The journey of Salliyargal, an Eelam Tamil film backed by producer Suresh Kamatchi, has become a telling reflection of the mounting challenges faced by politically rooted, content-driven cinema in today’s theatrical ecosystem. Originally slated for a New Year theatrical release, the film failed to secure adequate screens, sparking outrage and a broader debate about access, gatekeeping, and artistic marginalization within the exhibition sector. After weeks of uncertainty, Salliyargal has now premiered on the OTT platform Aha, marking a bittersweet milestone for a film that struggled to reach audiences through conventional means.
Produced under Kamatchi’s V House Productions, Salliyargal is set against the backdrop of the Tamil Eelam war and follows the harrowing experiences of doctors operating from underground bunkers, risking their lives to save both comrades and enemies. Despite its socially conscious narrative and historical relevance, the film’s theatrical prospects were effectively stifled—an outcome that Kamatchi and several industry voices have described as deeply troubling.
“The Stone That Was Once Rejected…”
Announcing the film’s OTT premiere, Suresh Kamatchi took to his X (formerly Twitter) handle with a pointed message: “The stone that was once rejected becomes the cornerstone of the house.” The statement, layered with symbolism, was a clear reference to the film’s rejection by major theatre chains during its planned theatrical release.
Kamatchi had earlier voiced strong criticism after Salliyargal was allotted only 27 theatres—an almost symbolic release by industry standards—effectively ensuring that the film would struggle to find its audience. According to the producer, even this limited release came after persistent efforts, requests, and discussions with theatre owners and exhibitors.
“PVR, in particular, did not allot even a single screen,” Kamatchi had said in a public statement weeks earlier. “Despite repeated requests and holding talks, we did not get any. When we called, they didn’t even pick up the phone.”
His frustration was not merely about box office prospects but about what he perceived as a systemic denial of opportunity—one that disproportionately affects films without star power or massive promotional budgets.
From Theatres to Streaming: A Forced Transition
With theatrical avenues effectively blocked, Salliyargal initially found a temporary release on the lesser-known OTT Plus platform. The intent, Kamatchi said, was to allow audiences to watch the film and share feedback, ensuring that the work did not vanish into obscurity.
Now, with its official premiere on Aha, the film has gained access to a much wider digital audience. Kamatchi also confirmed that Salliyargal will soon be available on Prime Video, further expanding its reach beyond regional and linguistic boundaries.
While the OTT release ensures visibility, it also underscores a difficult truth: for many filmmakers today, streaming platforms are no longer an alternative choice but a last refuge.
Allegations of “Modern Untouchability” in Cinema
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the Salliyargal controversy is Kamatchi’s sharp critique of theatre chains and industry associations. He described the film’s treatment as a form of “modern untouchability”—a phrase that resonated deeply within film circles and on social media.
“Who are they to decide that a film won’t run?” he asked. “Give the theatre. If the film doesn’t work, remove it. That’s fine. But have they even watched the film before deciding? No. Then on what basis do they refuse to allot theatres at all?”
These remarks highlight a growing concern among filmmakers that exhibition decisions are increasingly driven by commercial calculations that leave little room for risk, diversity, or political nuance. Films rooted in social history, regional identity, or ideological perspectives often find themselves sidelined in favor of big-budget, star-driven releases.
A Film About the Tamil People, For the Tamil People
At the heart of the controversy lies Salliyargal’s subject matter. Set during the Tamil Eelam conflict, the film focuses on humanitarian courage rather than spectacle—depicting doctors who work in secret bunkers, providing medical aid amidst relentless danger.
Kamatchi emphasized that the film was made “about the Tamil people and the Eelam struggle, a film meant for our people.” That such a film struggled to find theatrical space within Tamil Nadu, he argued, raises uncomfortable questions about whose stories are deemed worthy of exhibition.
The producer’s comments struck a chord not only because of their emotional intensity, but because they reflect a sentiment shared by many independent filmmakers who feel increasingly marginalized by a system that prioritizes scale over substance.
Industry Voices Join the Debate
The issue surrounding Salliyargal did not remain isolated. Filmmaker Karthik Subbaraj weighed in on the broader situation, describing the current climate as “tough times for cinema.” Referencing both Jana Nayagan and Salliyargal, Subbaraj called for collective introspection within the industry, urging stakeholders to “save art and cinema.”
His remarks underline a growing concern that the theatrical space—once seen as a democratic arena for storytelling—is shrinking for films that challenge conventions or address politically sensitive themes.
As multiplex chains dominate urban markets and single-screen theatres continue to decline, access to screens has become a form of power—one that can determine whether a film lives or disappears without a trace.
Cast and Craft: A Film Built on Performance and Purpose
Salliyargal features a strong ensemble cast, including Sathyadevi, Karunaas, Thirumurugan, Janaki, Mahendran, Nagaraj, Priya, Anand Sounderarajan, Mohan, and Santhosh. Rather than relying on star personas, the film emphasizes grounded performances that serve the story’s emotional and ethical weight.
Technically, the film is supported by a dedicated crew. Music is composed by Ken and Eshwar, whose score underscores the tension and humanity of the narrative. Cinematography by Sibi Sathasivam captures the claustrophobic intensity of bunker life, while CM Elangovan’s editing maintains a taut, immersive pace.
The creative choices reflect the film’s intent: not to sensationalize war, but to explore the moral resilience of those who choose to heal in the midst of destruction.
OTT as a Double-Edged Sword
While the film’s OTT release ensures accessibility, it also highlights a paradox facing contemporary cinema. Streaming platforms have democratized distribution, allowing niche films to find global audiences. At the same time, they have inadvertently normalized the idea that certain films do not “deserve” theatrical space.
For filmmakers like Kamatchi, this raises an uncomfortable question: is OTT becoming a convenient escape route for an exhibition system unwilling to engage with difficult or unconventional narratives?
The success or reception of Salliyargal on Aha and Prime Video may yet prove that audiences are willing—perhaps eager—to engage with such stories, provided they are given the chance.
A Larger Crisis of Access and Equity
The Salliyargal episode is not an isolated incident but part of a broader structural challenge. As theatrical economics become increasingly risk-averse, films without star power, franchise value, or massive marketing budgets struggle to secure screens—even before audiences have the opportunity to decide their fate.
This raises fundamental questions about artistic equity, cultural responsibility, and the future of cinema as a medium for diverse voices.
If exhibition decisions continue to be dictated solely by perceived commercial viability, the industry risks losing its narrative breadth—and with it, its relevance.
Conclusion: A Film That Refused to Disappear
Despite missing its intended theatrical release, Salliyargal has refused to disappear quietly. Its journey—from limited screen allocation to OTT release, from industry rejection to public debate—has turned it into something larger than a single film.
It has become a case study in the struggles faced by meaningful cinema in a market-driven ecosystem, and a reminder that stories rooted in identity, history, and conscience still matter.
As Salliyargal finds new life on Aha and prepares for its Prime Video release, its fate now rests with audiences. Whether embraced or debated, the film has already achieved something significant: it has forced the industry to confront uncomfortable truths about access, power, and whose stories are allowed to be seen.
In an era of “tough times for cinema,” as Karthik Subbaraj aptly put it, Salliyargal stands as both a warning and a testament—to the resilience of filmmakers who continue to tell difficult stories, even when the doors to the big screen are firmly shut.