Nayakan

<p>An anti-government union leader’s son Sakthivel “Velu” is arrested by the police to find his father’s whereabouts. They trick Velu into believing them as his well-wishers and release him. When Velu meets his father, the police kill the latter. Feeling betrayed, Velu stabs the police inspector and escapes to , where he is raised by Hussain, a kind-hearted smuggler living in the slums. One day, when Hussain is ill, a young Velu decides to carry out the smuggling activity on behalf of Hussain. His demand for a bigger commission from the smugglers enrages them, and they involve a corrupt inspector Kelkar to arrest Hussain and kill him in jail. When they close the case as suicide, Velu is enraged knowing the truth and murders Kelkar. He later takes care of Kelkar’s family which consists of his wife and a mentally challenged son Ajit. Kelkar’s wife knew that her husband’s immorality resulted in his death. Velu meets Neela, a schoolgirl forced into prostitution, who has interests to pursue her education. Her innocence and courage impress Velu, and he eventually marries her. They have two children: Surya and Charumathi. Velu’s power and command gradually increases in Dharavi as he voices out in support of local people which gains him huge popularity among the masses. His rival smugglers, the Reddy brothers lose a bet to Velu in smuggling some goods from the ship due to which Velu becomes the king of the harbour. Ashamed, they are instructed to murder Velu and his family in an attack, but Neela is killed instead. After avenging Neela’s death, Velu sends his children to to safeguard them. Years pass by, Velu’s power further increases in Bombay and is fondly called by everyone. Surya and Charumathi return to Bombay as adults after education. Surya follows Velu’s footsteps, a fact that he is initially hesitant of, but later learns to accept. Surya, when escaping from the police after a botched mission, dies in a petrol bunk explosion. A devastated Charumati blames Velu, disowns and leaves him. A few years pass by and a new , Patil is deputed in Bombay to eliminate gangsters; his first target is Velu. He collects all the evidence needed for the arrest of Velu. When Velu comes to meet Patil, he learns that Charumathi is married to him and they have a son. Patil too learns that his wife is Velu’s daughter and suspects that she might help her father to flee from the police. Velu absconds and his allies are arrested. He decides to surrender to the police to save them from undergoing torture in the police station. Through Charumathi, Velu sets up his surrender. Patil is shocked due to the lack of proper evidence against Velu as none comes forward from the public as a witness against the crimes committed by him. Patil meets Kelkar’s widow and the now grown-up Ajit and requests to disclose the truth behind her husband’s death in the court. She refuses and defends Velu’s acts. But Ajit is shocked after learning the truth. Velu is produced in the court and is exonerated due to lack of valid and strong evidence. He is overcome with emotion when he meets his young grandson (Charumathi’s son) Shaktivel. Velu steps out of the court amid a big cheer from his supporters, until Ajit shoots him to avenge his father’s death; Velu dies on the spot while Ajit is arrested. The two years I studied in Bombay (1975–77), he [ ] was at his peak. People in the belt thought he was God. I used to wonder how anyone could treat a fellow human as God. I never understood why they would do this. It fascinated me. It was such a dramatic story, this man going from to Bombay and ruling the city. I outlined this thought to Kamal Haasan and he said fine. That’s it. It was done. Decided. In the mid-1980s, narrated a story inspired by the American film (1972) to who agreed to act in the film. and were also confirmed to act. However , then an associate of Haasan, felt that it would be a Ganesan-focused film and not a Haasan film. The project was dropped. Haasan later told Srinivasan about the-then upcoming director . Ratnam had previously wanted to cast Haasan as the protagonist in his directorial debut, (1983), but the collaboration could not materialise then as Haasan was committed to (1981) at that time. Srinivasan came to Ratnam’s house and gave him an envelope, which contained a cassette of the film (1970). Ratnam, after watching the film, met Haasan and rejected the offer to remake the film. After Haasan asked him the kind of film he preferred to make, Ratnam suggested two stories: one was in the action genre similar to (1971) and (1984), while the other was based on the life of the don ; the latter was finalised. Ratnam had earlier