The Thuppakki controversy

Note : If you want to make an opinion about this article/me,read this post fully,till the end.If you don't have the patience to go through such a long article,better skip it completely.

There were lot of arguments about this movie last week.A Muslim organization showed protested against the movie.As a result director A R Murugadoss agreed to remove some 'controversial' scenes from the movie.And finally this controversy ended with a comedy by actor Vijay's father,S A Chandrasekhar.SAC gave a statement that "Vijay will act as a Muslim character in one of his future films".The Muslim organizations too agreed and the issue was 'amicably sorted out'.

Now about movie.Jagdish(Vijay) is an army man and he comes back to his home for a vacation.After a bomb blast,he finds out the involvement of terrorists.The cat and mouse game between Vijay and the villain forms the rest of the story.What made the Muslim organizations angry is,the villain and terrorists were shown as Muslims.They are not ready to accept this.And Murugadoss agreed to remove 'offensive' scenes from the movie.How can he remove offensive scenes?Is he going to name Ajmal Lathif as Arul Murugan?

First of all we all should understand something,'Thuppakki' is just a cinema.Whatever shown in the movie need not necessarily be true nor false.When you are making a movie about Mumbai blasts,you can't show the terrorists as Hindus or Christians.Just consider the case of 26/11 attacks.We could capture only one terrorist alive - Ajmal Kasab - is he a Hindu?So as per the script one can't show the terrorists as Hindus or Christians.

Nowadays these kind of protests has become very common.When Cheran makes a movie like Pokkisham, in which the heroine is Muslim,people object to it stating Cheran has shown Muslims in bad light..Worst case is,one pervert made a movie against Muslims in America.And there were assaults and protests against the American embassies in some countries.Here,in Chennai, they gathered in huge number and protested in mount road.Can anyone enlighten me what good impact did it have?If some lunatic makes a movie against Islam in some country,you should protest against him in that particular country.Not in other nations.They call their protest as peaceful protests.Just because they didn't have weapons,those protests cannot become peaceful protests.It caused a heavy traffic jam.I feel - the only reason for that protest is 'show of strength'. It is a veiled threat that 'be careful,we are huge in number,don't try to mess up with us'.

Sometimes some religious groups object to certain scenes in a movie stating that it hurts their sentiments.No community/religion is an exception to this.Hindu organizations objected to movies like Dasavatharam, Manmathan Ambu etc. Christitan organizations protested against The Da Vinci Code.So do you think these religious groups really reflect the opinion of common people?The answer is big NO.One one hand some religious groups say Murugadoss showed Muslims in bad light,but on the other hand,lot of Muslim guys support the movie and they say there is nothing offensive in the movie.

Common man never bothers about these things.This is a dialogue in the movie Velayutham - "Muslim friend illadha oru Hindu kooda nee kooda paakka mudiyadhu(you can't find a Hindu without Muslim friend)". They might have added this dialogue to appease the Muslim groups,but still its true.For me the first wishes for all Hindu festivals like Vinayakar Chathurthi,Vijayadasami,Diwali etc,will be from my Muslim friend only, who is in Kuwait.It is highly unfortunate that I have to use the term 'Muslim friend' here.Because for us a friend is a friend,religion doesn't matter,but there is no other go,I have to use this term to justify my stand.So the common man is fine.For him Ajmal Lathif is a terrorist and he doesn't see him as Muslim.

Reputed writers and social activists claim,through these protests,the Muslim outfits wants to distance themselves from terrorist activities and showing a terrorist as Muslim hurts them.I am not sure whether this is a true statement.Because some organizations like TMMK(TamilNadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam) has appealed actor Kamal Hassan to screen his Vishwaroopam movie to the Muslim community first and then release the same.I don't know is it really possible to get hurt without even watching a single scene from a movie.The social activists also claim,just because these movies show terrorists as Muslims,Muslims are facing several problems.They link everything like starting from renting a house to getting a visa approved with this.Guys think,is it really fair to blame the makers for visa rejection and all?

After the 11/09 attacks,US has made its visa process very difficult.They are not like India.On one side, the Pakistan rejects all the evidences produced against it by India,but on the other side,India liberalizes the visa policies for Pakistan.We can't expect every nation to be as intelligent as India.People allege Muslims are victimized at the time of visa processing.I have seen lot of Muslim guys going onsite.But one thing - if the assault on American ambassadors and embassies is not going to make the visa policies difficult,movies like Thuppakki or Vallarasu will not have any impact at all.One more question arises - whenever there is a bomb blast or terrorist attack on any part of the nation,carried out by terrorist outfits like LeT,Al Qaeda, SIMI etc,no Muslim groups come to streets and condemn those blasts.They don't even issue a public statement against these attacks.But whenever a movie like Thuppakki or Velayutham releases,they gather in huge numbers.

Another question which most of the activists raise is,why always terrorists are shown as Muslims.Watch the below scene.

It is from the movie Kazhugu,which had Superstar Rajnikanth in the lead role.This movie was based on 'narabali'.Does this mean this is against Hindus or Hinduism?We had a 'Vedham Puthithu' directed by Mr.Bharathiraja,which showed the caste feelings of Hindus.Even in the recently released 'Vaanam', the director(Krish) has shown as if some Muslims become terrorists only because of the harassment by the Hindus.And the Hindu groups objected to this movie,which was also wrong.In the movie Baashaa, the villain's name is Mark Antony,does it mean projecting Christians in bad light? Even in Christian nations, the screening of The Da Vinci Code was not banned,but it was banned in India,later on after going to court, it was screened.So much of respect the minority communities command in India.

When we start fighting for religion or caste for silly things,we cant make a movie at all and such silly fights may even harm the good relationship between Hindus-Muslims-Christians.I am not against any religion.An individual has his own right to follow any religion.Am not against atheists too.As much as one has the right to believe God,one has the right to question the very existence of God too.But we should not fall prey for the politicians who use the religion for their petty gains.When someone makes a movie against any religion,file a case against the movie.A movie like Innocence of Muslims will hurt the religious sentiments.Making such movies is heights of stupidity.But showing a terrorist or any character as a Muslim or Hindu should be considered as the creator's freedom.

We should learn to watch 'Cinema' as 'Cinema'.