The promotional machinery for The Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond is in full swing, ahead of its February 27, 2026, release. Producer Vipul Shah maintains a steadfast narrative: “Every scene is based on true events,” and the film is a mission to “expose this crime and ecosystem.”
However, as the trailer sparks “Beef Festivals” in Kerala and warnings of an “Islamic State in 25 years” ring out, a glaring question emerges. If the goal is truly to protect “daughters, sisters, and families” from “evil,” why is the cinematic lens so selectively focused?
Mr. Shah, while you claim to tell the “hard-to-digest truth,” the data, the financial motives, and the timing suggest a narrative that serves a specific agenda rather than a universal pursuit of justice.
1. The Statistical Paradox: Who is Converting Whom?
You claim The Kerala Story 2 exposes a “massive conspiracy of manipulative conversion.” Yet, objective data tells a different story. In the broader landscape of religious conversion in India, Hinduism remains the biggest gainer in terms of numbers compared to Islam.
If the goal is to expose “manipulation,” why is the narrative exclusively tailored to target Islam? By focusing on a singular direction of conversion while ignoring the broader demographic shifts, the film risks being perceived not as a documentary of truth, but as a tool for spreading communal friction.
2. The Legal Vacuum of “Love Jihad”
You cite a “video with 32,000 cases” to defend your narrative. However, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), as recently as 2025, reiterated that “Love Jihad” is not defined under current Indian laws. Central agencies like the NIA have reported no such organized cases.
Shashi Tharoor Slams The Kerala Story 2 As ‘Hate-Mongering’: Producer Reacts
The data from states with strict anti-conversion laws further weakens the “conspiracy” narrative:
* Uttar Pradesh (2025): Out of 1,310+ FIRs filed since 2020, the conviction rate is a staggering less than 1%.
* Madhya Pradesh (2025): Of the cases concluded, 58% ended in acquittals, often because the courts found the relationships were consensual.
When the conviction rates are this dismal, is the state not using these laws selectively? And are you not, by extension, dramatizing cases that the judiciary itself is quashing as “patently false”?
3. The Selective Naming of States
With great respect, you claim you are not “maligning” Kerala, yet you persist in using the state’s name as a prefix for “radicalisation.” This raises a fundamental question of courage and consistency:
Would you dare to produce fact-based stories on cow vigilante attacks, caste-based atrocities, mafia attacks, or communal violence in other states, and title them with those states’ names? If Kerala can be branded as a “hub of menace” based on isolated incidents, why do we not see “The UP Story” on vigilantism or “The Haryana Story” on honor killings? Targeting a specific state in the Union suggests a cinematic war against a specific political and social identity.
4. The Danger of Generalisation
In the trailer for the sequel, you depict a Hindu woman being force-fed beef—a scene critics call a fundamental misrepresentation of Keralite culture or general Muslim life in India. Even if we concede that one or two such isolated, harrowing cases exist, does that justify generalising an entire religion and a state of 35 million people? By taking outliers and presenting them as a “massive conspiracy,” you are constructing a narrative that labels an entire community as a threat.
Left Outfits Organise Beef Festivals, Serve Dish In Protest Against ‘The Kerala Story 2’ Film
5. Weaponising Personal Choice: The Road to “Hindurashtra”
Over the last 12 years, we have seen a systemic shift where the most personal aspects of life—the choice of food, the choice of religion, and the identity of whom one loves—have been turned into high-stakes political battlegrounds.
This magnification of personal choices serves a singular purpose: to strengthen the claim for a Hindurashtra (a Hindu Nationalist State). When you produce films that suggest certain religions or food habits are “weapons” against the nation, you become an active participant in a right-wing process of cultural engineering.
6. The “Election Calendar” Release Strategy
The timing of these films is hard to ignore. The Kerala Story arrived just before the Karnataka elections. Now, The Kerala Story 2 is scheduled for February 2026, right ahead of crucial elections in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal—all states where the Opposition holds a significant presence. Is it a mere coincidence that your “truth” consistently aligns with the electoral needs of a specific political ideology?
7. Money Matters: The Profitability of Polemics
Looking at your production slate over the last decade, a clear financial pattern emerges. Films like Bastar bombed at the box office, while your action franchises like Commando and Force saw only marginal profits.
In stark contrast, The Kerala Story—despite being panned for its storytelling and screenplay—gave you a 20-fold return on investment. Supported by tax-free statuses and endorsements from the ruling regime, it is economically “obvious” why you would return to the well of communalism. Propaganda, it seems, is far more lucrative than quality cinema.
Blog| The Kerala Story: How A Propaganda Film Pushed Misinformation And Got National Recognition
8. Quality vs. The Hate Machine: The Critical Verdict
Not a single major publication or serious film critic viewed The Kerala Story as a credible piece of art. The consensus from the industry’s most respected voices was devastating:
* Rotten Tomatoes: A dismal 14% score.
* NDTV: 0.5/5 stars, labeled a “lengthy WhatsApp forward.”
* The Indian Express: 1/5 stars, called a “poorly-acted rant.”
* The Hindu: Described it as “burlesque” propaganda borrowing from “hate-filled WhatsApp groups.”
You have capitalised on the support of the ruling regime and right-wing ecosystems to rake in money while ignoring the fact that your work is widely regarded as an “Islamophobic hate movie” rather than a serious contribution to Indian cinema.
Mr. Shah, you say, “When you are telling the truth, perhaps you are not in that much danger.” But the real danger lies in a “truth” that is half-told, financially motivated, and geographically biased. If you are truly a “responsible filmmaker,” the audience is waiting for you to look at the “menace” of vigilantism and caste-based violence in other states with the same unflinching—and named—scrutiny.
