Budget Reality Begins To Bite

With a rumoured budget of ₹142-150 crore, Parasakthi now faces an uphill, arguably impossible road to breakeven. Weekday trends suggest further erosion rather than recovery, with advance bookings on Monday reportedly hovering around ₹2 crore in Tamil Nadu.

Even optimistic projections capped Monday at ₹5 crore, a figure the film failed to reach. Best estimates now suggest that the film’s daily collections may struggle to even stabilise.

Fastest Pongal Week Collapse?

Despite a strong overseas opening and a ₹28 crore worldwide day-one figure, the domestic collapse has overshadowed everything else. While the film may cross ₹50 crore worldwide, the idea of touching ₹100 crore now looks increasingly unrealistic.

Tamil Nadu, the film’s core market, has already delivered its verdict.

In just three days, Parasakthi has gone from a hyped Pongal release to a case study in how fan openings, propaganda cinema, and media hype cannot substitute for audience acceptance.

If anything, Parasakthi may now be remembered not for its politics or messaging but for setting an unenviable record:
the fastest collapse of a major Tamil film during Pongal week.

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

The post Parasakthi Disaster: Sudha Kongara’s Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film Collapsed In Just Three Days At The Box Office appeared first on The Commune.

Director Sudha Kongara, whose latest film Parasakthi has failed to impress audiences or sustain box-office momentum, has now chosen a familiar escape route – blaming “anonymous social media handles” and, more pointedly, fans of actor Vijay for the film’s poor reception.

Instead of introspection on why a heavily marketed, politically loaded period drama failed to resonate beyond a narrow ideological base, Kongara has alleged a “targeted attack” and “slander” campaign, positioning herself as a victim rather than addressing the film’s creative and ideological bankruptcy.

From Flop Film To Manufactured Victimhood

In an interview to The Hollywood Reporter India, Kongara lamented that “just allowing your film to speak doesn’t seem to be enough” anymore and expressed hope that the film would somehow “take off during the Pongal weekend” despite clear audience rejection from day one.

She went on to claim that her film was being deliberately misrepresented online, saying there was “slandering, defamation of the worst kind, hiding behind unknown IDs.” While refusing to explicitly name those responsible, Kongara made it abundantly clear where she wanted the blame to land – Vijay’s fanbase.

To bolster this narrative, she cited a post from an X handle that mocked the film’s CBFC troubles and sarcastically suggested apologising to Vijay’s fans to save the film. This single troll post was elevated by Kongara into supposed evidence of an organised conspiracy, conveniently ignoring the far more uncomfortable reality: Parasakthi failed because audiences rejected its preachy politics and distorted historical narrative.

A DMK-EVR Propaganda Exercise Disguised As Cinema

Marketed as a “revisionist alternative history” of the 1965 Anti-Hindi agitation, Parasakthi is less a historical drama and more an ideological pamphlet rooted in EV Ramasamy’s toxic Dravidian rhetoric. The film portrays the agitation through a crude binary of virtuous Tamil revolutionaries and cartoonishly evil state representatives, flattening a complex historical moment into DMK propaganda cinema.

Kongara herself admitted that the film deliberately rewrites history, claiming that “genocide” occurred because the state failed to communicate Tamil opposition to Hindi – a claim not supported by historical scholarship but regularly pushed by Dravidianist polemicists.

The result is a film that speaks not to history, but to DMK’s long-standing victim card politics, alienating neutral audiences who expect nuance rather than ideological sermons.

CBFC Excuses And Manufactured Outrage

Adding to the post-release melodrama, Kongara also attempted to shift blame onto the Central Board of Film Certification, portraying routine certification cuts as censorship excesses. In a pre-release interview, she claimed the CBFC was democratic. However, when asked about it, she said, “When I did that interview I had not gotten my cut list. I had just been told that I would be certified but only audio cuts would be asked. Two days away from release, I got the cut list at 11 AM, and tomorrow is all I have before I cut and give the film, because the day after is the release. Where is the time to fight this cut list? “

She claimed exhaustion from last-minute modifications and complained about reductions in violent scenes and muted dialogues referencing political figures.

Yet even she conceded that none of the cuts affected the film’s core narrative. The CBFC merely demanded disclaimers for “constructed” scenes and moderation of explicit violence, standard practice.

The sudden outrage appears more about constructing yet another external villain to deflect from the film’s failure.

Box Office Reality Vs Ideological Echo Chambers

Despite negative reviews and weak audience turnout, the film’s producers have made the predictable claim that Parasakthi is “profitable for all exhibitors.” This assertion stands in stark contrast to ground-level reports of empty theatres and poor word-of-mouth, even within Tamil Nadu’s DMK-dominated media bubble.

