I make films, but know not what to make.
–Jiya Bhardwaj
–Jiya Bhardwaj
When Gandhi brought about the three wise monkeys, representing the principle "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil", he never really defined what ‘evil’ can be. Is ‘evil’ Satan from the hell, or a moral ground that consciously defines what’s good or bad for us? Or a law that states certain lines for us as citizens? What may be evil to me, may or may not be evil to you. I don’t mean to shake the grounds of the largely accepted evils, but the fact that can be understood here is, that every individual is a different person and clearly, has his own perspective.
Cinema, is an arena that provides an artist to showcase his work with freedom. His views, his perspectives, and his presentation is clearly what he wants his audience to see. If A has a problem with the dialogues, B has a problem with the clothes, C has a problem with the sentiments of a particular religion hurt, making the film take rounds at the court and facing a ban, I doubt Cinema is a medium of freedom. The Censorship Board, led by Sharmila Tagore, is welcome to certify a movie, but the whole phenomenon of the ban is a disgrace to art and its forms. ‘Certification’ classifies an age barrier of a particular movie. Once that is set, and once you follow it and not let your children watch it, I don’t think anything needs to be taken offence on, and if its personally offensive, one always has an option to walk out or boycott the film.
We can also look at another way to solve these issues. A synopsis of a film can openly hold a section which is dedicated to the censor board, where they could specify in a sentence ,the probable aspects of unrest for any community or to an individual at a very macro level, something as similar as the warning ‘cigarette smoking is injurious to health’. Let’s take Jodhaa Akbar as an example. The film was banned after protests from the Rajput community over Jodha Bai’s depiction as Akbar's wife. The Supreme Court later lifted the ban. Here now, if the censor board takes out a strategy to inform the audience what the film holds principally with its release, the Rajput community has a very fair chance to boycott the film. The censor board could hold their statement as…..“The following film is an adaptation of the life of Jodha Bai and Akbar the Great, where the director has explored their union in a wed lock.”
Very evidently, this seems like an open end and a never ending appeal in a helpless arena. What I simply appeal for, is a system that gives us distinction between Certification (at a very responsible level), Censorship ( just to certify in its various aspects) and a Ban (manipulatively can be called as a ‘self ban’ or more conveniently as an individualistic boycott)
And again, if you are worried about the impact of ‘vulgar’ or ‘violent’ scenes or dialogues on the youth or their effects on other communities, it’s time you open your eyes and look around.
Is it really the movies?
Here are a few famous films that faced bans :
1. The Da Vinci Code
Cinema, is an arena that provides an artist to showcase his work with freedom. His views, his perspectives, and his presentation is clearly what he wants his audience to see. If A has a problem with the dialogues, B has a problem with the clothes, C has a problem with the sentiments of a particular religion hurt, making the film take rounds at the court and facing a ban, I doubt Cinema is a medium of freedom. The Censorship Board, led by Sharmila Tagore, is welcome to certify a movie, but the whole phenomenon of the ban is a disgrace to art and its forms. ‘Certification’ classifies an age barrier of a particular movie. Once that is set, and once you follow it and not let your children watch it, I don’t think anything needs to be taken offence on, and if its personally offensive, one always has an option to walk out or boycott the film.
We can also look at another way to solve these issues. A synopsis of a film can openly hold a section which is dedicated to the censor board, where they could specify in a sentence ,the probable aspects of unrest for any community or to an individual at a very macro level, something as similar as the warning ‘cigarette smoking is injurious to health’. Let’s take Jodhaa Akbar as an example. The film was banned after protests from the Rajput community over Jodha Bai’s depiction as Akbar's wife. The Supreme Court later lifted the ban. Here now, if the censor board takes out a strategy to inform the audience what the film holds principally with its release, the Rajput community has a very fair chance to boycott the film. The censor board could hold their statement as…..“The following film is an adaptation of the life of Jodha Bai and Akbar the Great, where the director has explored their union in a wed lock.”
Very evidently, this seems like an open end and a never ending appeal in a helpless arena. What I simply appeal for, is a system that gives us distinction between Certification (at a very responsible level), Censorship ( just to certify in its various aspects) and a Ban (manipulatively can be called as a ‘self ban’ or more conveniently as an individualistic boycott)
And again, if you are worried about the impact of ‘vulgar’ or ‘violent’ scenes or dialogues on the youth or their effects on other communities, it’s time you open your eyes and look around.
Is it really the movies?
Here are a few famous films that faced bans :
1. The Da Vinci Code
It was banned considering "public sentiments" after protests by Christian organizations in Goa and Andhra Pradesh.
2 .Madras Café
2 .Madras Café
The film, which is set in the backdrop of the Sri Lankan Civil War, was not released in the state after several groups protested that the film portrayed the Tamil Tigers in a bad light.
3. Aaja Nachle
3. Aaja Nachle
The movie was banned because the lyrics of the title song was allegedly humiliating the Dalits. The lyrics were later changed. The ban was lifted later after the producers apologized
4. Aarakshan
4. Aarakshan
On 11 August 2011,In Punjab, the film was banned for hurting the feelings of the weaker sections of the society. But, the ban was lifted on 14 August 2011 after a preview screening.
5. Jodhaa Akbar
5. Jodhaa Akbar
The film was not released after theatre owners received letters written in blood from Karni Sena
6. Gulaab Gang
6. Gulaab Gang
Just before days of its release, Sampat Pal Devi, the leader of the original Gulabi Gang has filed a case against the makers of Gulaab Gang as she feels the filmmakers have no right to make a film on her life without her permission On 5 March 2014, the Delhi High Court passed a stay order against the release of the film across India stating that the release will cause irreparable loss to the reputation of Pal and that "the loss of reputation can not be compensated by monetary terms". High court one day later lifted the ban on Gulaab Gang
7. Goliyon ki Raasleela -Ram Leela
7. Goliyon ki Raasleela -Ram Leela
The petition had contended that the film was hurting religious sentiments of Hindus and its title 'Ramleela' was giving a wrong message to society as Lord Ram's 'leela' (act) had great impact on Indian society.
Read our interview with Pritish Nandy here.
Read our interview with Pritish Nandy here.