Hubbry Logo
EedaEedaMain
Open search
Eeda
Community hub
Eeda
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Eeda
Eeda
from Wikipedia

Eeda
Theatrical release poster
Directed byB. Ajithkumar
Written byB. Ajithkumar
Produced bySharmila Rajaa
StarringShane Nigam
Nimisha Sajayan
CinematographyPappu
Edited byB. Ajithkumar
Music byJohn P. Varkey
Chandran Veyattummal
Production
companies
Collective Phase One
Delta Studio
Distributed byLJ Films
Release date
  • 5 January 2018 (2018-01-05)
CountryIndia
LanguageMalayalam

Eeda (transl. Here) is a 2018 Indian Malayalam-language romance film written, edited and directed by B. Ajithkumar.[1] The film is a modern take on William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, set in the backdrops of political violence in Kannur, north Malabar.[2] Shane Nigam and Nimisha Sajayan play the lead roles.[3][4] Eeda was produced by Sharmila Rajaa through Delta Studio, in collaboration with Collective Phase One.[5] The executive producers were TRS Muthukumaar, K.J. Ayyappan, and Sukumar Thekkepatt. The film won the John Abraham Award for Best Malayalam Film in 2017.[6]

Plot

[edit]

The story set in north Malabar region of Kerala. Anand/ Nandu (Shane Nigam) is an MBA graduate who works in an entry-level managerial post in an insurance company in Mysore. While in his hometown in Kannur on leave, he happens to meet Aishwarya/ Ammu (Nimisha Sajayan) who is also a Kannur native and a student in Mysore. They meet on a hartal day and he helps her evade politicians who called for the hartal and drops her home. After a few initial chats and phone calls, they find each other in love.

Anand's family and Aishwarya's family are active in two opposing political parties in Kannur. When Aishwarya gets to know about this, she decides to break up because she does not want to see Anand killed. But Anand was persistent and the duo continues the relation.

Aishwarya's family decides to get her married to Sudhakaran, a close family friend who is also an active politician in the political party which Aishwarya's family supports. Aishwarya decides to do register marriage with Anand and they both decides to register their marriage at Mysore. But before the marriage could take place, Anand gets a call that Anand's close friend is murdered in Kannur in a retaliatory political clash. Anand comes home to attend the final rites.

Anand gets to know that his family's party has planned to murder Karippally Dineshan, the first cousin of Aishwarya as revenge for Anand's close friend's murder. Anand gets Dineshan's phone number from Aishwarya and calls him and says he wants to meet up. Anand warns Dineshan that the rival party is planning to kill Dineshan, but Dineshan is not bothered. On the way home, Dineshan was attacked. Anand tries to stop the attackers but fails. He then takes Dineshan to hospital but Dineshan does not survive.

Police as well as Anand's family members and their political party gets to know that Anand had called Dineshan on that day and the Police names Anand as the prime suspect in the murder, with other members of the party as other suspects. Unbeknownst to Anand, Anand's family's political party does not clear the air and allows the police to believe that Anand also is involved in the murder. This is done as a move to confine Anand to his family's party's holds forever, and also to give him a punishment for trying to apparently side with the opposing party by helping Dineshan. Anand is forced to go in a hideout due to pressure from his family and party. Since Anand had to switch off his phone to avoid him being traced by police, Aishwarya could not contact him. In an effort to save Anand, Aishwarya agrees to marry Sudhakaran in return of freeing Anand from the police case. Anand escapes from the hideout arranged by his family after realising that he is going to be the next scapegoat whom the opposing party will murder to take revenge on Dineshan's death. He seeks asylum in Aishwarya's friend's house. This friend's husband is a bedridden victim of another political clash. Meanwhile, Aishwarya is married off to Sudhakaran in a civil ceremony. With the supporting words of the bedridden political clash victim, Anand tries to reach Sudhakaran's home to meet Aishwarya as the evening reception of her marriage progresses.

