While Malayalam cinema has certainly produced its fair share of compelling stories in recent years, it is also no stranger to mediocrity. Padakuthira, directed by debutant Salon Symon, lands firmly in the latter category. A confused film that never decides what it wants to be, it tries dabbling in satire, spoof, and eventually a heavy-duty investigation drama—without succeeding in any of them. It follows Nandakumar (Aju Varghese), a sensationalist journalist running the once-respected magazine Padakkuthira, now mired in yellow journalism. Alongside his team, Nandakumar spins fabricated stories for clicks and attention, leading to a series of absurd consequences. When they cross paths with Ravishankar (Renji Panicker), a mentally unstable person, they take his outlandish speculations as gospel, resulting in increasingly ridiculous events that threaten to expose the magazine for what it truly is.
Director: Dr Salon Symon
Cast: Aju Varghese, Sija Rose, Renji Panicker, Nandu, Indrans, Joemon Jyothir
Written by Deepu S Nair and Sandeep Sadanandan, Padakuthira fixates on yellow journalism but in the most unimaginative way possible. What could have been a biting critique of contemporary media ends up as a clumsy, dated narrative populated by half-baked characters and jokes that struggle to land. The film’s humour is perhaps its weakest point. Most of the comic moments feel stale and predictable. A scene where Nandakumar fabricates a crime story and faces the wrath of those implicated feels painfully familiar, especially for those who’ve seen the 1980s Malayalam film Boeing Boeing. Another attempt involving a female actor upset about being portrayed badly for doing special numbers is equally outdated and lacks any modern perspective.
Padakkuthira feels like a film made 30 years ago. It is reminiscent of the mid-budget comedies from the 1990s featuring actors like Mukesh, Siddique, and Jagadish. Those films, however, had two major advantages. The performances were consistently good, and the humour, while sometimes broad, still managed to leave you smiling. This film, on the other hand, falls flat in nearly every instance. The comedy is forced, repetitive, and ultimately unfunny. Aju Varghese plays Nandakumar, a journalist who thrives on sensationalism. His performance works when playing the carefree loafer, but once the story treats him as a serious moral centre, it becomes hard to take him seriously. His portrayal turns into a caricature, and his persistent chain-smoking feels more like product placement than character depth. Sija Rose, who plays Keerthy, is wasted in a role that gives her little to do apart from reacting to Nandakumar’s foolishness. Indrans, an actor who typically exudes strong screen presence, ends up in a role that leans into a caricature of his own measured performances, lacking the subtlety that made his characters memorable. The only mildly redeeming performance comes from Nandu, who injects some energy into otherwise dull proceedings.
Padakuthira attempts to explore issues of fake news, media responsibility, and public consumption of sensationalist content. These are relevant topics, but the film fails to engage with them in any meaningful way. Instead, it falls into predictable twists and turns, with characters whose exaggerated naivety becomes frustrating. A half-hearted subplot about environmental protests and corrupt politicians barely registers and feels like an afterthought. Even the climax, which should have offered a sense of payoff or surprise, is utterly predictable. The final showdown lacks creativity, wrapping up the story in the most banal way possible. Despite a runtime of just under two hours, the film feels longer due to sluggish pacing, and the occasional attempts at emotional depth only highlight the film’s lack of consistency.
In one scene, Nischal, who reviews films for Padakuthira’s YouTube channel, begins trashing a film in the loud, crude style familiar from certain Malayalam YouTube "reviewers". The moment Nandakumar mentions the producers have paid them, Nischal instantly flips to a sugary, glowing review without a trace of irony. It’s played for laughs but ends up feeling like an unintentional reflection of the film itself—confused and willing to abandon any principle if it helps sell the story, though it fails to deliver on even that.