STAR & STYLE
Baradwaj Rangan tosses a mental cigarette into the air while thinking about the Super Star and his super style.
OCT, 2005 – SOMETIMES AN ETERNITY ISN’T ENOUGH to capture the essence of a person; sometimes thirty seconds are all thatâs needed. In the case of Rajinikanth, those thirty seconds came in the form of a television commercial for a brand of biscuit, wherein a couple of guys are watching a movie. On screen, a girl is chased by a couple of goons. Screaming â what else? â âbachao,â? she runs behind a hero, whoâs made to look like our hero. (The sunglasses, the costume, the hair, the accent â itâs perfect.) He pulls out his gun, discovers thereâs only one â sorry, âvunâ? â bullet in it. So he tosses a razor blade into the air and fires the gun in the direction of the blade, which naturally splits the bullet in two â one half for each baddie. When we cut back to the guys watching this movie, one exclaims to the other, âYeh cinema hai ya circus!â?
The answer to that question â in a good number of Rajinikanth movies â would be both. The medium may have been cinema but the matter was right out of the circus â in the comic sequences, he was a barrelful of monkeys; in the action sequences, he was a lion whoâd whip up a storm if the enemy so much as looked in his direction. (That, by the way, isnât just a figure of speech. While fighting the bad guys in his latest blockbuster, Chandramukhi, he twirls his leg round-and-round so fast, it generates a gust of wind that… whips up a storm.) And if the circus begins with a parade of all the acts, a piece of cinema with Rajinikanth begins with a parade of all the alphabets that make up his title â the letters S, U, P, E, R, followed by S, T, A, R. (Thereâs a trumpet burst and a musical âheyâ? as each alphabet appears, and by the time the word SUPER STAR is formed on screen, the audience is in such a frenzy, a jet plane could take off overhead and youâd never hear it.)
Why is Rajinikanth so popular? Ask his fans, and theyâll tell you itâs because of his charisma, his presence, his style. Rajinikanth is synonymous with style. A film of his, Baasha, even had a song that went, âStyle style dhaan, Super style dhaan,â? and the phrase âRajini styleâ? is as much a part of Tamil vocabulary as âammaâ? or âappaâ? or âwater lorryâ? â and the first time we got a glimpse of this style was probably in Ninaithaale Inikkum. A millionaire, seeing Rajinikanth throw a cigarette into the air and catch it in his mouth, challenges him to repeat the trick ten times in a row. If he lost, heâd lose his pinkie; if he won, heâd win a Toyota car. (This was still the India of the seventies, and amidst the Fiats and the Ambassadors, a Toyota would have seemed todayâs equivalent of a limo with Bipasha Basu as personal bartender.) In the movie, Rajini neither won nor lost that bet â he stopped with nine tries, not wanting to give the millionaire the, uh, finger â but in real life, his cigarette-flipping became a career-defining, and much-emulated, trademark. (Itâs tempting to wonder what course Rajiniâs career would have taken had Anbumani Ramdoss been Union Health Minister then.)
A little before and after Ninaithaale Inikkum, Rajinikanth, in movies like Engeyo Kaetta Kural and Mullum Malarum, still made the occasional attempt at being an actor. In fact, in movies like Moondru Mudichu and Avargal, we almost saw the birth not just of an actor but an archetype: the casually chilling antihero, who had no qualms toying with the lives of the good people around him. But after that cigarette flip, Rajini gradually moved from experimental actor to explosive hero, an outsize star doing outsize stunts in outsize stories with outsize style. Is it any wonder, then, that Sri Raghavendra, for instance, where he played the titular saint, bombed! His fans wanted masala, not meditation.