Anand is attacked by opposing party goons and is running and hiding from them. Meanwhile, Aishwarya demands that Sudhakaran do the needful to release Anand from the police case, and when he refuses to answer satisfactorily and indicates that they go to sleep, she states upright that she agreed to the marriage to get Anand released, but she did not agree to sleep with anyone. Angered, Sudhakaran calls up his party's political goons in front of Aishwarya and orders that Anand be pursued and killed. He goes inside the house while a shocked Aishwarya sits alone outside in the dark. Aishwarya decides to go in search of Anand alone in the night. Meanwhile, Anand is being chased by Sudhakaran's party goons and thinks that he will get killed, and so he switches on the phone to call the police, deciding to surrender, finding that to be the safest way to survive. At that time Aishwarya calls Anand and he tells her where he is, which is nearby. While on the run, Anand, to save himself, has to attack one of the goons chasing him and the goon appears to be killed. He is exhausted and hallucinates a dream sequence from the day he first met Aishwarya. Bleeding and crawling, he manages to find an equally exhausted Aishwarya at the forest temple they used to meet earlier at. Anand falls on her lap and crying and relieved and scared all at the same time, and exhausted, they both sleep off. The movie ends when as the morning dawns, they hold hands and walks onto the street, ready to face their uncertain future. Another hartal for the murder of a member of Anand's family's political party is being announced in the background.[7]

There is also an alternative interpretation to the climax scene that Anand in fact died in the forest that night, and him coming to Aishwarya and sleeping on her lap that night, and later walking with her onto the street are all her hallucinations, and that the hartal call in the background for the murder of a member of Anand's political party, is regarding the death of Anand himself.

Cast

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
is a Indian Malayalam-language romantic tragedy written, directed, and edited by , starring and as the protagonists Anand and Aiswarya. The narrative unfolds as a contemporary adaptation of Shakespeare's , centering on a passionate romance between two young individuals from families aligned with rival political factions in the violence-prone region of , northern . The film depicts the lovers' chance encounter in , where Anand works in an insurance firm and Aiswarya pursues graduate studies, evolving into a deep affair complicated by the entrenched political animosities of their hometowns. Kannur's real-world history of inter-party clashes, particularly between communist and right-wing groups, forms the tense backdrop, influencing the characters' fates through familial loyalties and escalating conflicts. Released on 5 January 2018, Eeda garnered attention for its raw portrayal of love amid ideological warfare, with strong performances from the leads earning praise despite mixed critical reception on pacing and stylistic choices. Notable for its unflinching depiction of Kerala's political undercurrents without overt partisanship, the film highlights the personal toll of ideological divisions, contributing to discussions on regional violence while achieving moderate commercial success in the industry.

Production

Development and screenplay

, drawing from his background as an editor and Film and Television Institute of India alumnus, conceived Eeda as his feature directorial debut, personally penning the screenplay to frame a romance against the backdrop of 's protracted political hostilities. The project originated from observations of the region's entrenched cycles of retaliation, where party loyalties—often inherited rather than ideologically driven—perpetuate feuds, as seen in documented clashes spanning decades, including the surge in violence between CPI(M)-linked SFI activists and Congress-affiliated KSU members that contributed to at least 30 deaths across factions in . Structured as a loose adaptation of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, the screenplay substitutes aristocratic family enmity with affiliations to opposing political fronts, tracing how initial acts of aggression cascade into broader vendettas that ensnare individuals, grounded in North Malabar's empirical record of frequent hartals, targeted assassinations, and intergenerational enmities without idealizing the strife. Ajithkumar emphasized balancing perspectives from both lovers' sides, diverging from the source material in subplots to underscore humanitarian disruptions over partisan glorification, while noting that younger characters embody shifting values detached from rote allegiance. This approach prioritizes causal realism in depicting rivalry's toll, attributing violence's persistence to loyalty mechanisms rather than abstract hatred, informed by Kannur's history of over 200 political deaths since the 1970s across CPI(M), , and /BJP lines, ensuring the narrative avoids unsubstantiated romanticization by rooting conflicts in verifiable patterns of escalation.

