Sivaji ganesan hits full#
Sivaji ganesan hits plus#

Sadly he met with a crippling injury during a film shoot and faded away. At that time, our industry was so starved of a good actor, that this boy went on to sign a dozen films even though Ennuyir Thozhan flopped. His was a breakout performance & all the magazines here hailed him as the next big thing in the industry. I remember there was a guy called Babu who debuted in BharathirajaвЂ™s Ennuyir Thozhan вЂ“ who had the spark as well as acting chops.

Sivaji ganesan hits plus#

But he had the charm and dynamism of a mass star, plus in certain type of character roles he shone like none other. That he took a long time to get a foothold here also went against him. But sadly somewhere he lost his grasp on the BO. Vikram did try to be the mass+class star, with monster hits like Dil Dhool Samy Gemini Anniyan and performance oriented roles like Sethu, Kasi, Pithamagan, Dheiva thirumagal, Raavanan. A good actor like Liam Neeson milked it for all its worth with the Taken franchise so why not not-so-Ilayadhalapathi. When you look at it, action is a relatively safe bet that way. As long as starpower is synonymous with action in Tamil, the shelf life of stars will either be limited or, as you said, dependent on their establishing and maintaining mass following that relates to their persona and not so much their acting. NOT capable of getting into kola gandu and beating up a whole gang all by himself). SRK has the chops but donвЂ™t know where heвЂ™ll be at 6-7 years from now if his questionable script selection continues.Д«ut in Tamil, there is still no indication that itвЂ™s ok for a star to just play somebody middle aged and normal (i.e. I can kinda of imagine Aamir Khan fitting into some such slot of respectable older star when he gets to that age. It worked because that role didnвЂ™t require him to look dashing or swoon the audience with incredible charisma (though he was still helluva charismatic as of that role) it did require intense acting. Pacino was nearly 60 when he played Lowell Bergman in Insider. This is a must for stars to have longevity, like the way RDN and Pacino were bankable long after their youth had passed. What sustains this kind of popularity? It is because in ABвЂ™s case, him playing his age (or higher, as in 102 NO) has been accepted by the audience. Of course Rajni is a good actor but what has sustained his superstardom is a strong identification with his persona that goes well beyond his acting.ДЄs late as last year, AB scored a moderate success with 102 Not Out. By the time you get to Rajni, though, you already see the change. Dilip Kumar also enjoyed a very long career as star, if with long fallows from the 70s onwards. There really arenвЂ™t many actors who can claim to have that kind of longevity. Only when this happens does a star have Sivaji like longevity.

I think we will have to explore the question of whether it is possible any more for a pure thespian to also be a star. (Of course, you could argue that the Sivaji Ganesan kind of actor doesnвЂ™t exist in the current generation, but thatвЂ™s another discussion.)

Ranjith, a Shankar and a Karthik Subbaraj - many of our biggest stars end up making a particular strain of film that revolves around their вЂњmassвЂќ appeal rather than their performing capabilities. But with the exception of a Rajinikanth - who, in the past year, has stretched to accommodate the very different films of a Pa. But the recent release of Petta and Viswasam made me think about how every big star, these days, is defined by a certain hysteria around their stardom.

This is not to mourn those lost times when a great actor could also be a big box-office draw. The only kind of long-lasting stardom possible today is that of the вЂњmassвЂќ star, doing вЂњmassвЂќ movies. This kind of stardom is not possible anymore. Yes, IвЂ™m cheating a little and including the 1980s, too, which yielded hits like Mudhal Mariyathai. And we come to the theme of this piece, that an actorly actor - someone who was sought out for his performances rather than his вЂњmass appealвЂќ, someone who made dramas rather than вЂњmassвЂќ movies - was a huge star across four decades. What about the 1970s? We have another triple role in the blockbuster Thirisoolam, towards the end of that decade. Note that each of these landmark films is in a different decade. Deiva Magan (1969), in which the actor played three roles, turns 40 this year. Veerapandiya Kattabomman (1959), the film that launched a thousand audition monologues, turns 60 this year. The ability to sustain a seriously long career with oneвЂ™s performances alone seems to have become a lost art.ДЄny time is a good time to talk about Sivaji Ganesan, but in case you want to peg this piece on an anniversary, Thillana Mohanambal turned 50 last year.

Sivaji ganesan hits full#

Read the full article on Film Companion, here: