The Kerala Story 2 Trailer Review: Representation, Responsibility & Reality
I wasn’t planning to share my thoughts on this. I usually prefer to observe conversations from a distance rather than jump into them immediately. But after seeing the way the makers responded to the criticism, standing firmly by the narrative despite the backlash, I felt it was important to add my perspective too. When public concerns are dismissed instead of meaningfully addressed, silence starts to feel like indifference. And this is one of those moments where staying silent didn’t sit right with me.
When a film carries the name of an entire state, it carries responsibility. A title like The Kerala Story isn’t just branding; it represents culture, people, history, and lived realities. It influences how audiences outside the state understand and perceive it. For many viewers who have never visited Kerala, this film could become a reference point. That’s why representation cannot be careless, selective, or driven purely by dramatic impact.
From the trailer, the narrative once again leans heavily on the “love jihad” angle, presenting it as if it reflects a larger truth about Kerala. That’s not a small allegation; it’s a serious and sensitive claim with social and political consequences. If a filmmaker chooses to explore something this controversial, it demands careful research, credible data, and balanced storytelling. Without that nuance, it risks turning a layered society into a one-dimensional narrative driven by fear rather than facts.
Kerala is not a monolith. It is home to multiple religions, cultures, languages, and ideologies coexisting for decades. Interfaith relationships, political disagreements, activism, and debate are all part of its social fabric, like in any progressive, democratic society. But isolating one narrative and presenting it as the defining story of the state creates a distorted image, especially for audiences who may not understand the ground reality.
One moment that stood out was the portrayal of beef being forced upon a character as a form of manipulation. In Kerala, beef is widely consumed across religions and communities. It is part of everyday food culture served in homes, restaurants, and celebrations. It is not a symbol of coercion or ideological dominance. Turning something culturally normal into a dramatic device to provoke shock or suspicion feels disconnected from reality.
The concern isn’t that cinema is addressing a difficult subject. Cinema absolutely should explore complex issues. The concern is when the storytelling lacks balance and begins to blur the line between individual incidents and collective identity. An isolated event, however tragic, does not automatically define an entire state.
Even the first film, which was presented as being based on true events, struggled in its execution. The portrayal of Shalini Unnikrishnan lacked authenticity. The styling, dialogue delivery, and emotional arc felt exaggerated rather than rooted in lived experience. When characters feel dramatized instead of real, the seriousness of the subject weakens. If a story claims to be factual or inspired by truth, then accuracy and grounded performances become even more crucial.
Another important aspect is perception. Cinema has the power to influence how millions of people think about a place they may never have visited. For many viewers outside Kerala, films like this may become their primary reference point. That’s why the narrative matters. When a story amplifies one controversial angle without showing the broader context, it risks reinforcing stereotypes rather than encouraging understanding.
This isn’t about denying that issues can exist anywhere. No society is perfect. Kerala, like every other state, has its share of challenges. Difficult conversations are necessary, and uncomfortable truths should never be ignored. But those conversations must be rooted in proportion and context. When one perspective is amplified repeatedly without acknowledging the larger social fabric, it begins to feel selective rather than balanced. Amplifying one angle and presenting it as the defining truth of an entire state is where discomfort begins because identity is always more complex than a single storyline.
Cinema is powerful. And with that power comes responsibility.
If you’re using a state’s name, represent it with honesty, depth, and accountability, not just drama.
👉 Don’t miss out—hit Follow or Subscribe to stay updated with weekly movie reviews and watchlists!
Comments
Post a Comment