Starring Sivakarthikeyan, Ravi Mohan, Atharvaa and Sreeleela, the film had every commercial advantage. What it lacked was honesty, both in storytelling and in post-release accountability.

Blaming Vijay Fans Won’t Save Bad Cinema

By framing audience rejection as a politically motivated smear campaign, Sudha Kongara has revealed precisely why Parasakthi failed. It was never meant to engage audiences – it was meant to lecture them. When audiences walked away, she chose to blame “Vijay fans” instead of confronting the reality that ideological cinema without craft, balance, or respect for viewers will not survive outside party loyalist circles.

In the end, Parasakthi stands exposed not as a brave historical drama, but as yet another EVR-inspired DMK propaganda film which places the DMK patriarch Karunanidhi in the limelight anf forgetting the actual martyrs and warriors. Parasakthi is a film that collapsed under the weight of its own arrogance and then went searching for scapegoats.

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

The post DMK Stooge Sudha Kongara Blames Vijay Fans For The Utter Flop Of Her Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film appeared first on The Commune.

The Tamil Nadu Youth Congress has called for a ban on the recently released Tamil film Parasakthi, alleging that it contains fabricated scenes, historical distortions and defamatory portrayals of Congress leaders, including former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister K Kamaraj.

The demand was made through a formal statement issued by Arun Bhaskar, State Senior Vice President of the Tamil Nadu Youth Congress, which was shared on social media by Congress spokesperson M Kumaramangalam on Monday, 12 January 2026, evening.

In the statement, Arun Bhaskar said, “Parasakthi is a film that must be strictly banned,” accusing the filmmakers of deliberately inventing incidents and presenting them as historical fact in order to malign the Indian National Congress.

The statement says that the film falsely portrays key events linked to the 1965 anti-Hindi agitation in Tamil Nadu. Bhaskar objected to scenes that suggest that the Congress government imposed Hindi-only forms across India, calling it “a complete fabrication deliberately created to malign our party.”

He also criticised a sequence in which Sivakarthikeyan’s character is shown meeting Indira Gandhi, claiming the film portrays her in a “villainous manner” in scenes that never occurred.

Bhaskar said the movie falsely shows Indira Gandhi visiting Coimbatore on 12 February 1965 and fabricates scenes of a train being set on fire in her presence. “None of these events ever happened in history,” he said.

Another major objection was raised against the film’s ending, which displays real photographs of K Kamaraj, Indira Gandhi and Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri while allegedly accusing the Congress of killing more than 200 Tamil people in Pollachi. Bhaskar said the claim was made “without a shred of evidence” and amounted to serious defamation.

Calling the film a “deliberate distortion of historical truth,” Arun Bhaskar demanded that all scenes depicting events that never took place be removed immediately. He also called on the film’s production team to issue a public apology, warning that strict legal action would follow if the demands were not met.

He concluded the statement by urging party workers to protest, saying, “I call upon all Congress workers to raise their voices against this injustice,” and added the hashtag #BanParasakthiMovie.

About the Film

Directed by Sudha Kongara, Parasakthi stars Sivakarthikeyan, Ravi Mohan, Atharvaa, and Sreeleela, and is set against the backdrop of the 1965 anti-Hindi protests in Tamil Nadu. The film was released on 10 January 2026 after receiving 25 cuts from the Central Board of Film Certification, with several scenes labelled as fictional.

For those who have watched the movie and told me there are historical inaccuracies that show congress in a poor light. Here you go.
@thearunbhaskar pic.twitter.com/LEfySpMWyk

— Mohan மோகன் (@MKumaramangalam) January 12, 2026

Source: NDTV 

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

The post Tamil Nadu Youth Congress Calls For Banning Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film ‘Parasakthi’ For Distorting History & Defaming Indira Gandhi appeared first on The Commune.

In what can only be described as a spectacular disaster at the box office, Sudha Kongara’s much-hyped DMK propaganda “Parasakthi” has turned out to be a colossal failure – a bloated, agenda-soaked period drama that has crashed and burned within its first three days of release.

From day one, the film was engineered not as cinema, but as naked pro-DMK propaganda. Timed conveniently ahead of the 2026 assembly polls, produced by Dawn Pictures (deeply tied to the DMK ecosystem), and distributed by Red Giant Movies, owned by DMK scion Udhayanidhi Stalin’s son Inban Udhayanidhi, the film was less a creative effort and more a poorly disguised party pamphlet.

