J.S.K - Janaki V v/s State of Kerala

Rating - 3/5

A courtroom drama portraying the investigation procedurals but missed on hooking the audience on right notes.

The crux of the story is about Janaki and her fight for justice against the State over the untoward event in her life and will Judiciary and the system stands by the plaintiff unfolds through the story.

Pravin Narayanan has penned a sensitive story portraying the life of physical abuse victims and the emotional and mental agony they face from the society through their empathetic eyes. The screenplay slips in few places where the audience misses the spark in the story giving a conclusion of a cliche survivor story. The story inspired from multiple incidents has been synchronized and portrayed on screen but fails to make a lasting impact altogether rushing through investigation and onset proceedings.

Good performance by Suresh Gopi through his power punch dialogue modulation and delivery. Anupama has given a stunning performance in the movie conveying the right emotions demanded by the character. Askar Ali, Yedhukrishnan,Vaishnavi & Divya Pillai made impressive performances. Madhav was giving a stone looked face struggling to say the dialogues felt preachy in few sequences.

Good music by Girish blending with the storyline added with Ghibran's background scores.

A watchable drama with decent performances ruling out the minor flaws.

I watched JSK, a film headlined by none other than the legendary Suresh Gopi. The story and direction are credited to Pravin Narayanan, but unfortunately, the film struggles to deliver on both fronts.

Story and Screenplay

The storyline is weak, and the screenplay is disjointed. The film is cluttered with too many subplots and an overwhelming number of characters, making it difficult to follow the narrative. At times, it's hard to tell which plot thread is being discussed or where the story is headed. To make matters worse, the film includes several unnecessary songs and dance sequences that add no value to the plot-just filler to stretch the runtime to a bloated 2.5 hours.

Performances by the lead characters:

* Anupama Parameswaran, who plays the titular character, was given a grand buildup before the release. But shockingly, she barely appears on screen for more than a few seconds at a time and has virtually no dialogue. Her most notable contribution is a few screams of frustration-perhaps reflecting her own dismay at being cast in such a marginal role.

* Suresh Gopi, as expected, dominates the film. He starts off as a lawyer arguing against the rape victim, gets the case dismissed, then has a change of heart and decides to fight for her. He brings in his sister to argue in the High Court and eventually joins in with a lengthy closing argument. True to form, the film delivers the expected monologues and action sequences, including a moment where Gopi single-handedly subdues a villain the Kerala Police couldn't handle. Classic.

* Madhav Suresh, Suresh Gopi's younger son, makes an appearance but doesn't get a single line of dialogue. He does, however, get a fight scene. His performance lacks expression-perhaps a sign of inexperience.

My Verdict

JSK attempts to tackle a sensitive subject-a rape case and its legal battle while raising the question about her rights including to abort - but fails to do so with coherence or emotional depth. The film leans heavily on Suresh Gopi's star power, but even that can't save it from its structural flaws and poor execution.

The rape victim is an adult, educated, moneyed, unmarried and orphaned, with literally no one to stop her from doing what wants. And yet she decides to wait for 7 months (of the gestation period), before going to court for the right to abort! Has the Director/Writer forgotten that we live in India - and this story also happens here - where every woman has the right to get an abortion - unlike the grand USA where women, including rape victims cannot get an abortion!

**Rating: 3/10**

A disappointing watch, even for die-hard Suresh Gopi fans.

Such a good movie. This film is welcome as it clearly highlights the right of all living beings in our country to live as they please and the protection of women and those who abuse them. Good story.. And an example of how even a common man can get justice if our Indian Constitution is used properly. Family watch movie.

After a long break, BJP MP and Union Minister Suresh Gopi has acted as a lawyer in the film JSK. The movie was originally titled Janaki vs State of Kerala. Later, due to the interests of certain members in the censor board, it was changed to Janaki. V vs State of Kerala. I couldn't understand what difference that change made. But after watching the film, it becomes clear why a ruling party's censor board member worked against it.

There are several dialogues in the film that damage the government's image-references like "Manja Kutty", "Irattachankan", and the news scrolls mentioning "Robin Bus" etc. All these highlight, in the eyes of the public, nothing but the government's failures.

The story revolves around Janaki, a girl who suffers sexual assault, goes to court seeking justice, and eventually wins by relying on the Constitution and its articles. I felt that some of the characters did not fully do justice to their roles. Anupama, who played Janaki, delivered an average performance. But Shruti Ramachandran, who appeared in the final part as the pregnant lawyer Nivedita, was quite disappointing. Her courtroom arguments and counterarguments looked as if she was simply reading them from somewhere. Similarly, Divya Pillai's acting also felt mechanical. Both of them need significant improvement.

Interestingly, no one in the film has a full-fledged role. The one with the maximum screen presence is Askar Ali. Many newcomers were part of JSK-some in their first, second, or third films-and it is undeniable that they all remained loyal to the movie.

Suresh Gopi did not heavy scenes in this film, and most of his screen time is in the first half. Yet, whatever part he had, he executed it gracefully.

Direction maintained a quality that was above average. Editing, cinematography, music, and background score were all fairly good. However, there are several areas that need improvement-especially the background score, which should have been better. The final action scenes were poorly executed, though the art direction of those sequences was excellent. The climax was completely unexpected. I never thought there would be another case and another accused (Ranjith Menon, Venkitt) before even knowing who the villain was.

The director managed to connect many small scenes very well. He also demonstrated a good understanding of laws, constitutional articles, and courtroom procedures, which was evident throughout the film.

Bad screenplay followed by the overacting of SG. Bgm also lacked to feel the audience about the intensity of the scenes. As compared to other courtroom drama it's a below average one. Madhav suresh acting in the serious situation looked like he is acting in a old age drama. I don't understand why some people compare it to lalettans neru!!!!!