In Aadukalam, you can notice traces of influence from directors like Michael Haneke — not heavily, but it did remind me of Michael Haneke’s Caché (Hidden). Haneke’s films also tend to depict human nature and violence through similar kinds of metaphors. It’s somewhat reminiscent of Amores Perros by Alejandro González Iñárritu as well. In that film, there were scenes of dogs being forced to fight each other — though I don’t remember all the details. Thinking about that, I looked it up and found an interview in which Aadukalam’s director, Vetrimaaran, mentioned that the idea for the film came after watching Amores Perros. He said that if it was possible to film dogs fighting each other, then why couldn’t one film roosters fighting each other? That thought was the starting point for writing his film. The narrative structure isn’t the typical straightforward sequence — instead, it uses a fractured storytelling style with around three or four timelines running in parallel, with the main narrative woven through them. Because of this approach, combined with the fast-paced scenes, the film never feels boring for the audience. The story portrays familiar, everyday ways of life and their flaws, using rooster fights as a metaphor. And because of this central theme, the characters in the film experience both good and bad outcomes. For them, rooster fighting is life itself — if you want to understand or define their lives, you have to see the rooster fights. The most striking thing is that, for these people, personal honor, social status, or even safety are secondary. What truly matters is rooster fighting. The hierarchy and status they care about are those determined by these fights. In a way, rooster fighting is itself a form of social structure. After watching the film, I felt that in real life too, the things we put all our strength, energy, sweat, and blood into — are they really beneficial for us? Do they truly bring peace to our hearts?
In Aadukalam, you can notice traces of influence from directors like Michael Haneke — not heavily, but it did remind me of Michael Haneke’s Caché (Hidden). Haneke’s films also tend to depict human nature and violence through similar kinds of metaphors. It’s somewhat reminiscent of Amores Perros by Alejandro González Iñárritu as well. In that film, there were scenes of dogs being forced to fight each other — though I don’t remember all the details. Thinking about that, I looked it up and found an interview in which Aadukalam’s director, Vetrimaaran, mentioned that the idea for the film came after watching Amores Perros. He said that if it was possible to film dogs fighting each other, then why couldn’t one film roosters fighting each other? That thought was the starting point for writing his film. The narrative structure isn’t the typical straightforward sequence — instead, it uses a fractured storytelling style with around three or four timelines running in parallel, with the main narrative woven through them. Because of this approach, combined with the fast-paced scenes, the film never feels boring for the audience. The story portrays familiar, everyday ways of life and their flaws, using rooster fights as a metaphor. And because of this central theme, the characters in the film experience both good and bad outcomes. For them, rooster fighting is life itself — if you want to understand or define their lives, you have to see the rooster fights. The most striking thing is that, for these people, personal honor, social status, or even safety are secondary. What truly matters is rooster fighting. The hierarchy and status they care about are those determined by these fights. In a way, rooster fighting is itself a form of social structure. After watching the film, I felt that in real life too, the things we put all our strength, energy, sweat, and blood into — are they really beneficial for us? Do they truly bring peace to our hearts?