Despite aggressive PR push on social media—filled with generic praise for Sivakarthikeyan’s “restrained acting,” Leela’s “convincing presence,” and the film’s “powerful BGM” – audiences have voted with their feet. Theatres across Tamil Nadu are reporting empty screens, cancelled shows, and a resounding silence where the makers had hoped for applause.

#Parasakthi Monday completely washed out across Tamil Nadu.
Already rejected in outer TN.

A huge disaster – 2026 #ParasakthiDisaster pic.twitter.com/Wxxc3ur1T9

— (@OruPereVaralaru) January 11, 2026

#Parasakthi Monday completely washed out across Tamil Nadu.
Already rejected in outer TN.

A huge disaster – 2026 #ParasakthiDisaster pic.twitter.com/Wxxc3ur1T9

— (@OruPereVaralaru) January 11, 2026

#Parasakthi in UAE – a complete washout in overseas.
Sad state for the OS distributor.

Overseas rights sold for ₹29 Cr.!!

pic.twitter.com/BI6xoj19xK

— Muthuraj (@muthurajvembu) January 12, 2026

#ParasakthiDisaster completely washed out in overseas #Sivakarthikeyan pic.twitter.com/zCsEMNFLJK

— Rasni (@iamRasni) January 12, 2026

#Parasakthi Day 3 Review total washout #ParasakthiReview #ParasakthiDisaster pic.twitter.com/C4cQDkXvbi

— Rocky (@ItzRockky) January 12, 2026

A Template-Driven Propaganda Piece

Billed as a retelling of the 1965 anti-Hindi agitations, “Parasakthi” sanitizes history to suit a Dravidianist narrative. The film shamelessly whitewashes the role of EV Ramasamy Naicker, who had actually opposed the 1965 protests, while turning Congress figures into cartoon villains. Complex history is flattened into a simplistic “Tamil pride vs. Hindi imposition” binary conveniently ignoring the BJP and focusing its ire on Delhi in general.

Social Media Buzz vs. Ground Reality

A glance at social media shows a clear divide. While verified accounts and “film critic” handles, many tied to Dravidianist outlets, have been posting generic praises about “powerful performances” and “technical finesse,” real audience reactions tell a different story.

The irony of ironies was that North Indian viewers were praising the film online despite it not even being released in Hindi belts: This only highlights the artificial nature of the online hype—a curated PR bubble that has failed to translate into actual theatre footfall.

North Indians Singh’s and Saxena’s to Chadda’s & Chaturvedis are loving #Parasakthi, this proves movie doesn’t have a language barrier..

Beauty is that Parasakthi did not even release in North India yet How cute pic.twitter.com/KHob2Ey1s6

— Mithun K Raman (@mithunraman) January 10, 2026

While Telugu and Kannada cinema are giving global blockbusters like “RRR,” “Pushpa,” and “Kantara”, rooted in local culture but universal in appeal, Tamil cinema’s Dravidianist lobby remains stuck in a tired, divisive, politics-first rut. “Parasakthi” was meant to be a rallying cry ahead of the elections. Instead, it has become a case study in how ideological overreach can kill creativity and repel audiences.

As theatre occupancy drops sharply by Day 3 and negative word-of-mouth spreads like wildfire, one thing is clear: “Parasakthi” isn’t just a bad film, it’s a failed political experiment. And no amount of paid reviews or PR hashtags can save it now.

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

The post Parasakthi Disaster: A Complete Washout For Anti-Hindi DMK Propaganda Film On Day 3 Itself Despite Paid Reviews And PR appeared first on The Commune.

With the release of the pro-DMK propaganda film Parasakthi, several clippings of the film from the audience in theatres started circulating on social media.

The film has drawn attention for scenes depicting alleged excesses under the Congress government, which has in turn led to an escalating online clash between supporters of the Congress and the DMK.

Many ridiculed the appearance of a few characters and questioned why they had been made so. For instance, former PM Indira Gandhi was looking ghastly in her appearance in the film.

Not taking this lightly, Congress members and supporters of the party started mocking the former CM Karunanidhi portrayed in the film.

One such case was when the All India Congress Student Union executive named “Salam Mass” reacted to online content about the film by posting, “Who is this clown, someone tell me?” The remark was widely circulated on social media and drew sharp reactions across the spectrum.

Following this, several DMK members and supporters of the party lashed out at the handle for the remarks.

