The much-awaited ‘The Kerala Story’ was released in theatres on May 5. The movie has been a talking point for quite some time due to its content, as it follows the story of a group of non-Muslim women converted and recruited to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
The movie has received mixed reactions from critics and viewers alike. However, it was reported that the movie had a decent Day 1 Box Office opening, where it collected around Rs 7.5 – 8 crore. The movie also managed better opening figures compared to 2022’s ‘The Kashmir Files, which collected about Rs 3.5 crores on opening day.
It is pertinent to note that the movie was released alongside Marvel’s ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3’ but managed better opening figures compared to the Marvel movie. It was reported that the ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3’ raked in about Rs 7 crores on Day 1 in India.
‘The Kerala Story’ also managed a better opening figure compared to most of this year’s big starrers releases, including Selfiee, Bhediya, Cirkus and Shehzada. Furthermore, the movie is estimated to be the fifth-highest-opening film of this year.
‘The Kerala Story’ stars Adah Sharma, Yogita Bihani, Sonia Balani, and Siddhi Idnani in the lead roles. The film is directed by Sudipto Sen and produced by Vipul Amrutlal Shah’s movie production house.
In the film, actress Adah Sharma plays the role of Fathima Ba, a Hindu Malayali nurse who went missing from Kerala and was recruited by ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) after being forced to convert to Islam.
Backlash against The Kerala Story
The movie faced severe backlash attempting to prevent its release. Kerala’s ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF), the opposition United Democratic Front (UDF), and other Left and Islamic organisations spoke out against the release of ‘The Kerala Story’ in the State and called for a ban. The Kerala Congress spoke out against the film and told people to boycott it.
It is pertinent to note that the movie’s collections raked in a decent amount even though its screenings were cancelled, on the opening day, in several Kerala districts after protests against the move. Two shows that were listed to be screened were cancelled in Kochi. The theatre owners at Kochi’s Lulu Mall, PVR Cinemas, and Centre Square Mall decided not to screen the film. However, they’ve not stated any reasons for not screening the film.
Furthermore, other movie theatres in Kollam, Pathanamthitta, Kottayam, Idukki, Kannur, and Wayanad districts have made similar decisions to not screen the movie. While theatres and distributors had agreed to show the movie on 50 screens throughout Kerala; however, many pulled out right before the release. Thereafter, the makers decided to run the film on 17 screens. However, it is not yet known how many theatres will show the movie.
Movie’s Release Challenged in Court
On May 5, the Kerala High Court declined to pass any interim order on pleas against the release of the movie “The Kerala Story”. The court also recorded the statements of the producers who will be removing the teaser from all social media handles for claiming 32,000 non-Muslim women were converted and forced to join the terror organisation ISIS.
While hearing the plea demanding a stay on the release of the movie, the bench of Justice N. Nagaresh and Justice Sophy Thomas stated that they had watched the trailer and teaser of the film in an open court. The makers are directed to take down the teaser having 32,000 figures, but they cannot put any stay on the film and the trailer.
“The trailer does not contain anything offensive against any particular community as a whole”, the court also said in its order.
The court observed after a competent statutory examined the movie and found nothing wrong with it that the movie should be made available for public exhibition. As provided in the guidelines, the Censor Board has examined the movie as per guidelines before certifying the film ‘A’.
From the statement of the DSG, we find that the producers have published a disclaimer that the film has been fictionalised or is a dramatised version. We are not inclined to pass an interim order restraining the release of the movie. Since the makers have agreed to remove some portions, no further orders are required, the court said in its order.
Earlier, the Supreme Court refused to entertain an interlocutory application (IA) challenging the release of the movie on May 2. The court further observed that an IA is not an appropriate remedy to challenge the release of a movie.