Casting and crew

Shane portrayed Anand, a (SFI) supporter, selected for his established ability to depict intense, youthful characters in realistic settings, as demonstrated in his lead role in the coming-of-age drama Parava (2017). played Aishwarya, a Kerala Students' Union (KSU) supporter, chosen based on her breakout performance in the investigative courtroom drama Thondi Muthalum Driksakshiyum (2017), which showcased her skill in nuanced, grounded roles amid conflict. These casting decisions prioritized actors with verifiable experience in authentic portrayals of youth navigating personal and societal tensions, enhancing the film's credibility in depicting politically divided young lovers. B. Ajithkumar served as both director and editor, leveraging his background in editing high-stakes action-dramas like Kammatti Paadam () to maintain a concise that reflected the unyielding progression of ideological clashes. His dual role ensured focused editing that avoided superfluous scenes, aligning with the story's emphasis on real-time consequences of . The production, associated with Rajeev Ravi's banner, incorporated a raw, documentary-like visual approach to capture Kannur's socio-political grit, though was handled by Pappu.

Filming and post-production

Principal photography for Eeda took place primarily in , , and , , to authentically depict the film's setting amid North Malabar's political tensions and urban contrasts. Pappu emphasized the natural landscapes of Kannur's coastal and rural areas alongside Mysore's cityscapes, using these locations to underscore the characters' entrapment between personal desires and communal strife. The production incorporated during shoots to reflect the unpredictable nature of the portrayed violence and relationships. Post-production was overseen by director , who also handled , focusing on tight pacing to balance romance with escalating conflicts rooted in ideological divides. , credited to Pramod Thomas, integrated ambient elements like rally noises and interruptions to heighten the sense of pervasive disruption and isolation, drawing from Kannur's documented of partisan clashes without relying on extensive . This approach maintained a grounded realism, aligning with the film's low-budget origins and avoidance of stylized interventions that might obscure the causal links between and personal tragedy.

Release

Premiere and distribution

Eeda premiered theatrically across select theaters in on 5 January 2018. The film's distribution was handled by LJ Films Pvt Ltd, focusing primarily on regional audiences in amid its depiction of politically charged violence. Promotional efforts centered on the narrative's roots in Kannur's real-world ideological conflicts between left-wing and right-wing factions, rather than solely romantic elements. The first official trailer, launched by actor , was released on 10 December 2017, showcasing tense encounters between rival groups. A second trailer followed on 2 January 2018, further emphasizing the lovers' entrapment in partisan strife. Following its limited theatrical run, Eeda became available for streaming on starting 15 September 2018, broadening access beyond initial cinema screenings constrained by the subject's sensitivity to local political dynamics. This digital expansion aligned with the film's modest rollout, prioritizing targeted regional exhibition over widespread national theatrical distribution.

Box office performance

Eeda was produced on a low budget, estimated at less than ₹5 crore, reflecting its independent production scale focused on narrative depth rather than star power or spectacle. The film earned approximately ₹0.90 crore in total collections, primarily from Kerala markets where its depiction of local political rivalries in Kannur garnered resonance among audiences familiar with the region's ideological conflicts. This performance marked it as an average earner in the competitive January 2018 release slate, overshadowed by Pongal festival films and lacking the broad appeal for pan-India screens. Its limited gross underscored niche viability rather than mainstream success, with political sensitivities around Kannur's real-world violence—portrayed through rival party affiliations—likely constraining wider theatrical distribution beyond circuits. Despite critical for authenticity, the film's regional focus and absence from major trackers highlighted modest financial returns relative to contemporaries like Kayamkulam Kochunni, which grossed over ₹100 . Overseas earnings remained negligible, aligning with its hyper-local themes that did not translate easily.