And masala, after all, is what brings in the masses, who, in turn, are the ones who make a megastar â at least in south India. There have been stylish mass-heroes before Rajini. (MGR, for instance, used to do this thing with his arm that made it look like he was flinging an invisible frisbee.) And there will no doubt be stylish mass-heroes after Rajini. (Why, Simbu even calls himself âLittle Super Starâ?!) But there hasnât been â and there likely wonât be â a hero who so defined a style and who was so defined by his styles as Rajinikanth. Take any of the post-Rajini stars of Tamil cinema. Vikram is a mass hero, as is Vijay, as is Vijayakanth, as is Sarath Kumar â but with each of these stars, if someone asked you what made them unique, youâd hum and haw. Some are good actors, some are good dancers, some are good orators, some are good fighters, some are good comics… They are generic stars who, more or less, do what the generic hero is supposed to do â act, dance, orate, fight, do comedy.
With Rajini, though, thereâs no humming, no hawing. What makes him unique isnât just one thing. Itâs the airborne cigarettes. Itâs the sunglasses being twirled between both hands before making their way to his face. Itâs the patterns being traced in the air with a forefinger, accompanied by a soundtrack effect that makes it appear as if theatreâs been filled with whooshing wind. Itâs the âpunchâ? dialogues that pass on from the movie into mythology. Itâs the hand casually ploughing through his hair from the forehead on. Itâs the laugh that goes âaa… haa… haa…â? (To non-fans, these are just syllables, but true Rajini devotees, upon seeing this, will also replay in their mindsâ ear the singsong intonation of this laughter.) Itâs one of a kind, that âRajini style.â?
Copyright ©2005 Man’s World
Ravi K
October 22, 2007
I do agree that no distinct mass hero has risen after Rajini. Even Vijay (and wannabe superstar Simbu) clearly model themselves after Rajini. Vijay at least has the most charisma and widespread fanbase of the group you mentioned.
LikeLike
Deepa
October 22, 2007
Somehow among all your wonderfully written articles, this one seems to lack the style (yours not Rajini’s) and punch….seems a little halfhearted…hmm…not a fan of Rajini style, maybe? BTW, thats just an observation, not a critisism.
LikeLike
G
October 22, 2007
Deepa
>Somehow among all your wonderfully written articles, this one seems to lack the style (yours not Rajini’s
Agreed. The very fact that he takes a stupid North Indian spoof of Rajni as the take-off point for this article tells us all we need to know about
Rangan’s real feeling for Rajni saar. 🙂
P.S. What’s the name of that fat hirsuite bear-like hero? The one that only tent cinema goers for the last 20 years or so should probably be aware of? Would you tell something about him?
LikeLike
MumbaiRamki
October 22, 2007
Ditto as Deepa’s comment .
LikeLike
brangan
October 22, 2007
Deepa / G: I’m not very happy with this myself. My first draft began with his smashing intro in Aboorva Raagangal, but then this being a “national” magazine, had to make it more general. Though, strangely, for the Mani Ratnam piece, I was able to write it exactly how I wanted. On a similar note, there’s a piece I just finished about “sex in Cinema”. Again, it’s not something I’m happy about. I’ll put it up soon, and you can see for yourself. Sometimes, with deadlines and all, I guess you just churn out stuff. And G, are you talking about T Rajendar?
LikeLike
G
October 22, 2007
T Rajendar? Yes, that is it.
Does he enjoy any kind of cult status? I needed the name to google, thanks!
LikeLike
Ravi K
October 22, 2007
T. Rajendar has directed some hit films with memorable music (also composed by him), such as Oru Thalai Ragam, but his recent attempt at being a hero in Veerasamy flopped.
Is your article on sex in cinema about Indian cinema or cinema in general?
LikeLike
munimma
October 22, 2007
I think for us “discerning” readers, you should post what you actually want to write. 🙂
LikeLike
raj
October 23, 2007
When you are writing about a formulaic film-churner, like Rajni, no wondeer Baradwaj Rangan resorted to formulaic writing. I vaguely do remember the piece with the Apoorva Raagangal intro on Rajni – have you published that before, BR? I think so, and I think you had the freedom to talk about Mullum malarum in that.
Too bad that you have to pander to the bollywood image of rajni when you havee to talk to a “national” audience – when a bengali writer is asked to write about Mithun in the national press, I suppose he would talk more about the 3 national awards, make his point about his acting skills and then move on to Goonda etc. Too bad you cant do it – I strongly feel this was an opportunity to record the fact that Rajni was an awesome actor, far more than the likes of Aamir Khan or Sharukh can aspire to be everr, before he subsided into his limited image.You missed it.