narrated this story, when it was only an idea, to producer R. C. Prakash, but it was not picked up then. Cinematography for was handled by , and editing by and . In September 1986, Haasan gave his schedule dates for the film to Srinivasan, and was paid 17.5 lakh (US$145,583 in 1987) for playing Velu. Ratnam wanted Haasan to have as realistic a look as possible. He preferred Haasan in traditional attire. Haasan was initially hesitant regarding his look and wanted to sport a beard similar to that of his old-aged look in (1983), as he felt it would not give away his jaw line, which would reveal that the character was portrayed by a younger person. Ratnam, in turn, did not want Haasan to sport a look similar to or any of his other previous films. Haasan ultimately sported to provide some weight around his jaw for Velu’s old-age look. Neela, the wife of Velu, was played by , who made her debut in the film. The character was created by Srinivasan to reduce the violent content and help the film cater to family audiences. Ratnam wanted a “new face” to portray Neela as he felt only then the character would have the required zest and gusto. Saranya sent her photograph to Ratnam to audition for the role. She was later cast after a successful screen t- Saranya’s father was against her being cast, but she and her mother managed to convince him. Though Ratnam has stated that Saranya was “the first and only person we saw for the role”, claimed that she was approached, but refused as she considered that speaking in Tamil would be difficult for her. The dubbing voice for Saranya was provided by actress . According to , Ratnam considered her for the role of Velu’s daughter Charumati; however, the role ultimately went to . Ratnam believes that was suggested to him by Haasan, when was being considered for the role of the assistant commissioner Patil. Raghuvaran declined as the script required him to cut his hair short. Nassar shot for six days and initially believed there was nothing special in his role. He later admitted his surprise of the reach of his character post-release. Although was then known mainly for playing leading roles, she accepted the supporting role of Velu’s sister Shakila. She later recalled, “I didn’t know what to accept and what to reject. I just grabbed whatever was offered irrespective of the character. That was a mistake.” Raja Krishnamoorthy (later known as ), then the General Manager at , quit to portray Velu’s father, with being his debut film. Haasan wanted for the role of Ajit, the son of Inspector Kelkar ( ). Anand was reluctant since he wanted to focus on his career as a director, but after Haasan insisted, Anand accepted. Ratnam initially planned to complete the shooting in 60 days and 70 rolls of film. The initial budget was 60 lakh (US$500,000 in 1987), but time and increased the budget to beyond 1 crore (US$830,000 in 1987). According to Srinivasan, principal photography commenced in November 1986 and the first lasted for 10 days, but the scenes shot during this period were scrapped because Haasan disliked them, prompting script rewrites and causing shooting to be delayed; the rewritten script had more violence, and scenes taken from and (1984). According to Ratnam, a three-day test shoot involving Haasan, unknown to Srinivasan, was done in December 1986 as the script was not yet complete. While the shots taken did not make the final cut, they helped to get the technical aspects of the film on the right track. Ratnam said the first “real schedule” of began in January 1987. 15 days of shooting took place in the slum areas of . Using photographs taken there, the art director created a set at Venus Studios in Madras. Thousands of junior artists were hired to recreate the atmosphere of the slum areas. Additionally, were brought for the same. Haasan helped in the make-up for the other actors in the film and asked and to cut their hair so as to make their characters Selvam and Iyer in their old age scenes look convincing. One scene involved Velu telling Iyer, “Udamba paathukonga” ( ) and Ganesh spontaneously said “Naa poraen. Naa irundhu enna panna poraen. Nee nalla irukkanum, Naickerae” ( ); an impressed Haasan told Ratnam to retain the improvised dialogue. Haasan used perfume for the female cast. Ratnam had marked around 12 lakh (US$100,000 in 1987) for the film’s action sequences. To make the sequences slick and entertaining, cinematographer and stunt sequence director Jim Allen, who was known for his work stunt sequences in (1975) was chosen. But after three days, he was removed from the film as he charged 200,000 per day (US$16,000 in 1987) and Srinivasan could not afford the