Themes and analysis

Adaptation of Romeo and Juliet

Eeda reimagines William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet by substituting the ancient familial feud between the Montagues and Capulets with a contemporary ideological conflict between supporters of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Kannur, Kerala. The protagonists, Anand (played by Shane Nigam), a CPI(M) affiliate, and Aishwarya (Nimisha Sajayan), aligned with the BJP, embody the star-crossed lovers whose romance emerges amid this partisan divide, mirroring the Verona setting's enmity but grounded in 2010s Kerala's political landscape of cadre loyalty and territorial rivalries. Director B. Ajithkumar has described the film as loosely inspired by Shakespeare, focusing on young love thwarted by affiliations to opposing political "families" rather than bloodlines, with the lovers' aspirations for education and urban escape—such as their affair developing during time away in Mysore—reflecting modern Keralite youth mobility amid entrenched local animosities. Key narrative beats parallel Shakespeare's structure while adapting to ideological barriers: a chance encounter in their native sparks initial attraction, akin to the Capulet meeting, but escalates into secrecy due to vigilance rather than parental oversight. Their clandestine in evoke the balcony scene's intimacy, where expressions of devotion occur under cover of distance from home turf, yet these are repeatedly disrupted not by feuding kin but by urgent summons back to factional duties and escalating clashes, underscoring how political allegiance functions as the prohibitive force. This substitution highlights causal mechanisms rooted in voluntary ideological commitment, as characters prioritize cadre solidarity over personal bonds, diverging from Shakespeare's emphasis on inherited vendetta. The tragic climax departs from Shakespeare's fatalistic double suicide driven by miscommunication and , instead culminating in retaliatory reflective of documented cycles of and counter-killings in Kannur's partisan , where agency in —such as Anand's entanglement in a operation—precipitates the lovers' doom without reliance on contrived mishaps or . This resolution attributes the catastrophe to human choices within ideological frameworks, portraying the deaths as foreseeable outcomes of unchecked retaliation rather than inexorable fate, thereby critiquing the self-perpetuating logic of over romantic inevitability.

Depiction of political violence in Kannur

The film Eeda portrays in as an endemic feature of daily existence, with recurring hartals enforcing shutdowns and sporadic murders escalating personal vendettas into communal clashes between rival party loyalists. Scenes depict improvised explosive devices detonated along roadsides and machete-wielding assailants targeting opponents during broad daylight ambushes, reflecting the routine brutality documented in the district from the 1990s onward, where such tactics became hallmarks of inter-party confrontations. This depiction draws from empirical patterns of violence, including over 180 political killings in Kannur since 1980, predominantly involving CPI(M) cadres and or workers, with 69 murders recorded between 2000 and 2016 alone. Central to the film's visualization is the spatial and symbolic division of Kannur's landscape, where red flags hoisted by CPI(M)-aligned families signal territorial dominance, contrasting with banners marking opposing enclaves, mirroring real cultural markers that perpetuate factional hostilities. Hartals are shown not as isolated protests but as coercive tools paralyzing commerce and mobility, akin to incidents in the when CPI(M)-led strikes in frequently devolved into confrontations with supporters, resulting in fatalities from bombings and stabbings. Student wing clashes, such as those between the CPI(M)-backed SFI and -affiliated KSU, amplify this routine, with the film integrating campus rivalries that echo documented campus violence contributing to the district's death toll, including targeted assassinations during election periods. The narrative underscores a parity in savagery across factions, with both sides perpetrating retaliatory killings—evident in sequences where protagonists' families exact through and assaults—countering portrayals that frame left-wing actions as mere ideological fervor rather than calculated . In Kannur's context, this mirrors data showing comparable casualties among CPI(M) and /RSS ranks from 1990–1999, with 14 CPI(M) and 16 deaths, amid a broader cycle where organizational muscle from dominant groups like CPI(M) sustains the violence's intensity. Local dialects infuse dialogues with authentic inflections, grounding the violence in the region's parochial animosities rather than abstracted partisanship.