“A little before and after Ninaithaale Inikkum, Rajinikanth, in movies like Engeyo Kaetta Kural and Mullum Malarum, still made the occasional attempt at being an actor”
That’s an awful under-statement. That was a period when, infact, Rajni was considered the actor and Kamal the mere superstar 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
October 23, 2007
Raj: So you’re telling me that *that* piece got published too, the one where I talked about Aboorva Raagangal? Even I don’t remember this 🙂 Let me dig into the archives and see if I can pull it up… And yes, whatever said, this article *was* a bit of a missed opportunity
LikeLike
d-day
October 23, 2007
Rajini’s acting is pathetic, better than Srk maybe..but not Aamir.
Mullum malarum, johnny, etc are overhyped..I still remember how we made fun of his acting, he struggled with dialogue delivery..he is so corny,comical and ridiculous in his recent films that we overhype his old films which were both critical and commercial failures…His pathetic dialogue delivery, and his less capable expressions, etc is no match for an actor like Aamir khan. His body language was always similar…His incapablity to represent portray tamilians were visible in his films…Aamir has shown how prefect his hindi roles are…Although Rajini’s comic timing is worth it like in Thillu mullu…That ALONE is better than Aamir…Other than that, Aamir is infinitely better than Rajini.
LikeLike
raj
October 24, 2007
Yeah, right. Aamir Khan resembled a native Kutchi in Lagaan. You couldnt see traces of Aamir Khan persona at all.Or, could you? Just think of that. Even Mangal Pandey was less of Mangal Pandey and more of a serious Bhuvan, wasnt he? You are blinded. Watch MM, Johnny again. Hell, look at the body language differences between Johnny and Vidyasagar and you’ll know why Rajni is leagues ahead of Aamir Khan
LikeLike
d-day
October 24, 2007
raj…u belong in rediff movie boards where there is no iota of sanity in their argument…this is a myth that rajini fans use..sorry..i hav been watching tamil films for decades now..i know where he stands..maybe nt fr his fans who spread inflated lies..he is just a pathetic actor,period..
Comparing with Aamir..wait before I fucking barf..
LikeLike
raj
October 25, 2007
d-day, LOL! rediff message boards, indeed! just go back and see who is using sane words and arguments based on the subject and who is using mere statements like “patheteic’,and whats wore, bringing in profanity -t hats typical rediff board stuff and you are accusing me – when all I put forward wa argument based on the actual subject – you have a thick skin, I say.
Never mind, i wouldnt want to stoop to your personal attacks level so please feel free to exhibit more of your standards
LikeLike
raj
October 25, 2007
And just go and see other threads here in rangan’s lair to see how much criticism of Rajni i have made when deserved – unlike you, who are just harping on your own Rajni hatred – which is fine – but when you do that, you lose the so-called ‘moral high ground’, mate.
LikeLike
d-day
October 25, 2007
Raj,
Im sorry..yes my earlier comment is really in a bad taste..I take those harsh words back..i was really in a bad mood after reading rediff comment boards,i used it instinctively..Apologize again..but,i dont think much of rajini as an actor..and im a die hard Aamir fan..maybe i am blinded partly..but the whole word is blinded when it comes to acting..no one can measure it? but i see Aamir as a more capable actor..maybe rajini is better than srk, hrithik, etc. bt do you seriously think he is better than aamir? I dont think so..also i believe that kamal is the best actor in india..i dont underrate tamil films at all..i also think sivaji is a greater actor than Amitabh which most people wouldnt agree,i find amitabh’s histrionics to match his hindi sensibilites,sivaji’s was to tamilian’s sensibilities,but i still rate Sivaji more for his mindblowing performances like Parasakthi, uyarnda manidan, devarmagan, mudhal mariyadai, Gauravam (overacting notwithstanding), Vietnam veedu, Thiruvilayadal (no one in this planet could do that role) etc the variety is Mindblowing than any other actor…i m also not partial to hindi film industry..bt i think rajini fans overhype rajinis earlier performance more,and use this as a defense against hindi stars,talented ones like Aamir included..