யார் இந்த கோமாளி

இவனை தூக்கி சுமக்க வேண்டிய அவசியம் என்ன நமக்கு@mkstalin pic.twitter.com/zj7ZUzig40

— திமுக கட்சி அடிப்படை உறுப்பினர், (@CkmThiyagu) January 11, 2026

யார் இந்த கோமாளி என்று கலைஞர் வேஷத்தில் இருந்த நடிகரை பார்த்து ஒரு காங்கிரஸ் கபோதி சமூக வலைதளங்களில் பதிவு செய்திருக்கிறான்.

இந்த அல்லக்கைகளுக்கெல்லாம் கழக வரலாறு எங்கே தெரியப்போகிறது.

இதோ ஒரு வரலாறு..

/இந்திரா காங்கிரஸ் & திமுக தேர்தல் கூட்டணி 1971..

காங்கிரஸ் சார்பில்… pic.twitter.com/RLkZruDf2j

— ஜெயராமன் திமுக (@jayaraman418) January 11, 2026

யார் இந்த கோமாளி ?

தொடர் 95 தோல்விகளை கண்டு கொஞ்சம் கூட வெக்கமே இல்லாம தோல்வியிலிருந்து படிப்பினை கற்காமல் வாக்கு இயந்திரத்தின் மேலும் வாக்கு திருட்டு என புரட்டு பேசிக்கொண்டு பிரதான எதிர்கட்சி தலைவராக இருந்தும் 365 நாட்களில் 300 நாட்கள் தாய்லாந்து கொலம்பியா என இன்ப சுற்றுலாவில்… https://t.co/SuNnwYH1Wc pic.twitter.com/pwDjCdytuo

— Adam நோலன் (@nolan_moor) January 11, 2026

Subsequently, the post was deleted.

According to the Congress student leader, sustained pressure from DMK members and pro-DMK Dravidianist accounts led to the post being taken down. In a subsequent message on his X handle, he explained the deletion, writing: “The post I made this morning was a response to the continuous false accusations that online DMK members are making against the great leader Kamaraj, Indira Gandhi, and many others. Shortly after I posted it, due to the continuous pressure exerted by some key DMK functionaries from their office on our party’s office bearers to remove my post, I have deleted it to avoid causing any embarrassment to the party leadership. Otherwise, there is nothing for the online DMK members to crow about here. I am a proud Tamilian who walks hand-in-hand with leader Rahul Gandhi. No matter how much mud you throw at me, calling me a ‘Sanghi’, it will not stick to me.”

The episode has added to the growing political tension between the Congress and its DMK ally in Tamil Nadu, particularly as debates over historical narratives and cinematic portrayals spill over into social media and party politics.

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

The post DMK Reportedly Bullies Congress Student Leader Into Deleting Post Mocking Karunanidhi Look-Alike In Parasakthi Film appeared first on The Commune.

A renewed political debate has emerged over the role of EV Ramasamy (hailed as Periyar by his followers) during the 1965 anti-Hindi agitation, with historical writings and magazine records being cited to challenge the dominant narrative associated with the Dravidian movement.

Writings from the period indicate that EVR, despite being projected in later years as the father of the anti-Hindi movement, had in fact taken positions that sharply diverged from the student-led agitation of 1965. According to material published at the time in the magazine Thenmozhi, EVR had asked, “What will be spoiled if Hindi comes? When 13 states accept it, how can you alone oppose it?”

These views were strongly opposed by Tamil scholars and activists. Poet and scholar Pulavar VP Palanivelan wrote in response that “those who call Periyar the leader of the Tamil race are fools.”

Thenmozhi, edited under the leadership of Devaneya Pavanar and Perunchithiranar, published sustained rebuttals to Periyar’s statements during the agitation.

In Nedumaran’s Kurinji Pongal Special Issue (1965), Periyar was asked about the growing student protests. He replied, “The weakness and leniency of the government are the reasons for the increase of indiscipline and hooliganism among our students.”

While former Chief Minister K Kamaraj had reportedly suggested that the agitation was seen in the North as an attempt to weaken the Congress, Periyar went further, describing it as “a hooligans’ agitation” and saying the Congress government had failed by not suppressing it.

At the same time, C Rajagopalachari (Rajaji) wrote that “English alone is the path to unity” and warned that opposing Hindi would create divisive feelings. EVR, writing in Viduthalai, responded by sharply criticising the DMK, stating, “Because a crowd has got ready to fall at the feet of Brahmins for the sake of positions, such anti-Hindi activities are growing.”

Thenmozhi countered this by writing, “The Tamil Brahmin is far superior to the Hindi Brahmin,” a remark widely interpreted as accusing Periyar of aligning himself with North Indian elites rather than Tamil interests.