Ideological fanaticism and its consequences

In Eeda, ideological fanaticism manifests as an erosion of personal agency, where protagonists from opposing political factions—representing CPI(M) and /BJP affiliates—grapple with loyalties that prioritize party directives over individual desires, culminating in self-destructive choices that underscore extremism's toll on human relationships. This depiction critiques the normalization of violence as an outgrowth of ideological purity, portraying it instead as a deliberate mechanism for maintaining factional control in Kannur's polarized landscape, where over 200 individuals died in political clashes between 1972 and 2017, with roughly equal losses on both sides (78 from CPI(M), 68 from /BJP). The narrative exposes ideology's role in power consolidation through martyrdom cults, as fallen cadres are venerated to recruit and radicalize youth, sustaining retaliatory cycles that reject in favor of perpetual antagonism; this reasoning dismantles romanticized justifications like "class struggle," revealing them as veils for territorial dominance rather than principled defense, evident in Kannur's history of evenly matched fatalities across ideological lines from 2000 to 2016 (approximately 30 each for CPI(M) and /BJP). Such patterns normalize chosen extremism over pragmatic coexistence, with neither faction excusing its contributions to the bloodshed that claimed hundreds in Kerala overall during the same period, Kannur accounting for about half. Broader consequences extend to familial and communal disintegration, including social ostracism for perceived betrayals of party honor and enduring hardship for survivors' kin, as intransigent prioritizes vendettas over victim support, leaving families like that of slain CPI(M) worker Kuzhichalil Mohanan isolated amid unresolved . These micro-level ruptures reflect causal chains where disrupts generational stability, channeling youth into violence-prone roles that hinder and force migrations from high-conflict zones, as empirical patterns in violence-affected areas show elevated student out-migration rates to evade peer exposure to extremism's academic drags.

Reception

Critical reviews

Critics commended Eeda for its atmospheric depiction of in , highlighting the film's unflinching portrayal of tit-for-tat killings driven by partisan ideologies, which lent authenticity to the narrative's backdrop. review noted the aptness of the title in capturing a contemporary love story amid Kerala's " of ," though it critiqued the leads' lack of onscreen chemistry. Performances, particularly by and , received praise for conveying the tension between personal romance and ideological fanaticism, with Onmanorama appreciating their handling of the protagonists' lingering affection despite encroaching violence. Several reviews, however, faulted the film for uneven pacing and narrative inconsistencies, where the romance often yielded to an overwhelming "dark aura" of brutality, diluting the emotional core of the adaptation. Lensmen Reviews described middle sections as "clumsy" with confused protagonists, though the finale regained strength in underscoring violence's consequences. Critics in outlets like Times of India and Indian Express assigned ratings of 3/5, reflecting appreciation for thematic realism but reservations about coherence, with some arguing the ideological messaging—prevalent in left-leaning media—prioritized condemnation of partisan hatred over balanced . More favorable assessments, such as from , hailed it as "brilliantly executed" for integrating star-crossed lovers into turbulent politics, emphasizing the leads' terrific portrayals amid Kannur's real-world conflicts. Nowrunning praised the "sensational" story's political ambivalence as fodder for reflection on fanaticism's toll. Overall, professional ratings averaged 3 to 3.5 out of 5, indicating niche acclaim for its bold realism but limited broader appeal due to the dominance of grim over romantic depth.

Audience response

Audiences in responded positively to Eeda's depiction of in , praising its authenticity and resonance with local experiences of inter-party feuds rooted in historical warrior traditions. Viewers highlighted the film's raw portrayal of tit-for-tat killings and loyalty-driven conflicts as relatable, with discussions emphasizing how the narrative captured the district's turbulent reality without overt partisanship. Global streaming reactions on platforms like showed a divide, with some appreciating the central love story's triumph over political divides as a poignant arc, while others critiqued the violence sequences for and pacing issues that diluted engagement. User reviews noted that the romance often felt overshadowed by repetitive political motifs, leading to perceptions of preachiness in equating ideological with familial vendettas. Certain conservative-leaning viewers expressed reservations about the film's framing of through a romantic lens, arguing it risked normalizing tribal loyalties by subordinating consequences to personal passion, rather than unequivocally condemning the . This countered broader tendencies to romanticize political affiliations, with feedback underscoring a preference for clearer causal over .

