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

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!!!!!

The movie sets out to be a gripping courtroom drama with a strong central story - a woman's unexpected tragedy and her relentless fight for justice against a failing system. The premise holds great potential, and the cast delivers commendable performances. No actor feels out of place, and at times the natural dialogue adds to the realism.

However, the film's promise quickly fades due to poor storytelling and weak execution. The early thrilling tone is overshadowed by overly dramatic and sometimes unnecessary dialogues, which break the flow and dilute tension. Direction remains average throughout, failing to hold the narrative together. The cinematography is particularly disappointing; in a genre that thrives on intensity and sharp visuals, the bland camera work makes the courtroom scenes dull instead of gripping.

The climax, instead of delivering a punch, takes an awkward turn with an unnecessary fight sequence that feels both forced and tiring. Worse, it shifts the focus away from the film's core agenda. The abrupt ending leaves the audience unsatisfied, making the journey feel incomplete.

Overall, while the core idea is strong, the film's execution undermines its potential. If you are a die-hard fan of courtroom dramas, it may be worth a one-time watch. For others, this is a film better skipped.

Why did they even made such a stupid logic less movie. This is worst movie I watched ever in my life, no story, no sense dragging around 3hrs. In the beginning she wants to retain baby and suddenly she wants it to abort it, I don't see the logic here.they dragged this movie without any solid twist. Total timewaste.

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.

Suresh Gopi, his fake beard, and a band of bad actors - what could have been a gripping courtroom drama, almost like a Criminal Justice episode, collapses under amateur filmmaking. It begins well, grabs attention, then loses track midway. Poor direction drags it down, and so does an overdramatic, pointlessly political Sureshgopi. His dialogue delivery has strong effect, but this film needed a grounded performance, far from his theatrics.

The story is stitched together and carried by weak actors: Madhav Suresh, who has no clue what he's doing, and Askar Ali, who reminds us of Asif Ali but with dull, unconvincing acting. On the brighter side, Anupama and Shruti Ramachandran are decent, and the villain comes across as believable.

The story had promise, but all the intrigue and suspense are wasted on shallow references and courtroom scenes that lack credibility. The screenplay needed tighter, sharper treatment, sticking to its core plot instead of drifting into agenda-driven dialogues and pointless politics. By the end, it pushes in a social (pro-choice) angle that was simply not well done.

If done differently, this could have been a far better film. But the flaws are too many to ignore.