Why is ‘The Kerala Story 2’ facing backlash even before release? This explainer breaks down the trailer controversy, political reactions, court intervention, and the scene that ignited the debate.
Screengrab from the trailer
Just when you thought the drama around ‘The Kerala Story’ had finally cooled down, its sequel has arrived with the subtlety of a loud thunderclap. One week before its release, ‘The Kerala Story 2’ is trending for political arguments, legal petitions, angry statements, and a trailer that has sparked fierce debate across the country. The chatter is everywhere: social media, TV panels, political speeches, and now even the courtrooms.
The film, directed by Kamakhya Narayan Singh and produced by Vipul Amrutlal Shah, claims to tell a ‘disturbing’ story. It shows young Hindu women falling in love, entering interfaith marriages, and then allegedly being abused, stripped of rights, and forced to convert to Islam. That claim alone has divided audiences sharply. Supporters say it exposes hidden truths. Critics insist it pushes dangerous one-sided narrative.
Advertisement
So what exactly has triggered this fresh controversy? Why is one particular scene being discussed again and again? And how does this sequel connect to the stormy legacy of the first film? Let’s unpack the drama, point by point.
Advertisement
Everything began when the makers dropped the trailer earlier this week. And oh, it did not quietly slip into the internet, it exploded.
The trailer introduces three Hindu women from different parts of India. Each of them falls in love with Muslim men and chooses marriage against her family’s wishes. What follows, according to the film’s narrative, is a slow and painful change. The women are shown drifting away from their customs, losing contact with their roots, and eventually feeling trapped inside violent and loveless marriages.
The film presents itself as cautionary tale. It positions the story as a warning, especially aimed at young women. The central message hinted in the trailer: cross-faith romance, the film suggests, can lead to loss of identity, faith and freedom.
Supporters of the film argue that it tries to create awareness about forced conversions and abusive relationships hidden behind romance. Critics, however, strongly disagree. They say the trailer paints interfaith marriages as automatically suspicious and dangerous, which they believe can deepen communal mistrust.
That difference in interpretation is exactly where the controversy begins.
Every controversy usually has one moment that becomes the emotional centre. Here, that moment is a scene where a Hindu woman is shown being forcibly fed beef.
This image quickly became the most talked-about visual from the trailer. In India, beef consumption is tied to religion, politics, identity. Over years, disputes around beef have led to protests, violence and legal cases.
Critics say the scene is deliberately designed to provoke emotional outrage and create fear around interfaith marriages.
The debate moved from social media to politics very quickly. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan openly criticised the film, calling it “false propaganda” and “poisonous.” In a Facebook statement, he questioned why such works, which he believes spread division and hatred, should be allowed public screening.
He argued that the film harms Kerala’s long-standing reputation for communal harmony and secular values.
According to him, the story portrays even consensual interfaith marriages as acts of coercion. He also warned that forces trying to disturb peace in the state are like “enemies” of Kerala’s social fabric.
Soon after the political criticism, the issue reached the courts. A petition was filed in the Kerala High Court by a biologist named Sreedev Namboodiri, challenging the film’s release.
The court then issued notices to the Information & Broadcasting Ministry, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), and the film’s producer. The case is scheduled to be heard on February 24.
Questions are being asked: Did the censor board exercise proper due diligence? Can films dealing with sensitive themes be separated from political consequences? And what happens when a film directly names a state in its title?
Interestingly, the film has already received a U/A certificate from the CBFC. This means it is cleared for public viewing with parental guidance for young audiences.
Makers have welcomed this certification saying it allows teenagers and families to watch the film. But this approval has sparked another debate. Critics wonder whether such sensitive and politically charged themes should be accessible to younger viewers.
Another point critics highlight is film’s title ‘The Kerala Story 2’. Narrative claims to include incidents from across India. But title focuses on one specific state.
For critics, this territorial naming carries strong political implications. They believe it unfairly associates Kerala’s image with communal tension and forced conversions.
For filmmakers however, title reflects what they describe as documented cases linked to the state’s social context.
To understand why the sequel is so controversial, we need to revisit the first film, ‘The Kerala Story’.
The original film followed a young woman who was allegedly manipulated into religious conversion and radicalisation. Her journey reportedly took her from Kerala to Syria, where she was shown being forced to join the terrorist group ISIS. The lead role was played by Adah Sharma.
The film faced strong criticism. Many reviewers called its screenplay illogical and accused it of inaccurately portraying Kerala. Several critics labelled it propaganda. It also faced protests and legal battles especially in Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu.
But the movie did well at box office. It earned ₹303.97 crore worldwide, making it the ninth-highest-grossing Hindi film of 2023. This success itself became controversial because political parties got involved. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party heavily promoted the film during the Karnataka assembly election campaign.
So the sequel is not entering neutral space. It is arriving on shoulders of a film that was both hugely successful and heavily criticised.
The controversy around the first film grew even bigger when it won two awards at the 71st National Film Awards: Best Direction for Sudipto Sen and Best Cinematography.
The awards were not quietly celebrated. They triggered sharp reactions from political leaders in Kerala. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan again criticised the recognition, saying it promoted misinformation and insulted India’s secular cinema tradition.
Opposition leaders condemned awards alleging political bias.
At heart of this controversy lies unresolved question. Is ‘The Kerala Story 2’ trying to highlight uncomfortable truths? Or is it reinforcing communal stereotypes?
Cinema has always explored political and sensitive themes. But this film sits at complicated intersection: interfaith relationships, religious identity, state image, contemporary politics. Each topic is already sensitive on its own.
Supporters say films should tell difficult stories and raise awareness even if that is uncomfortable. Critics respond that storytelling should not oversimplify complex social realities or create fear around specific communities.
This clash of perspectives is making sure that this debate will likely continue for long, long time after film’s release.
Advertisement
