Should Rajinikanth be made to pay up?

It is a case of theatre owners and those who distributed Lingaa expecting Rajinikanth to emulate his character in real life. In Lingaa, the king Lingeswaran played by the Superstar, gives up his wealth and position to ensure the people of his kingdom in pre-1947 India live safely after a dam is constructed. Cut to 2014, when the distributors want Rajini to give up a part of his wealth, to compensate for the losses they claim they have incurred.

The distributors contend that Lingaa that released on Rajini's birthday on December 12, did not do the kind of super business the Superstar's films are expected to. Not true, say those associated with the film. Lingaa was the highest Tamil grosser of 2014, reportedly earning Rs 100 crore. The movie made with a budget of Rs 120 crore reportedly sold its different rights for about Rs 200 crore. The filmmakers therefore say, the complainants are talking through their hat.

But the distributors narrate a different script. M Ruben, the distributor for the three districts of Tuticorin, Kanyakumari and Tirunelveli says he expected 100 per cent revenue but realised only 30 per cent. Arguing that he put in money banking on Rajinikanth, he wants the actor to compensate for the 70 per cent loss. There are 200 other distributors and exhibitors who relate a similar story and sat on a hunger strike in Chennai to appeal to the man in Poes Garden - Rajinikanth.

Over the last three weeks or so, these distributors and exhibitors have been asking Rajini to do what he did in 2002, when his Baba became a black sheep at the box-office. Then Rajini had paid distributors who had lost money. Now again the distributors say they invested in Lingaa only because the producer Rockline Venkatesh and director KS Ravikumar had been identified to helm this project by Rajini. Which is why they are telling Rajini, "Whatever the revenue and what we have paid, adjust the money and refund."

While the two sides indulge in verbal volleys, there is a lesson in this for the Tamil film industry. And for every other industry. That buyers need to take responsibility for their decision. A film is not like a white good that promises a particular quality. So if the showroom or online portal has delivered you a defective branded mobile phone or an ill-fitting shirt, you can exchange it or ask for a refund. But to expect every Rajinikanth film to be a money spinner without looking at whether the script had sufficient punch in it, makes bad investor sense. After all, even mutual funds proclaim that past performance is no indication of how the fund may perform in the future.

At the same time, filmmakers too are guilty of over-hyping their product, especially if it features someone like Rajini. The budgets are lavish and the risk factor goes up manifold too. In this case, it has scalded the distributors and theatre owners and burnt a hole in the carefully built-up superstar image of Rajinikanth.