CNN
 — 

“My name was Shalini Unnikrishnan,” an actor dressed head-to-toe in a full Islamic veil, says in a mournful voice as she speaks to the digicam.

“Now I am Fatima Ba, an ISIS terrorist in an Afghanistan jail. And I’m not alone.”

This is the unique teaser for Indian filmmaker Sudipto Sen’s controversial new film, “The Kerala Story,” the newest field workplace hit in India regardless of fears it’s deepening non secular tensions between majority Hindus and Muslims within the nation of 1.4 billion.

The low-budget, scripted movie has taken $24 million since its launch simply over two weeks in the past, in accordance with Box Office India, a worrying signal in accordance with Debasish Roy Chowdhury, co-author of “To Kill A Democracy: India’s Passage to Despotism.”

Movies like these are “custom-made to spread hate, trigger Islamophobia and justify violence against Muslims,” he mentioned.

Filmmakers had initially tried to current the film as primarily based on a real story of three ladies within the southern state of Kerala who have been allegedly lured into changing to Islam and trafficked into becoming a member of ISIS. According to the filmmakers, these ladies have been pawns in a “dangerous conspiracy” hatched towards India that has seen tens of hundreds of Indian ladies comply with the identical path.

But critics have been fast to level out that merely wasn’t true – and there was no proof to assist such a declare. Last week, India’s Supreme Court ordered the filmmakers so as to add a disclaimer that claims the movie is a fictionalized model of occasions, and that there is no such thing as a knowledge to again its claims of broader conspiracy to radicalize Indian ladies.

According to a 2020 report from the US state division’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2020, there have been “66 known Indian-origin fighters affiliated with ISIS” as of November that 12 months. In 2021, India’s National Investigation Agency mentioned it had arrested 168 individuals related to 37 circumstances “of terror attacks, conspiracy, and funding” impressed by ISIS. Neither report offered a gender breakdown.

Kerala’s chief minister, Pinarayi Vijayan, has known as the story “fake,” and others say the movie perpetuates unfavourable stereotypes of Muslims at a time of accelerating non secular polarization.

But many distinguished politicians from the nation’s ruling Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have praised the movie, with some BJP-ruled states even waiving tax on tickets.

The essential character, Unnikrishnan, portrayed by Indian actress Adah Sharma, is depicted as an harmless, fun-loving Hindu woman, learning at a university in Kerala. She befriends her three roommates, together with a younger Muslim girl.

In the movie’s trailer, the Muslim roommate is seen conspiring with older Muslim males at an “Islamic Study Center,” the place they instruct a gaggle of boys to “isolate” Unnikrishnan and her roommates from their households. “Develop physical relations… If required, make them pregnant,” an aged, bearded man, carrying conventional Islamic garments, says.

The Muslim roommate makes derogatory feedback towards Hindu gods and claims that ladies who put on hijabs are by no means raped.

Unnikrishnan and the 2 different ladies seem to change into brainwashed to marry Muslim males, convert to Islam, and be part of ISIS. The trailer additionally depicts scenes of brutal violence towards ladies, over chants of “Allah is great.”

Speaking to reporters in Mumbai final week, filmmaker Sen mentioned they “have done a service to the nation” by making the movie.

The movie’s producer, Vipul Amrutlal Shah, mentioned they knew the movie can be labeled as propaganda. “We knew every criticism that would come our way. But that should not deter us,” he added. “Our country needs to be woken up.”

However, some film critics have slammed the movie for its factual inaccuracy and failure to offer nuance.

Independent information outlet The Wire known as it “a propaganda film that thrives on shock value.”

Critic Sowmya Rajendran wrote “all the creative liberties … are presented as the absolute truth, with no serious attempt to understand why such radicalisation takes place and what feeds it.”

Shubhra Gupta from the Indian Express called it “a poorly-made, poorly-acted rant which is not interested in interrogating the social complexities of Kerala, an India state proud of its multi-religious, multi-ethnic identity.”

She criticized the filmmakers for stereotypes, writing: “All the Muslim figures in the film are dark and intimidating.”

Several BJP politicians have praised the movie for drawing the nation’s consideration to “love jihad” – a time period utilized by radical Hindu teams who accuse Muslim males of making an attempt to transform ladies of different faiths to Islam.

Some BJP-run states have launched anti-conversion legal guidelines concentrating on “love jihad,” making it more and more troublesome for inter-faith {couples} to marry or for individuals to transform religions – a transfer lambasted by rights group for being unconstitutional and Islamophobic.

India’s northern Uttar Pradesh state, which is ruled by Yogi Adityanath, a hardline Hindu monk-turned-politician, was one of many first states to go the regulation.

“The Kerala Story draws the attention of the entire nation to the conspiracy of love jihad,” Adityanath instructed reporters after a particular screening of the movie. “The entire society must be made aware of this distortion.”

Critics say non secular polarization has elevated since Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his BJP swept to energy in 2014, prompting tensions between Hindus, who make up greater than 80% of the nation’s inhabitants, and Muslims, to simmer.

Modi, who was campaigning for the BJP throughout native elections earlier this month, mentioned “The Kerala Story” was “trying to expose the consequences of terrorism in society,” whereas accusing opposition events of making an attempt to ban the movie.

According to Chowdhury, the movie “follows the familiar pattern of the Modi government’s unalloyed backing of hateful and divisive cinema.”

He mentioned the movie’s success “should be taken as a sign of radicalization” of society.

“There is no room for cinema like this in the civilized world, because my freedom of expression ends when it begins to threaten your freedom to exist,” he mentioned.