LikeLike
raj
October 25, 2007
d-day, fine. I have a life so I dont really think too much about comments box stuff. Well, yes, Aamir is a damn good actor but I guess you hadnt seen Rajni in his prime – I mean, it is one thing to see his old movies now on TV/Video and quite another to have been actually present when he made his strides – those were different times. He limited himself later – and that I still dont forgive- but he was an awesome actor with awesome range – he has done it all in the short period during 70’s when , believe it or not, he was the ACTOR and Kamal was the STAR. Kamal has ofcourse gone on and produced stuff that Rajni’s output so far can never equal – but thats a different point altogether.
Aamir Khan, the reservation I have about him is that I cant see beyond the Aamir persona in his performances – maybe my fault but I thought, for examlple, Mangal Pandey was nothing but Bhuvan made serious. The expressions, the body language were pretty much the same except for the specific customization according to the gravity of Mangal as opposed to the optimistic Bhuvan.
Bhuvan actually exposes Aamir’s limitations – ippo Virumandi paartha, do you see Kamal – I only saw the raw, unrefined madhurai mannin Virumandi there. In Bhuvan, I couldnt see a Gujarati/Kutchi person of the 1890’s. I only saw good, old Aamir of QSQT.
Whether Rajni could bring the mannin manam – oh! he very well did- Just watch Mullum Malarum with an open mind – it is an awesoms performance. Thats where he leaves Aamirs andd Shahrukhs way behind.
Even Johnny was beautifully done. Credit to Mahendran ofcourse but you cnnot under-estimate Rajni, the actor, who just chose to be ordinary.
ANd, yeah, I am with you on Sivaji. Unfortunately, he was limited by his ambitions and the lousy environment that Tamil Cinema was in – Yoganand, Thirulogachander, Guhanathan hmm, what a bunch of losers he got as directors- colossal waste of talent.
If only he had had a Black, a Cheeni Kum(well, Mudhal Mariyaadhai was sort of similar theme but different treatment) etc, he would have put India on the world acting honors map.
Yes, Gauravam was an outstanding performance, despite the over-acting. Forget Thiruvolaiyadal, watch Thiruvarutchelvar- adhellam, chance-e illai. Kamal is attempting one of his Dasavatharam roles as a saint-poet, I think. Lets see how it goes. Actually, yu have to watch Sivaji in movies like Lakshmi Kalyanam(Crap movie but lovely underplayed performance), Galatta Kalyanam(over the top comedy, who said he cant do comedy?), Ooty varai uravu(ditto), well, I can go on.
LikeLike
d-day
October 26, 2007
Aamir certainly appeared and lived as “Mangal pandey”, from the wrestling scene to just a glance..but he is limited in his expressions too,like bulging his eyes wide open to express anger.lets leave Aamir out..i still maintain that he is much better than Rajini in representing the son of their soil..it’s unfair you compare him to Kamal’s virumandi,which is underrated masterclass..from the courtroom scenes to the hut scene where he changes from one mood to another (when he finds his gradma dead)..As I said,I would say that he is the best actor from India..Dilip kumar is the only other actor in the same pedestal with that balance of underplaying,overplaying,intensity,verstaility,etc all packed in one..but coming to Rajinis earlier performances..you are right about the difference in being at the time,and watching his movies in TV..i havent seen those films in recent times..but i have seen it when released..i used to watch his earlier KB films in theater,i can strongly say taht Rajini was already into exaggerated emotions hinting towards gestural ‘star’ pretensions,while Kamal moulded into the role,clearly impressed with the performance and not screen presence…bt that would be a tall order for rajini to better..lets forget that as it would only be unfair to compare to a talent likme kamal…i typed “pathetic actor” in a bit of haste and naivety..bt truth is i never really rated RAjini as a good actor,maybe decent like how Vikram dominated for sometime in recent days from Sethu to Kasi…agreed that Rajini had few awesome scenes like when he says “rendu kaalu rendu kai illatiyum..inda kali polachupam sir” in Mullum malarum..but he used to be on or off..either good or way bad..no consistency..he only got worse wit kai kodukum kai,etc with really mediocre acting..even in the overhyped “Johnny”,u see his propaganda clearly lik talking to the camera..after that its only been bad..i hav seen more consistency in Aamir’s case..please dont bracket him with SRK,who is a pathetic actor..anyway lets agree to disagree.