Political and social commentary

The film Eeda has elicited political commentary centered on its portrayal of violence between CPI(M) and BJP-affiliated families in Kannur, with critics debating whether it fairly equates the culpability of both sides amid the region's empirical patterns of conflict. Proponents of the film's approach argue it highlights the mutual fanaticism driving retaliatory killings, reflecting data from 2000 to 2016 showing roughly equal losses—approximately 30-31 deaths each for CPI(M) and RSS/BJP workers in Kannur's 69 recorded political murders—thus underscoring a cycle of vengeance irrespective of dominance. However, detractors from left-leaning viewpoints contend the depiction introduces a false equivalence, given CPI(M)'s longstanding organizational control in Kannur and higher overall political murder contributions statewide (Kannur accounting for 36% of Kerala's cases from 2000-2015), potentially understating the asymmetry in initiating aggression. Some observers, including Congress figures, have praised the film for exposing the "violent political agenda" shared by CPI(M) and Sangh Parivar leaders, suggesting it could foster dialogue by prompting joint viewings. Conversely, accusations of an anti-CPI(M) slant emerged, particularly from party workers irked by the sympathetic portrayal of the RSS-affiliated male protagonist amid a backdrop where CPI(M) families historically hold sway, leading to claims of the narrative exploiting real tragedies for dramatic effect without sufficient condemnation of extremism's roots. Right-leaning commentary has viewed the film as a rare critique within Kerala's left-dominated cultural sphere, challenging the intrusion of ideology into personal spheres like romance, though the production's emergence in a media environment perceived as CPI(M)-sympathetic underscores broader debates on ideological balance in regional storytelling. Social discourse around Eeda emphasizes its illustration of politics eroding individual agency, portraying how partisan loyalties transform close-knit communities into arenas of monstrous polarization, with personal relationships sacrificed to familial and ideological vendettas. Localized backlash manifested in Kannur theaters, where screenings faced disruptions or cancellations due to sensitivities over depicting ongoing violence, yet no statewide bans occurred, highlighting tensions between artistic exploration and partisan exploitation without escalating to formal prohibitions.

Accolades and legacy

Awards won

won the Critics Award for for her performance as at the on December 7, 2019, praised for conveying emotional depth amid political turmoil. She also received the South Indian International Movie Award for in 2019 for the same role, highlighting her nuanced depiction of . The film secured a for Best at the , recognizing Rajeev Ravi's stark visuals that enhanced the realism of 's violent backdrop.

Cultural impact

Eeda's portrayal of partisan violence in as a destructive force affecting personal lives contributed to a broader cinematic shift in toward unvarnished examinations of regional political conflicts, diverging from earlier tendencies to romanticize or ideologically frame such events. Released amid heightened national scrutiny of 's clashes—exacerbated by BJP campaigns highlighting over 170 deaths since the 1980s—the film underscored the human toll without favoring either CPI(M) or affiliates, earning acclaim for its neutrality in balancing romantic and political elements. This approach influenced subsequent works, such as 2023's , which similarly centered 's inter-party murders, signaling a trend in independent productions prioritizing causal critique over partisan narratives. The film's cultural resonance extended to public discourse on ideological entrenchment in , where it faced resistance—including alleged pressure to remove screenings from theaters—highlighting sensitivities around depictions challenging local power dynamics. By framing youth recruitment into feuds as a perpetuation of generational trauma rather than heroic duty, Eeda fostered conversations on breaking cycles of retaliation, aligning with post-release analyses that viewed it as a for eroded personal agency amid polarized loyalties. Its inclusion in retrospectives of underscores a legacy of prompting reflection on violence's futility, distinct from propagandistic glorification prevalent in regional media.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.