money. Haasan brought his own gun, sparing Ratnam the usage of a prop. In the scene where Haasan chases Kelkar, he uses his own bottle of sugar glass, which he had brought from the United States. The remaining portions were shot at Bombay (now ), including the portions involving Velu’s childhood life in the city. The scene featuring Neela studying for her mathematics examination was suggested by Srinivasan. Velu’s childhood portions before he moves to Bombay were canned in for one and a half days. This was also the last part of the principal photography. The song “Naan Sirithal Deepavali” was shot at the spot where the is located today. The old building previously located at that spot was called the “Indian Express Building” by film industrialists as it was adjacent to the Old office of . Thota Tharani converted the building’s exterior into a brothel and used the opposite end of the building for Velu’s house location. was notable for using technique of filmmaking. Ratnam and Haasan met Mudaliar in person, when Ratnam asked Mudaliar how he would foresee his own death; Mudaliar replied that it would be in a public riot amidst much panic and tension, this inspired the film’s climax. When the film was completed and the first print was ready, it was three hours long. Although Ratnam and Haasan wanted Srinivasan to release the film uncut, he felt audiences would never see the entire film due to its length, so he requested Lenin to remove the scenes which he felt were unnecessary. The result, according to Srinivasan, “gave life to the movie, along with the theme music .” Haasan, Ratnam and Srinivasan have acknowledged to being inspired by in various scenes. These include Velu’s killing of the Reddy brothers, the murder of Velu’s son Surya, and Velu crying at Surya’s corpse. One scene in the film involves Velu and Selvam tying their illicit cargo to large bags of salt attached to rubber inner tubes which they then dump into the sea; the cargo sinks from the weight of the salt, but when the salt dissolves the cargo bobs to the surface, by which time they have passed the customs officers. This was described by Lalitha Gopalan in her 2002 book as an homage to , a view that was shared by S. Shiva Kumar of . According to historian , the film “tends to glorify violence and portrays the anti-social, smuggler-king in an approving and sympathetic way, modelling him on .” Lalitha Gopalan notes that the film “attempts faithfully to re-create a historical period by carefully managing different aspects of the . More than any other detail in the , automobiles – different models of cars, jeeps, and vans – indicate the passage of time within the diegesis.” According to a article, the film does not extol crime or violence; rather it narrates the story of a tragic character who rises from slums to untold riches and unbridled power. Ratnam has stated that the question asked by Velu’s grandson, whether he is good or bad, “puts across the moral dilemma of the man in a nutshell”. The soundtrack was composed by , this being his 400th film soundtrack. wrote the lyrics for all the songs except “Nila Adhu Vanathumele”, which Ilaiyaraaja himself wrote. Ilaiyaraaja composed the film score using ancient instruments, for the film. The song “Andhi Mazhai Megam” is set in the . “Nee Oru Kaadhal Sangeetham”, set in the , is featured on both sides of the original LP record as the second track. The theme song “Thenpandi Cheemayile” plays for most of the film. “Nila Adhu Vanathumele” is set in the Carnatic raga. was released on 21 October 1987, day. The at Madras initially refused to permit the release of the film, as it was based on a living person. When Srinivasan appealed to the revising committee at Bombay, they said that they would permit the release of the film he produced a letter stating that it was not based on Mudaliar’s life. Through writer Mathioli Shanmugam, Srinivasan met Mudaliar, who gave him a letter, after which the censor appellate board at Bombay permitted the release of the film. of bought the rights of the film after Srinivasan distributed the film; Venkateswaran also received a producer’s credit. It was dubbed into as and into Hindi as . Despite the Hindi dub, it was later remade in Hindi as (1988). In 2015, was screened at the Habitat Film Festival. became a major success in many states. The film completed 214 days run in Tamil Nadu and completed 100 days in both Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. The film ran for 25 weeks at Madras’ Anand Theatre, 105 days at Grelan, 105 days at Udhayam, 175 days at Madurai Minipriya, 100 days at Salem, 85 days at Trichy’s Kalaiyarangam, 100 days at Jupiter, 105 days at