TN Santhosh’s Kanithan resembles his mentor AR Murugadoss’s Thuppakki in a lot of ways. The heroes and the villains of both the movies keep playing mind-games. They don’t confront each other till the climax. The pub songs – etc., etc. – look similar. But Atharvaa’s film is not as grippy as Thuppaki due to the badly-written screenplay.

A potential script and actors are wasted because of an indifferent treatment in Miruthan.

After watching Bangalore Naatkal, the first question that pecks the mind is that what is the need for remaking films like Bangalore Days and Premam?

Thoongaavanam, which should have been done and dusted in 90 minutes, is dragged to fit the conventional time-expectations of the Indian audience. The French film’s script doesn’t stick with the three-part film grammar, which is prevalent here. The interval block becomes fatal to the flow of the film.

The problem with making a film based on history is the amount of liberty the filmmaker can afford to take, in order to tweak the history so that the film appeals to a wider audience. If the story and the characterisation breach a certain boundary, and if the infused fictional elements overshadow the facts, then the film fails to do justice to the genre. Rudhramadevi seems to have bumped into a similar problem.