A Blog on Cinema

A Circus called 2006 Awards


This time when we heard that [tag]Prithviraj[/tag] won the award for the best actor for his performance in Vasthavam, we were shocked. He did quite well in Vasthavam, but was it better than the performance of [tag]Mammotty[/tag] in Palunku, Karutha Pakshikal and Kaiyoppu or [tag]Murali[/tag]’s performance in Puli Janmam? In our opinion No. So why did the jury give the award to Prithviraj?

The reason, according to a jury member, is that Mammotty, Murali and [tag]Suresh Gopi[/tag] ((it’s not a joke, they were seriously considering his performance in Chintamani Kolacase) had already won [tag]National Awards[/tag] and so they were excluded from consideration. Our immediate thought was this: The awards are called [tag]2006 State Awards[/tag] and not 2006-State-Awards-Taking-Into-Consideration-All-Previous-Awards. 2006 State Awards should be just that. The Jury should watch the movies released in 2006 and decide who is the best actor among them. It should be a stateless transaction, like HTTP. If someone won National Awards since its inception in the early fifties that should not be held against him.

Who came up with this rule? Was this decided on the fly? Such rules did not exist previously for Mohanlal won the best actor last year and he has won the National Award more then once. There will be more respectability if the rules for the game are published before the game and not while the game is being played. Imagine that during a cricket match, the umpire decides that a new bowler can bowl from the middle of the pitch instead of the 22 yard line. This is something of that sort.

This looking at history is nothing new in Kerala awards. Last year [tag]Salim Kumar[/tag] won the second best award edging out [tag]Manoj K. Jayan[/tag] because he was seen as a comedy actor doing a serious role, while the jury thought there was nothing new in the superlative performance of Manoj. We have one request to the jury – ignore the past and the future of every actor. You are given a set of movies, so please watch them and make a decision. Ignore factors like how many national or international or Asianet Ujala awards this person has won. Ignore if he was a comedy actor or a woman before. Just look at the performance and not the actors horoscope.

We have no issues with Prithviraj winning the award due to his acting and by openly facing competition, but it loses his credibility when it is done by such rules which excludes other talents due to silly reasons.

Postscript: On hearing the news about the awards, Blessy said “The best film award is unfair. I was expecting an award. I didn’t get one. Also I was expecting an award for Mammootty. This is not fair, jury didn’t give awards according to my expectation”.
We agree with him. We were expecting an award for for the best website on Malayalam Cinema and we didn’t get one. This is not fair. The jury didn’t give awards according to our expectation. Booo Hoooo!


  1. Very true. The only consideration for the award should have been the performance of the actor in 2006.

    But again, once we have a jury and they give awards, we need to respect it. My opinion who is the best actor will be different from yours and that is exactly why we have a jury!

  2. I think that we need to have a weighted rating to compare the actors… Has Mammooty of KP, Palunku and Kaiyoppu bettered the Mammooty Malayalam industry knows and has Mohan Lal of Keerthi Chakra, Vadakkumnathan bettered the vintage Mohan Lal.. As for Lal I would say that it was not a stellar performance or the best of Lal in the above 2 movies… I saw those 2 movies and I felt I was watching Mohan Lal and not a Major Mahadevan or a Bharathan Pisharody…

    I havent seen the movies KP, Palunku and Kaiyoppu of Mammooty and nor have I seen Vaasthavam, so I am not in a position to say anything about them.. But can anyone who has seen them, give an unbiased weighted rating to Mammooka and Prithvi and tell who scores…

  3. Unnikrishnan,

    You are suggesting that we take into account historical evidence. My take is that we should not take into account earlier performances of Mammotty or Mohan Lal or anyone else. Awards are not there to see if they have improved in performance compared to previous years. The question of previous years itself should not arise. Each year is new and complete by itself.

    The goal of awards is not to give everyone the award by excluding previous winners by some reason. If such trend continues one day Narayanankutty will be the best actor and Valsala Menon the best actress.

  4. Considering historical data while deciding awards may be good in promoting newer talent.

    But then why not make that clear/public before calling for entries. Have a clearly defined rule and make that public. Then you don’t have to embarrass the whole process of award selection.

  5. The criteria behind this awards are totally foolish. Here are the reasons: (1) Prithvi did his best in “Vasthavam” and he should get award if he is better than other actors. Rajeevkumar should openly say that they gave award to Prithvi because his acting was better than others. Instead of this he insulted Prithvi by commenting that they didn’t compare him with other actors. So technically and logically this decision is bad.
    (2) The encouragement factor: Do you think awards are for encouragement?
    Never… is your foolishness to think that awards are for encouragement. Awards are certificates of a finished work or performance. The committee is accepting your excellence in performance. Everyone knows you have talent, but you don’t have anything to show, then how can an intelligent jury give you an award?
    How can you say that jury should give me award because I am young, I have talent and I have a good future…I need encouragement etc… Will they stop giving awards to Adoor Gopalakrishnan from here onwards? Its just like asking Sachin Tendulkar not to score runs for giving chances to new comer Uthappa…. Its just like asking P T Usha to run slowly to give the medal to another athlete!

    (3) What did the jury mean by second best actor/actress? Logically second position means the position just after first position. In the final round there were only Prithvi and Sreeni. Prithvi got Best actor award. So naturally Sreeni is the second best actor. But they gave award to Saikumar. What is the basis of this selection? Do the second best actor act in different style to get this award?

    Same thing happened in the case of actress. In the final there were only Urvashi and Khushboo.. Urvashi got the award…and naturally Khushboo is the second best…. But they gave award to Padma… They have to announce the parameters they have used to give this award.

    (4) How can they give awards to Prithvi and Urvashi at the same time?
    They gave award to Prithvi for encouragement. So they should take the same criteria for actress also. They should give encouragement to Padma for “Karutha Pakshikal” or Sindhu Menon for “Puli janmam”.
    They gave award to Urvashi. She is an established actress. And it was a average or below average performance by Urvashi. Rajeevkumar openly said that they didn’t see any better performance from Mammootty or Lal this year compared to their old performances. Same principle should apply for Urvashi also… Do they think her performance in this year is better than her old performances ?

    It clearly shows their double standard……….. The government should stop this kind awards or should select knowledgeable people as Jury members.

  6. Pingback: varnachitram » Blog Archive » A Tale of Two Film Industries

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.

Get Adobe Flash player