It is frightening that those are being practised in real life as well.
In Kerala, a celebrated Malayalam filmmaker has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody after an actress alleged he attempted to sexually assault her on a film set — a case that has prompted a fellow director to ask a question older than cinema itself: whether what an artist creates reveals who they truly are. The arrest of Ranjith Balakrishnan, whose decades-long career shaped much of Malayalam cinema, has opened a reckoning not only about workplace safety on film sets but about the relationship between the stories powerful men choose to tell and the lives they quietly lead.
- An actress filed a formal complaint alleging Ranjith Balakrishnan lured her to a caravan on set and attempted to sexually assault her — triggering charges of assault, wrongful confinement, and outraging modesty.
- Balakrishnan, a filmmaker with over three decades in the industry, was arrested under conditions of deliberate secrecy and remanded to fourteen days of judicial custody at Ernakulam Sub Jail.
- Director Dr Biju seized the moment to draw a disturbing line between the misogyny embedded in Balakrishnan's films and the behavior now alleged in real life — arguing the screen had been warning us all along.
- The case is landing as a broader indictment of power dynamics in the Malayalam film industry, where the gap between artistic reputation and personal conduct has rarely faced this level of public scrutiny.
A sexual harassment complaint filed by an actress has led to the arrest of veteran Malayalam filmmaker Ranjith Balakrishnan, who was remanded to fourteen days of judicial custody at Ernakulam Sub Jail in Kerala. According to the complaint, Balakrishnan invited her to a caravan during a film shoot and made unwanted advances. Police registered the case under sections covering sexual assault, wrongful confinement, and outraging modesty, carrying out the arrest with deliberate secrecy.
The legal proceedings quickly drew a public response from Dr Biju — filmmaker and former chairman of the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy — who used the moment to articulate something he had long observed. In a Facebook post written in Malayalam, Biju pointed to a pattern of misogyny in Balakrishnan's films, particularly in dialogue and characterization, and expressed alarm that such attitudes appeared to have found expression in real life as well.
Biju's critique carried a personal dimension: years earlier, Balakrishnan had publicly questioned Biju's relevance as an artist. Now, with Balakrishnan in custody, Biju responded not with score-settling but with a statement about artistic integrity — citing his own film Painting Life, in which a woman transforms a director's understanding of the world, as an example of what cinema could aspire to.
At the heart of Biju's statement was a refusal to separate an artist's conduct from their creative vision. For Balakrishnan, whose career stretching back to 1987 had produced films like Nandanam and Prajapathi, the arrest now casts a long shadow — raising the question of whether the worldview woven through his work had always reflected something the industry chose not to see.
A Malayalam filmmaker arrested on sexual harassment charges has become the subject of a pointed rebuke from a fellow director, one that cuts deeper than the legal case itself—into questions about what artists say on screen and what they do in the world.
Ranjith Balakrishnan was taken into custody after an actress filed a complaint alleging he attempted to sexually assault her on a film set. The incident occurred during a shoot when, according to her account, he invited her to a caravan and made unwanted advances. Police registered the case under multiple sections including sexual assault, wrongful confinement, and outraging modesty. He was sent to judicial custody for fourteen days and held at Ernakulam Sub Jail in Kerala. The arrest proceedings were conducted with what authorities described as utmost secrecy.
What followed was a statement from Dr Biju, himself a filmmaker and former chairman of the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy, who used the moment to air a longer grievance. Years earlier, Balakrishnan had publicly advised Biju to examine his own relevance as an artist—a comment that had stung enough for Biju to respond with a detailed letter at the time. Now, with Balakrishnan in custody, Biju chose to speak again, this time with the weight of events behind him.
In a Facebook post written in Malayalam, Biju identified a pattern he had observed in Balakrishnan's films: a persistent misogyny embedded in dialogue and character. "We have seen misogyny in the dialogues of many of his films," Biju wrote. "It is frightening that those are being practised in real life as well." The statement drew a direct line between the stories a filmmaker tells and the behavior he exhibits—suggesting that the gap between art and conduct had collapsed in this case.
Biju offered a counterexample from his own work: his English-language film, Painting Life, in which a woman fundamentally transforms a director's understanding of life, people, society, and art. The implication was clear—cinema could elevate or degrade, depending on the vision behind it. Biju also addressed Balakrishnan's earlier jab about relevance, noting that his own work had maintained a consistent presence in international film festivals and that he was fully aware of his standing in the field.
The core of Biju's critique, however, was about integrity. "It is something no artist should practise," he wrote of the degradation he saw in Balakrishnan's conduct, "and the integrity of an artist is extremely important." The statement treated artistic credibility not as separate from personal behavior but as inseparable from it—a claim that resonates through an industry where power imbalances on set are often treated as inevitable rather than inexcusable.
Balakrishnan's career had spanned decades. He began as a screenwriter in 1987 and directed his first feature in 2001. Films like Nandanam, Black, and Prajapathi had established him as a significant voice in Malayalam cinema. Now that career faces an uncertain future, shadowed by both the legal proceedings ahead and the question of whether the worldview expressed in his films had always reflected something darker in the man himself.
Citações Notáveis
We have seen misogyny in the dialogues of many of his films. It is frightening that those are being practised in real life as well.— Dr Biju, filmmaker and former Kerala State Chalachitra Academy chairman
The integrity of an artist is extremely important. It is something no artist should practise and the degradation is significant.— Dr Biju, on artistic responsibility and conduct
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did Dr Biju feel compelled to speak out now, rather than simply let the legal process unfold?
Because the arrest made visible something Biju had already seen in the films themselves. The misogyny wasn't hidden—it was on screen, in dialogue, in how women were framed. The arrest gave him permission to name it.
Do you think Biju was settling an old score, or making a larger point about the industry?
Both, probably. The earlier comment about relevance clearly stung. But Biju's statement goes beyond personal grievance. He's arguing that what we put into art matters because it shapes how we move through the world. That's not petty—that's a claim about responsibility.
The actress filed the complaint. Why is a fellow filmmaker's critique significant?
Because it breaks a silence. Industry figures often protect each other. Biju's willingness to connect the dots—between on-screen misogyny and off-screen conduct—signals that some in the industry are willing to acknowledge the problem rather than compartmentalize it.
What does his reference to his own film suggest?
That cinema can work the other way. That a filmmaker can use the medium to expand understanding rather than reinforce contempt. It's not defensive—it's aspirational. He's saying: this is what's possible.
Will this statement affect the legal case?
Probably not directly. But it shapes the narrative around it. It moves the conversation from isolated incident to pattern, from one woman's complaint to a question about what the industry has been tolerating.