LikeLike
d-day
October 26, 2007
Thanks fr those recommendations,i havnt seen few of those..bt like u said,its the quality of directors who has been bad..”a collosal waste of talent”, thats a scary and a valid statement..i cant imagine how much one could extract out of him..Kamal is right about Sivaji,he is a born talent who happened to be born in a wrong place at a wrong time..Kamal is born in a wrong place at a much better time,although he is a lesser talent,his output seems to be better because of the talented directors he got,and his own hardworking, committed and dedicated cause to cinema as such..i m no expert abt tamil cinema..forgive if they are ridiculous..just saying what i infer from what i have seen of these actors…
LikeLike
d-day
October 26, 2007
d-day, a fair share of your points are pretty much my views, too.
Lets just agree to disagree on Rajni and Aamir.
But yes, we cant rank Aamir with Shahrukh and the like. The problem with Bollywood is everyone is a great actor for them. I mean, you just watch the bollywood reviews – including our, own, beloved, fairly objective Baradwaj – and usually, they write stuff like “Inimitable Akshay Kumar”, “Akshay, in a way he only can, shoulders the movie”, “Ajay Devgan gives an unmatcheable performance as…”, “the great Anil Kapoor..” (Ha!Ha!), and if you happen to be familiar with a certain Deepa Gahlot, “Rishi Kapoor, the ultimate natural talent Indian cinema ever produced”!..
I mean to say, what? Competent, yes. But why do these people, including Rangan, write as if these are God’s gift to Indian Cinema and no contemporary Indian(as opposed to Hindi) actor can do what these guys are doing in their respective movies.
Thats what bugs me. Aamir, yes, one of the best in Indian Cinema currently but the moment you start comparing him with the Southie stalwarts, even that wud sound too high praise for him. Heck, even Amitabh deserves some of the eptihets he gets. But when the likes of Akshay, Anil,Ajay, Hritik, Sharukh are praised with anything more than “competent”, I think it is overdone
LikeLike
d-day
October 26, 2007
Kamal deserves a lot of praise because he saw what happened to Sivaji and steered clear of that path and took the road less travelled – for that, he deserves to be celebrated. He is a lesser talent than Sivaji- u no, the same grouse about Aamir’s expressions, I think even with Kamal , he has his patented azhugai, patented comforting-women-with-a-anguished-expression-grab-the-head-and-hug routine etc – but he makes it upw ith his shrewd choices and hard work. Only thin is I woud definitely want to see less of Kamalhassan’s views (Anbe Sivam for instance could have given the same message more effectively and compactly without the loud Communist propoganda song – it wasnt really relevant to the movie) and more of the character in his movies. Well, as I expressed elsewhere, the biggest challenge for Kamal would not be a movie without songs, fights, his moustache beard or trousers or handsome face or whatever – for him , the challenge is to act in a role that doesnt require him to touch the heroine :-).
LikeLike
d-day
October 26, 2007
“the challenge is to act in a role that doesnt require him to touch the heroine” LOL. Thats okay, actually every great actor, brando,nicholson,mohanlal,etc have a special weakness for women both in reel and real lives..:)
Also i think all actors have their patented ways of expressing..many belv Kamals is hamming in his recent films…bt i fr one,has seen him move the audience with just a glance in Pushpak,or trying to hide his face in kuruthipunal,the villager like weeping spree in Virumandi,etc..this is true even with Brando or Mohanlal,who is a more natural talent apparently..but i dont understand what is naturalness..i havent seen such emotions from any other person..we can only call it believable or not believable..or how effective it is..Kamal has been impressive enough for tamilians,like brando fr Americans..i hope i am clear..that is why i think sivaji was more effective than Amitabh was,to their respective people.