This exchange reportedly led to heightened tensions, after which Periyar proposed drastic measures, declaring, “Do not worry about elections. Declare both the Swatantra Party and the ‘teardrop’ (DMK) illegal and ban them. Ban all newspapers. Impose a gag law so that no one can speak about the anti-Hindi issue.”

As protests intensified and turned violent, marked by police firing, student deaths, and suicides, CN Annadurai called on students to step back, stating that the agitation should be left to elders and that student violence had no connection with his party.

EVR, however, later wrote in Viduthalai (1965), “Only after I ordered Kazhagam cadres to take burning ghee, matchboxes and knives to suppress the Hindi agitators did the agitation fearfully come to an end.”

In later years, Periyar also criticised Tamil nationalist rhetoric itself. In a 1967 article in Viduthalai, he wrote, “Those who cannot make a living in any other way in our country try to survive in the name of Tamil. Their desperation is what appears as cries like ‘Tamil must be protected’, ‘I will work for Tamil’, ‘I will die for Tamil’. Other people should not get trapped and deceived by this.”

Large sections of Dravidian politics have sought to downplay or erase these aspects of EVR’s record. These writings raise questions about how the history of the anti-Hindi movement has been presented, and whether there is room today for an open and structured debate on EVR’s role during one of the most turbulent chapters in Tamil Nadu’s political history.

(This article is based on a Facebook Post By Sundararaja Cholan)

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

The post ‘When 13 States Accept It, How Can You Alone Oppose?’ – Historical Sources Reveal EVR’s Stance Against 1965 Anti-Hindi Agitation In TN appeared first on The Commune.

Claims of strong box-office momentum for the 2026 pro-DMK propaganda film Parasakthi came under scrutiny on Friday after multiple theatre owners and social media users challenged “sold out” narratives circulated by DMK mouthpiece Sun News’ X handle.

A post by Sun News under its Cinema Bytes segment claimed that early morning shows in Chennai were sold out and projected high demand for the film across Tamil Nadu. The post was widely shared on social media and amplified by several cinema-related accounts.

#CinemaBytes | சில மணி நேரத்திலேயெ முன்பதிவு டிக்கெட்டுகள் விற்றுத் தீர்த்த பராசக்தி!#SunNews | #Parasakthi | #TicketSales pic.twitter.com/kxRyvjxMVD

— Sun News (@sunnewstamil) January 9, 2026

However, the claim triggered a backlash after X users added community context, noting that while some first-day first-show screenings in Chennai had limited occupancy, theatres in several other cities across Tamil Nadu were far from full.

Even grok mama giving slipper shot to this dog https://t.co/Q8q2E074cf pic.twitter.com/5mOYxdeJxk

— alpha #269 signing off (@viratsathruler) January 9, 2026

Links to live booking platforms were shared to dispute the narrative, showing significant seat availability in cities such as Madurai, Coimbatore, Tirunelveli, and Dindigul.

First show kooda fill agala enga oorula. Enda ipdi olu okringa https://t.co/CrtGrSJrZF pic.twitter.com/CoYg8inNNu

— LEO (@leodas315) January 9, 2026

That perumbalana theaters https://t.co/0l02Zsv06I pic.twitter.com/ieWfpMHb6s

— Vel Vijay (@ravendran_tvk) January 9, 2026

Elame Oru Alavuku dha bro #Parasakthi FDFS https://t.co/xEtWWKSZlH pic.twitter.com/a5XQ3MGCPg

— Karur Films (@Karurfilms) January 10, 2026

The controversy escalated when official theatre handles themselves publicly contradicted the hype.

Official handles of cinema owners and exhibitors joined the discussion, with some openly mocking what they described as manufactured publicity. Screenshots and posts from theatres suggested that occupancy levels outside Chennai did not match the impression created by promotional posts.

The X account of Dindigul Cinemas, a tracker and analyst, posted that only 24 tickets had been sold over three days for a 9:00 AM first-day-first-show screening, directly questioning the credibility of the “sold out” claim.

The episode also saw trolling aimed at the film’s producer Dawn Pictures, with users accusing the production house of attempting to inflate numbers through friendly media amplification. Several posts described the public rebuttal by theatre owners as unprecedented, noting that exhibitors rarely contradict promotional narratives so openly.

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

The post Theatre Owners Troll Sun News For Claiming Tickets For Pro-DMK Propaganda Film Parasakthi Were ‘Sold Out’ appeared first on The Commune.