The film industry is witnessing the turbulent decline of A.R. Murugadoss, a director once synonymous with mega-hits like Ghajini and Thuppakki. His current trajectory is defined not just by a string of commercial and critical failures, but by a controversial pattern of publicly shifting accountability away from his own creative choices. This growing crisis, mirrored by other veterans, signals that the era of the 2000s Kollywood giants may be drawing to a close.
The Accountability Crisis: From Darbar to Sikandar
Murugadoss’s creative downturn gained significant speed after his Hindi film Akira (2016), but the colossal disappointment of the Rajinikanth-starrer, Darbar (2020), was the true flashpoint. Instead of acknowledging the film’s glaring narrative flaws, Murugadoss publicly attributed the underperformance to external factors, specifically citing the “unmet expectation” stemming from Rajinikanth’s political aspirations. Industry sources are quick to point out that he has “never once openly admitted that he was the reason for Darbar’s failure.”
This pattern of deflection is most acutely felt by his leading actors. Murugadoss controversially suggested that the script of Darbar, originally a pure father-daughter story, was “spoilt” by the commercial necessity of adding a romantic track and songs after Nayanthara was cast. This deflection is particularly damaging given Nayanthara’s prior allegations about her experience on his 2005 film, Ghajini, where she claimed her role was substantially altered and she was “exploited,” reduced to being portrayed primarily for glamour and outfits. Such historical context adds a disturbing layer to the director’s current propensity to blame his stars.
The blame game continued with the failure of his Salman Khan-starrer, Sikandar. When the film was universally panned for its “non-existent story” and “archaic 80s feel,” Murugadoss publicly blamed the poor quality on Salman Khan’s late arrival on set due to security and health concerns. This drew sharp industry rebuke, with critics rightly questioning, “Why did he not know when Salman would arrive? He blamed Salman instead of writing a proper script.”
This lack of commitment and accountability has concrete repercussions: a major project with Vijay was reportedly shelved due to conflicts, and Murugadoss abruptly halted a film with Sivakarthikeyan mid-way to pursue Sikandar, showcasing a questionable professional commitment to projects and partners.
Creative Stagnation: The Specter of Plagiarism
Murugadoss’s consistent over-reliance on remakes—from the Hindi Ghajini to Akira (a Mouna Guru remake) and Holiday (Thuppakki’s Hindi version)—has exposed a deep-seated lack of original content. This has led critics to sarcastically dub him “Muruga Nolan, not Christopher Nolan.” This moniker is a scathing critique that implies he merely mimics the scale of great directors without possessing their core creative genius or humility. The criticism is further solidified by the settled, but unforgettable, ‘bounded script’ controversy surrounding his hit film Kaththi (2014), where writer Gopi Nainar was eventually compensated for plagiarism. This stain on his creative integrity directly parallels his subsequent string of failures.
The Systemic Crisis: Why Veteran Directors are Outdated
Murugadoss’s turbulence is part of a larger, systemic crisis affecting his generation. The struggles of S. Shankar, who has similarly lost his ‘Midas Touch’ with recent flops like Indian 2 and Game Changer, highlight a shared problem: an inability to resonate with the Gen Z audience.
The “Outdated Formula” of the 2000s—defined by extreme grandeur and excessive melodrama—is now actively rejected by younger viewers. Influenced by fast-paced global content and OTT platforms, Gen Z audiences demand realistic, succinct, and novel narratives. They simply no longer tolerate the forced commercial elements, unnecessary songs, and theatrical action sequences that were staples of the veterans’ cinema. As a result, when directors like Murugadoss and Shankar cling to their old styles, their recent large-scale films are often reduced to being average entertainers or outright disasters.
The contrast is made brutally clear by the success of Atlee, who served as an assistant director to Shankar on films like Enthiran and Nanban. Atlee has mastered the new-age pulse, delivering pan-Indian blockbusters like Jawan. His rise underscores the urgent need for his veteran contemporaries to evolve.
Conclusion: Reinvent or Retire
The parallel struggles of A.R. Murugadoss and S. Shankar mark a critical juncture for Kollywood’s veterans. Their repeated setbacks confirm that star power can no longer compensate for outdated storytelling. The Gen Z audience has effectively rendered the traditional formula obsolete.
For directors like Murugadoss, the path forward is difficult: he must demonstrate the humility to reinvent, shed his reliance on formulaic tropes, and seek fresh, current writers. His pattern of blaming actors from Rajinikanth to Salman Khan, and the ethical stain of plagiarism, have severely compromised his standing. Failure to adapt will see him permanently relegated to the sidelines, confirming that the industry is no longer forgiving of those who prioritize spectacle and past glory over evolution and substance.
