RIFLE RANGE BOY: #ThugLife

Thug Life (2025)
Director: Mani Ratnam

https://www.justwatch.com/za/movie/thug-life-2025

Following the release of this film, one realises the extent to which external forces are harnessing the power of social media to sway public opinion on various matters. Furthermore, films act as platforms for disseminating the ideologies of political parties.

Even before the film's release in Karnataka, during his promotional tours, Kamal Haasan, the central star of the movie, inadvertently – or perhaps not – provoked a diplomatic row between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. In his speech, he stated that the Kannada language is an offshoot of the Tamil language. This was not taken lightly by loyalists and politicians alike, who spoke the Kannada language.

It is no secret that Kamal Hassan's political party is currently allied with the DMK, the ruling party of Tamil Nadu. The DMK practises divisive politics based on language, ethnicity, and anti-Hindu sentiments. Kamal Hassan is merely announcing his resurgence in Tamil Nadu politics. The State of Karnataka was a latecomer, having been carved out of the Mysore Presidency in 1956 on linguistic grounds, and has faced conflicts with Tamil Nadu over the flow of water from the River Cauvery, the worst of which occurred in 1991. This was when anti-Tamil looting and the burning of vehicles bearing Tamil Nadu number plates escalated after a Tribunal ordered the release of Cauvery water into Tamil Nadu. Although Hassan's statements were not incorrect, the Kannadian fundamentalists are unlikely to accept any of this. It is irrelevant that Tamil is an older language with evidence from ancient tablets, or that both languages may have arisen from a common ancestor, the Proto-Dravidian language.

The row has taken on monumental proportions, with the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce collaborating with politicians to ban its screening in the state of Karnataka.

The film itself was not groundbreaking. Movie enthusiasts have encountered numerous films with similar storylines. In fact, Nayagan, which the director made in 1987 with the same star, featured a son avenging his father's death, just as this one does. Narratives of betrayal and rebellion among gangsters are nothing new. Netizens were quick to point out several glaring plot holes. There is an awkward moment when an adopted daughter might have married her brother. In another instance, both father and son could be vying for the same woman in intimate relationships. The characterisation is superficial, and there are far too many characters who do not contribute significantly to the story.

https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people
/thuggees-002145

I was more interested in the origin of the word 'thug'. It has Indian origins. It was during the time of the British Raj, and the colonisers were eyeing the mineral-rich interior lands, which were home to a tribal group that prayed to a form of Kaali named Thugee. The Thugees naturally wanted to defend their land. Just as the Mau Mau people of Kenya were vilified by the British to create stories of them being cannibals and baby snatchers, the Thugees were described as deadly assassins who moved in groups to identify their prey. Their weapon of choice was a bandana, with which they would strangle their victims and kill them. The Thugs were feared so intensely that they entered the English lexicon.

There is another connection between thugs and the origin of the word 'assassin'. Not all thugs are Hindus; some are Muslims. The Muslim influence can be traced back to the mid-1200s in Persia. There was a group of mercenaries who were compensated with hashish; hence, they were called 'Hashshashins'. The Hashshashins became known as assassins in the English language. They moved about, fighting for and against the Muslim kingdom while opposing the Crusaders. They battled the Mongols quite disastrously, who chased them away to India, where they lived among tribal communities. They mingled with the Thugee worshippers and collaborated with them. The Hashshashins revered Kali but did not worship Her. Of course, all this could merely be a figment of the British Raj's imagination, conjuring a bogeyman out of the Indians.

(P.S. A film that is not worth discussing. There are already far too many YouTube channels offering brutal rundowns on this movie.)