The controversy stirred by the Malayalam movie Empuraan shows no sign of fading anytime soon. Despite the film’s lead actor, Mohanlal, issuing a public apology, Prithviraj Sukumaran, the movie’s director, remains conspicuously silent. This silence, especially from someone who has previously positioned himself as accountable and forthcoming, is disappointing. Prithviraj’s reluctance to address the controversy directly reveals a troubling pattern of evading responsibility when it matters most.
This inconsistency becomes even more glaring when compared to a similar incident involving the 2022 film Kaduva. Directed by Shaji Kailas, with Prithviraj in the lead role, Kaduva sparked significant controversy over a derogatory dialogue that portrayed differently-abled children and their parents in a profoundly insensitive light. The offending line suggested that such children were a result of the sins committed by their parents — a statement that naturally provoked a fierce backlash.
When the controversy erupted, director Shaji Kailas was the first to issue an apology, followed by Prithviraj himself. Notably, Prithviraj not only shared the director’s statement on social media but also issued a separate, personal apology. Yet, the issue did not die down, as many demanded the removal of the offensive dialogue entirely.
Under mounting pressure, the Kaduva team convened a press conference, attended by Shaji Kailas, Prithviraj, screenwriter Jinu Abraham, and producer Listin Stephen. They expressed regret and pledged to mute the controversial dialogue in all future versions, including international releases. Even the OTT version now has the problematic dialogue muted. Through this process, Shaji Kailas demonstrated remarkable ownership and accountability — qualities that Prithviraj now seems to lack.
In stark contrast, Prithviraj’s response to the Empuraan controversy has been woefully inadequate. Despite his experience with the fallout from Kaduva, he has chosen to remain silent, letting Mohanlal bear the brunt of the criticism. This glaring lack of responsibility is particularly appalling given how eagerly Prithviraj claims credit for the film’s success on his social media handles. Why is it that the blame for the film’s re-editing appears solely on Mohanlal’s shoulders, while Prithviraj conveniently shies away from public scrutiny?
Leadership in cinema, as in any creative endeavour, requires the courage to stand by one’s work, especially when confronted with justified criticism. Mohanlal, despite knowing the inevitable backlash, addressed the issue head-on with maturity and grace. Meanwhile, Prithviraj’s silence reflects not just a lack of accountability but a deeply ingrained hypocrisy — one where he willingly basks in the glory but evades the storm when things go awry.
In a situation demanding collective responsibility, Mohanlal remains the lone figure taking the heat on behalf of the entire team. This incident serves as a grim reminder that accountability cannot be selectively applied. Prithviraj Sukumaran needs to reassess his approach to leadership and responsibility before his credibility as a filmmaker and an artist becomes irreparably tarnished.
