Versions-Hindi, Tamil and Telugu . IN DVDs subtitles may be available Actors: Abhishek Bachan, Iswarya Rai, Madhavan, Vidya Balan and Mithun Chakrvarthy.

Direction: Maniratnam.

Maniratanam is always fascinated by morally ambiguous characters and such morally ambiguous characters are the main protagonists in some of his films. His Thalapathi is of a mafia pair. Nayakan is on Bombay slum don. Guru is on robber baron. The screen play is excellent and the production values are of international standard. The photography is a delight to see and the music by Rahman was as usual full of rhythm. The first song “Nannari” by the female protagonist is much better than “Jodi” song later. Iswarya Rai – herself and her dancing are feasts to the eye. Bachan runs through the role competently. The cameo roles of Madhavan, vidya Balan and Mithun chkravarthy are powerful.

----SPOILERS HERE I have a quarrel with the denouement. Guru was hauled up before a commission based on the exposure by the newspaper baron (Mithun) and his journalist (Madhavan). Guru gives a reply to the inquiry in spite of his stroke; what you can derogatorily call “Bashan”. He starts “another man broke the law years back but I am not a Mahatma”. He has the audacity to compare himself with Gandhi. Gandhi broke the laws which he perceived unjust to the Indians not surreptitiously but openly giving notice to the government, Gandhi did not use either strong arm or soft arm tactics on the officers to get his way. Guru also gives a populist reason that earlier in his life getting rich has been only for rich people and the establishment is jealous that an ordinary middle class man tries to become rich. He also spouts the highly populist view of third world corporations beating the first world corporations. At the beginning of the inquiry Guru’s wife who speaks for Guru requests the commission chairman to talk in Tamil (I saw the Tamil version of the film) as she and her husband are village people and do not know much English. What hypocrisy? Ultimately the inquiry commission sets him free with a fine of only 63 lakhs. In the final scene Guru claims that his empire belongs to the shareholders who also became rich in the process and his business has become the top in India and will also become a top class organization in the World.

This is all usual libertarian crap from the mouth of a corrupt businessman. This film gives wrong message to the youth. It is OK to break the laws as long as you are successful. At least in Nayakan there is a suspicion of some remorse. At the end of the film Nayakan, his grandchild asks him “are you a good man or a bad man”. Nayakan replies “I do not know”. Guru succeeded during the environment of License Raj. Then the government (read high level officers) had hand in all matters and it is therefore necessary and easier to corrupt morally weak officers. Because of this also Guru did not face any competition. . But once liberalization started and competition increased I don’t think if Guru has now started his business with his morally ambiguous views, he would have survived. It is during this liberal period great organizations like Infosys, TCS, Wipro, Satyam Bajaj Auto, TVS etc came up fast with perhaps minimum shenanigans.

GURU is an excellent film with a wrong pernicious message.

----spoilers end