There's some serious upvoting for this film here on IMDb; if not for a weighted averaging of the film's rating by viewers, this would be the number one movie of all time having just come out this year, and that by a wide margin. I thought the movie was good for it's portrayal of corrupt authorities taken down by a dedicated attorney, it hit on many of the points that social justice advocates clamor for here in this country. Based on a true story, one can only marvel at the dedication of a man like Chandru (Suriya), who utilized every bit of means and cunning to humiliate the brutal police authorities and their corrupt political allies. Many times it's a difficult story to watch, as the beatings and punishment doled out by district police against members of lower castes approach grotesquely inhumane treatment. Chandru's efforts eventually pay off, and it was inspiring to see him honored by the citizens he represented at the finale, reminiscent of that final scene of Gregory Peck in "To Kill A Mockingbird".
One note of caution when coming to the IMDb title page - the names of characters listed in the credits don't match the corresponding identification of characters in the film. As an example, actress Lijo Mol Jose portrayed the agonized wife Sengoni in the credits, but in the film, captioning described her as 'Sannamma'. I'm not versed well enough in Indian nomenclature to know if that's a result of translation or some other factor. I would also question the narrative offered at the end of the story that stated the attorney portrayed in the picture was responsible for ninety six thousand cases in six years. To do that, he would have to have been involved with over forty cases per day, every single day for six years, with no days off!
One note of caution when coming to the IMDb title page - the names of characters listed in the credits don't match the corresponding identification of characters in the film. As an example, actress Lijo Mol Jose portrayed the agonized wife Sengoni in the credits, but in the film, captioning described her as 'Sannamma'. I'm not versed well enough in Indian nomenclature to know if that's a result of translation or some other factor. I would also question the narrative offered at the end of the story that stated the attorney portrayed in the picture was responsible for ninety six thousand cases in six years. To do that, he would have to have been involved with over forty cases per day, every single day for six years, with no days off!