Coimbatore’s Archana, 100 days at Bombay’s Dinora and 224 at Bangalore’s Pallavi. The Telugu dubbed version also completed 100 days of theatrical run. received critical acclaim. Varadarajan Mudaliar, who saw the film during a preview in Madras, expressed appreciation for it and said it “wasn’t at all what I had expected”. He added that it “made me realise that I could have been a better man”. On 23 October 1987, N. Krishnaswamy of said, “[ ] is a rare Tamil film. Sensitivity is its hallmark. Authenticity is its lifebreath. It has the stamp of nativity. It has class. Yet, it is not an Art film. It could be a watershed in Tamil cinema; an artistically made film that could make money as well.” On 1 November, stated that Haasan underplayed his role well and demonstrated his histrionics as a godfather in the film well, adding that the film stood out for its sets, taking, colour, richness and international quality camera work. The magazine gave the film one of its highest marks of 60. of lauded the film, saying it could be watched more than once. A 1988 review published in described Haasan as having given a “powerhouse performance”. Writing for in 1989, Madhu Jain believed deserved “a permanent place in the Indian cinema pantheon” after watching it at the 12th International Film Festival in Delhi. The film was for the in 1987 at the ; however, it was not shortlisted among the final nominees. became a “landmark” of popular Indian cinema. As a part of its legacy, the film has been acclaimed for being a box-office success whilst being a critical success. English journalist stated in his 1997 book , “From the films that followed in the wake of , the most interesting is Mani Rathnam’s (1987) starring [Kamal Haasan] in a fictional version of the Bombay gangster Varadarajan Mudaliar’s life.” In 2005, the magazine included in its list of . After the film was selected by as one of the best, insiders of the magazine spoke about Ratnam’s work in the film, saying “Ratnam has no such difficulty blending melodrama and music, violence and comedy, realism and delirium, into a two-and-a-half-hour demonstration that, when a gangster’s miseries are mounting, the most natural solution is to sing in the rain.” The tagline given to the film by was “A terrific gangster epic in the style.” The film was also ranked 82nd in list of greatest films of all time. was also included in ‘s list “India’s 20 greatest films” at no 13. In April 2013, on the centenary of Indian cinema, included the film in its list of “100 greatest Indian films of all time”. When questioned by Baradwaj Rangan if he would make a sequel to , Ratnam said, “Never. When you finish a film, you’re glad to be rid of it. You’re happy you don’t have to go back to that script again. Been there, done that.” The scenes and dialogues from the film have been parodied in various films, including (2001), and (2004). When stand-up comedian and television anchor launched a quirky play titled in October 2005, he named the cast after famous characters in Tamil films. Accordingly, (one of ‘s character in the film), Badshah ( in ) and Velu Naicker (Haasan’s role in ) play the central characters of a family of brothers. Similarly, in the 2013 comedy film , in which the characters were named after popular protagonists of Tamil cinema, a member of the supporting cast was christened Velu Naicker. According to the Telugu newspaper , Rajinikanth, after being impressed with , requested Ratnam to write a similar script, but the project never materialised; its similarities with ‘s script for (2016) made him accept to star in the latter film. The famous line in the film, “Neenga Nallavara Kettavara?” (Are you good or bad?) was used in “The Punch Song”, a song from the film, (2014). Delhi Ganesh reprises his role as Iyer in the 2022 film . In October 2012, coinciding with the 25th anniversary of , Haasan published an article in , titled “Of course Velu Nayakan doesn’t dance”, in which he recounted the the film. In the article, he described Srinivasan as stingy and being unhappy about shooting the film in Bombay, adding that films “were a business” for him and he “wasn’t interested in films as art”. In response, Srinivasan accused Haasan of defaming him, and wrote an article titled “Living in past glory” as a rejoinder, in which he accused Haasan of “distorting the facts” and undermining the contributions of others to the film. He also accused Haasan of interfering with the original screenplay by Ratnam to include sequences copied from and . Srinivasan, however, concluded by writing that he was not against Haasan taking credit for the film’s success, as long as it was not at his expense.</p>