LikeLike
M. KEERTHIVASAN
December 2, 2009
I think that rajini is far more superior actor than sivaji ganesan, kamal, and mgr. Because, he can change to heroism to entertain public, as well as become more effective and realistic character actor when people require. He can adopt to the situation very well. You are telling that expression of rajini is very weak, which is not correct, he is showing emotions whenever required not dramatically, but more realistically. I think rajini, and t.s. balaiah are the greatest character actors of tamil nadu apart from s.v. ranga rao, whereas sivaji, mgr, kamal are said to be the heroes or darling of the masses.
LikeLike
M. KEERTHIVASAN
February 26, 2010
D-day, you are a fool to say that rajini is camera conscious, but in real case, being a technician, kamalhasan is camera conscious and he is always exagerrating small things and he is considered to be next sivaji ganesan, and mgr. But rajini unlike kamalhasan, created his own image as a hero, and as a character artist, he is way ahead of this idiot actor kamalhasan. But kamalhasan, apart from tamil films, never can stay long in other indian cinemas with the exception of malayalam, somehow malayalam fans accepted every actor from hindi, tamil, malayalam, and telugu. In short, rajini is a practical actor like t.s. balaiah and kamalhasan is more of a hero from the starting to ending. Raj is also wrong in overestimating this bloody kamalhasan and underestimating super star. Entertaining hero, and a class character artist in the mould of t.s. balaiah (rajini).
LikeLike
keerthivasan
September 8, 2012
Rajini always acted for the masses, whenever they demand something, he is ready to give to them. Because an actor is a dog and he should act as per the interest of the public. Kamalhasan always thinks that he is god, which is not true. Rajini can do any type of character roles and entertaining heroism in the form of MGR. In short, he is no limited actor as kamalhasan. Kamal may be technically sound than Rajini, but Rajini can make the public happy by doing the roles which is very closely related to them and he can do it conviniently and not showing any discomfort.
LikeLike
Sagar Shankar Kale
July 18, 2016
Could anyone puh-lese help me find the video of Rajni’s biscuit ad 😦 This is how its mentioned in the above blog. I’m dying to find this out!!
“In the case of Rajinikanth, those thirty seconds came in the form of a television commercial for a brand of biscuit, wherein a couple of guys are watching a movie. On screen, a girl is chased by a couple of goons. Screaming â what else? â âbachao,â? she runs behind a hero, whoâs made to look like our hero. (The sunglasses, the costume, the hair, the accent â itâs perfect.) He pulls out his gun, discovers thereâs only one â sorry, âvunâ? â bullet in it. So he tosses a razor blade into the air and fires the gun in the direction of the blade, which naturally splits the bullet in two â one half for each baddie. When we cut back to the guys watching this movie, one exclaims to the other, âYeh cinema hai ya circus!â?”
LikeLike
keerthivasan
April 27, 2017
Both kamalahasan and rajinikanth are doing variety of roles. That is accepted, the way they project their characters and taking it to the public, is different. Whereas rajini, whatever character he is doing, whether commercial, or non-commercial or realistic movies, is ready to make the subject interesting, and editing portions quiet clear, and the public can easily understand what the subject is. He is also allowing other actors to show their talents, so that the movie is a team work with good story, good supporting actors and the main actor like rajini. In fact, kamalahasan lacking all these qualities. Kamalahasan is projecting himself as intelligent and wants to show that he is the demi-god and the whole tamil movie depending on kamalahasan. He is a bloody cheat and cheating the common public. He is a selfish idiot. He is no match for our great actor nadigar thilagam, who encouraged many actors like m.r. radha and our thalaivar super star and other actors. Rajini and sivaji ganesankku jay. Kamalahasan down down
LikeLike
Jyoti S Kumar
April 27, 2017
It’s the laugh that goes “aa… haa… haa…”? (To non-fans, these are just syllables, but true Rajini devotees, upon seeing this, will also replay in their minds’ ear the singsong intonation of this laughter.)
(guffawing).. indeed, that sing song intonation was playing in my head, before i started reading the words in the parantheses…
LikeLike