• Revitalising stories for modern audiences

In Sri Lanka, the legend of Sinhabahu holds a significant place in cultural folklore, capturing the imagination of generations. This timeless tale, famously retold by playwright Ediriweera Sarachchandra in his acclaimed play ‘Sinhabahu,’ draws inspiration from the ancient chronicles of the ‘Mahavamsa’. Over the years, this myth has undergone various interpretations, with Sarachchandra’s rendition standing out as the most renowned. 

Recently, this captivating narrative received a fresh cinematic adaptation from esteemed director Somaratne Dissanayake. Titled ‘Sinhabahu,’ the film hit theatres on 11 April, showcasing Dissanayake’s vision and creativity. With the director also penning the screenplay, the movie has garnered praise from audiences and critics alike, breathing new life into this cherished legend.

Catching the film in theatres upon its release, we were delighted to experience the latest adaptation of the Sinhabahu legend on the big screen. Despite our familiarity with the tale from childhood, the film offered a fresh perspective that captivated us from start to finish. It was quite the experience to witness the story unfold in a manner that felt both familiar and entirely new. 

This cinematic rendition served as a shining example of revitalising ancient legends for contemporary audiences. As avid enthusiasts of this timeless tale and its many retellings, we found ourselves immersed in a vibrant tapestry of storytelling, a testament to the enduring power of myth and imagination.

The story 

For those unfamiliar with the legend of Sinhabahu, it is chronicled in the ‘Mahavamsa,’ detailing the story of the renowned king from ancient India. He was the father of Vijaya of Sri Lanka and ruled Sinhapura. Born to Suppadevi, a princess of the Vanga Kingdom, Sinhabahu’s father was a lion who abducted the princess, as per the ‘Mahavamsa’. His hands and feet resembled a lion’s paws. 

At 16, Sinhabahu escaped his father’s den with his mother and sister, Sinhasivali, arriving in the capital of Vanga. Later, he slew his father for a reward but refused the throne of Vanga, opting to establish the city of Sinhapura in Lāta. Living there with his sister-consort Sinhasivali, they had 32 children, including Vijaya and Sumitta.

In director Dissanayake’s new cinematic interpretation, there are certain story beats that he, as the screenwriter, has opted to alter. Speaking to Brunch, he shared the specific changes and his personal reasons for them: “This is a reimagining of a legend which is essentially literature. We all are aware that Sinhabahu is shrouded in myth and legend; it is more literature than it is historical fact. 

“As creatives, it is our right to take a beloved story such as this and make our own reimaginings. What I have done is reimagine my interpretation of this story; this is how I see Sinhabahu being retold in the medium of film.”

The filmmaker expressed his intention to adapt the story in a way that made it believable on the big screen. “In the legend, the beast – or the lion – is an actual animal with claws, sharp teeth, and a mane; therefore, the relationship that the queen had with him is one of bestiality. 

“In my reimagining, I have portrayed him as a savage warrior king who resides in the wilderness, with his territory as his kingdom, making it a human relationship. I believe that this is a more digestible and believable version of the story and that it allows for smoother immersion in the film’s narrative.”

Dissanayake emphasised on a significant change in subverting the incestuous storyline between Sinhabahu and Sinhasivali. “I decided to reinterpret that story and not portray the incestuous storyline, in order to make it a more palatable reimagining of the story,” he explained. 

However, he clarified: “This is my reimagining and in no way do I declare that it is the only way to see this story or the right way. I do not denounce the previous tellings of this story nor do I mean for this to be the only way to tell this story moving forward. This is just my version – it is only a version.”

The production 

Dissanayake revealed that the production had faced challenges, particularly with the intention to feature the late Jackson Anthony, who unfortunately passed away. He said: “The passing of Jackson Anthony was a hard pill to swallow, not only because it was a loss for our film but also for the entire Sri Lankan cinema industry.”

He added: “He was a prolific artist, appearing before the public in versatile forms; as a director, producer, singer, screenwriter, television host, novelist, columnist, lyricist, historian, and traveller. He was a multi-talented, versatile individual and his loss will be felt in every industry he graced.”

Dissanayake said that when Anthony had been bedridden, it had been his wish for his two sons, who were already in the film, to continue, with his eldest son taking on his role. “What Akila did was not replace him but rather carry out his father’s wishes to effectively tell this story,” said the director, adding that they had not felt the loss as keenly because Akila stepped up to the plate.

The director also pointed to the emotionally-charged atmosphere following Anthony’s passing and the story parallels. The Sinhabahu story, after all, largely chronicles the relationship between a father and son. Given that the two sons were now portraying the father and son roles, exploring the story of patricide, there were some emotional moments between the brothers. 

“It is only human to have emotional moments, especially given these story parallels, and we did experience such intense moments. I am hopeful that I was able to handle those moments with grace and empathy, allowing my actors to feel what they needed to feel while delivering their performances,” he said.

Audience feedback

While watching the film at the Roxy Cinema, Brunch had a chance to speak with some audience members. Many had enjoyed it, although there were mixed feelings about the costumes. “The costumes, especially those of the royal women, were a bit funny – the crop tops and bra straps were distracting,” one person noted. 

Another viewer shared their surprise, saying: “I came expecting a good laugh, but the trailer didn’t do justice to the film’s strengths. The dialogue and performances were the real highlights. The script was poetic and reminiscent of the Sinhabahu we know, but the fresh take was very welcome.”

From our perspective, this film was a surprising hit. We did not expect to warm up to the poetic dialogue, thinking it might be a distraction since it was an unfamiliar speaking style for us. However, we were proven wrong. The dialogue turned out to be the best part of the film, with the performances not far behind. If you have been hesitant after watching the trailer, we definitely recommend seeing this film. It could be an interesting cultural reset.