Despite making 24 voluntary cuts, Empuraan, the Mohanlal film, continues to promote fundamentally anti-national and anti-Hindu-Christian messages. The controversial Malayalam film—written by Murali Gopy and directed by Prithviraj—still suggests that Muslims turn to terrorism and join extremist organisations due to the actions of Hindus.
The Distorted Portrayal of Hindus Persists Despite the Re-editing
The film, despite changes to names and dialogue, continues to perpetuate anti-Hindu sentiments. The plot revolves around Masood Saeed (played by Prithviraj), a character who, after losing his family in the Gujarat riots, joins Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) to seek revenge against Hindus. The movie still portrays Islamic terrorists who shelter Masood as sympathetic figures, subtly encouraging a young boy to fight against Bharat. Even after re-editing, the film reinforces the idea that terrorism is a justified means of vengeance. The protests were never about removing the Gujarat riots from the film; instead, the demand was to include the Godhra riots for a more balanced portrayal. However, while the timeline has been vaguely altered from “2002” to “a few years ago,” the core narrative remains unchanged—depicting Hindus as the villains. Additionally, the scriptwriter and director appear to place the blame for Muslim terrorism on Hindus. Notably, the director portrays himself as Masood Saeed, a name that closely resembles those of infamous terrorists Hafiz Saeed of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Masood Azhar of Jaish-e-Mohammed. This resemblance remains unchanged despite other modifications to the film.
Some Questions to the Director and the Writer
Is there any truth to the narrative promoted by Prithviraj and Gopy? If losing family members were a justification for joining a terrorist organization, how many people in this country would have been recruited into terrorism? Have the filmmakers considered whether the children of the 59 Hindus killed in the Godhra massacre or the 254 Hindus who were massacred in the Gujarat riots have taken up arms or joined terrorist groups? If tomorrow, Hindus and Christians in Bharat decided to take up arms to avenge past wrongs committed by Muslims, what would be the fate of this country?. So, what message are you trying to convey through this film?
The reality is that terrorists do not join such organizations merely out of rebellion. Their motivations are deeply rooted in spreading the religion or establishing the religious state. Instead of discouraging radical ideologies, Empuraan appears to justify or whitewash Islamic terrorism, placing the blame entirely on Bharat and its Hindu and Christian population. If, as the film suggests, Hindus are responsible for the rise of Islamic terrorism, then the scriptwriter and director must clarify whether terrorism in West Asia is also a result of Hindu actions. Therefore, the filmmakers owe the public an apology for promoting an anti-Hindu stance that depicts Hindus as the enemy of Muslims. Besides the destruction of the Christian cross symbol in the film—could this be a subtle message encouraging Christians to leave West Asia? Is the film subtly inciting Muslims in Kerala to take up arms against the Hindu-Christian community in the state? Is this the film’s true agenda?. Moreover, the film still promotes a narrative that vilifies Bharat’s state institutions, depicting entities such as the judiciary, investigative agencies, and the government as wrongdoers—solely for their stance against terrorism. Now, with the renaming of the NIA, will the fundamental agenda of portraying Bharat’s administration as criminal disappear?.
Kerala’s Youth in Narcotic Crisis, Anarchy in Malayalam Films
The British strategy that subdued China through the supply of opium in the 18th and 19th centuries seems mirrored by anti-national forces now controlling narratives in Kerala. As part of the ongoing narcotics jihad in the state, Kerala’s youth are being lured into addiction, with opium fueling the crisis. Empuraan, through Mohanlal and Prithviraj, is further embedding such ideas in their minds with its anti-national, anarchic, and terrorist narrative. This is not an isolated incident in the Malayalam film industry; narcotics and anarchism are recurring themes in recent films, especially those released by groups like the Mattancherry Mafia, which glorify alcohol, drugs, and chaos. This raises concerns that Empuraan might be trying to cultivate terrorist ideologies among Kerala’s increasingly drug-affected youth. The ideological leanings of director Prithviraj and writer Murali Gopy seem to align with this disturbing trend.
Prithviraj’s Anti-National Views, Murali Gopi’s Anarchism
Prithviraj has often faced criticism for his alleged anti-national stance and tendency to appease anti-national elements. He previously appeared in a Halal-Flat advertisement in Kerala, supported the anti-citizenship law protests organized by anti-national forces, and has been accused of displaying an anti-Hindu and anti-Christian bias.
Furthermore, Prithviraj initially agreed to portray himself as ‘Variamkunnath Kunjahammed Haji’, the leader of the 1921 Malabar Hindu massacre but later withdrew following strong public opposition. He was also actively involved in the controversial “Save Lakshadweep” campaign, which was criticized for its anti-national undertones. His 2010 film Anwar was set against a terrorist backdrop, and in ‘Janaganamana’, his character delivered the contentious dialogue, “This country does not belong to anyone’s father.” A closer examination of his filmography reveals a recurring pattern of anti-nationalist propaganda and appeasement. Additionally, reports claim that drugs were seized from his flat during an excise raid.
Similarly, Murali Gopi, known for his outspoken views, has frequently criticized Bharat’s political system, labelling it a “fascist regime” and opposing censorship. Anarchism is a central theme in his speeches, and he argues that films in a multicultural society like Bharat should be free from censorship. His ideology challenges legal systems and promotes anarchist views, often targeting Bharat’s democratic institutions. This theme is also evident in his films Lucifer and Empuraan.
A Call for Vigilance and Some Questions to be Investigated
When analyzing the personal lives of Prithviraj and Murali Gopi, along with the ideological backdrop of Empuraan, several unsettling questions emerge. Were there controversial elements in the original script that were later cut? What scenes involving the national anthem were removed by the censor board? Were anti-national forces involved in the locations of the filming of Empuraan, both locally and abroad? Why did one of the original producers withdraw from the project? What are Prithviraj’s Gulf connections and financial dealings? Did external forces influence Murali Gopi to write the script in an anti-national manner? These questions need to be addressed. The agenda being pushed by Prithviraj and Murali Gopi through Empuraan is something that Kerala society should critically examine and oppose in the long term. Without resorting to the excuse that a movie should simply be viewed as entertainment, both of them should apologize for attempting to create communal divisions and anti-national narratives within our country under the guise of freedom of expression.
Comments