Is Kollywood getting the sequel formula?

Chennai: “I will be there wherever corruption takes place," Kamal Haasan’s character tersely says in the climax of Shankar’s ‘Indian’. Now, 23 years on, the ‘Indian thatha’ true to his word is returning this year in ‘Indian 2’.

The well-crafted climax with an open ended closure had lent itself to a logical sequel. But, the same can’t be said of most of the nine

sequels

that released in the past year. Sequels have turned out to be the new go-to formula and starting with ‘Charlie Chaplin 2’ in January, half a dozen more including ‘Indian 2’, ‘Thani Oruvan 2’ and ‘Uriyadi 2’.

Film critics, however, feel that instead of a natural progression in the narrative, many of these films are trying to cash in on the success of a previous film and ending up with a confusing stretched-out narrative.

Film critics say, making good sequels to a great original is hard work as expectations are also higher. Poor story planning, lack of continuity and having the same characters in the identical narrative structure without new conflicts can be disastrous as there will be nothing new to offer. Film critic V M S Subagunarajan feels poor sequels in Tamil are those that were made in desperation. It seemed ‘Sandakozhi 2’ was made in the hope that it would do well after the director’s previous film ‘Anjaan’ did poorly at the box office. "To make a successful film, some directors, after a series of flops, resort to making a sequel of their super-hit movie," says Subagunarajan. The actors too pick up sequels over an original project as they think it can bring them back to form.

"A sequel shouldn’t be made unless either the movie’s second part is an extension of its first part or there are unanswered questions that can be made into another story," he says. ‘Baahubali 1: The Beginning’ is a recent example where Kattapa killing Baahubali made the audience wonder why he did what he did. The director S S Rajamouli intelligently connected the plotlines and characters to ‘Baahubali 2: The Conclusion’ and satiated the curiosity of the audience.

But it seems not many fit the definition of a sequel except for the ‘2’ in the title. Unlike Hollywood, Kollywood often confuses genres like a prequel, sequel,

franchise

and spin-offs and ends up taking a muddled approach.

For instance, ‘Tamil Padam 2’, was praised as a standalone film for the humour between the hero and villain, but was criticised for confusing the storyline that it claimed to take forward from the 2010 film ‘Tamil Padam’.

For a sequel to work, recall value and connecting characters and plots must happen effortlessly, says a film writer. "A big hero, fat budget and grand promotions with the old movie name is what is happening in the industry. Nothing is going to work if there is no story to say at the end of the day," he says, citing the example of ‘Saamy Square’. "Vishwaroopam 2 was also poorly planned and had nothing new in its second part," he says.

Dhananjayan G, producer and founder-dean of BOFTA Film Institute says a director shouldn’t take a shortcut by naming a film as a part 2 of another film and cheat the audience by giving an unrelated story. "If it’s called as a sequel, it should have extension in story, characters and the concept," he says.

The viewers’ interest needs to be kept in mind, points out film historian S Theodore Baskaran. "Shankar’s ‘Indian’ clicked because the concept was new in the 1990s. Since then, Tamil cinema has seen many vigilante films. Hence, we can’t say ‘Indian 2’ will be a sure shot hit," says the film historian, who believes the sudden surge in sequels is a signal that Kollywood directors are running out of ideas. "There are a lot of good stories available that can be made into a great film. Instead of going behind the old ones for sequels, fresh ideas should emerge," he says.