By Shailesh Kapoor
Film censorship was the hot topic of debate in the media for an extended period over 2015-17, when PahlajNihalani was at the helm of affairs at CBFC. The ad hoc, almost anarchic, ways of CBFC during his tenure got much bad press. It has been a subject of some of my columns here too, including this one at the time of Udta Punjab.
A committee headed by veteran filmmaker ShyamBenegal was formed in early 2016. By mid-2016, the committee had submitted its recommendations on structural changes in the certification process in India. Eighteen months hence, the report is gathering dust in the corridors of I&B ministry at ShastriBhawan in New Delhi. Meanwhile, in 2017, Nihalani was replaced by a more known and celebrated personality, Prasoon Joshi. So far, he hasn’t pushed the reforms agenda either.
But even as the film industry waits in hope of a more liberal certification policy, CBFC has turned out to be the least of its worries of late. The release of Padmaavat (earlier Padmavati), scheduled for January 25, has been under threat in large parts of India. After the film’s December release was postponed, the film got its due certification from CBFC, with bizarre changes recommended, such as the change in the title, and digital work to cover DeepikaPadukone’s midriff in the Ghoomar song.
Not left with much choice, and choosing to give up the smaller battles for the bigger war, makers of the film conceded to these changes, paving the way for the film’s release.
But the alacrity with which several state governments jumped in, banning the film one after the other, was fascinating. The banning spree started with Rajasthan but travelled across North and West like a raging forest fire. Yesterday, the Supreme Court put an end to this farce, suspending the proposed ban, basing their judgment entirely on constitutional premises.
But it’s not the end of the woes for the makers of Padmaavat. The will to enforce the Supreme Court decision will evidently be missing, and ‘soft instructions’ can be sent to exhibitors to avoid releasing the film. One hopes that the bigger national chains, such as PVR and INOX, do not buckle under pressure. But when you run the risk of property damage with tacit support to the goons from the local police and administration, it may seem a bit too brave, even foolhardy, to not buckle under pressure.
News channels have remained silent on the issue in recent weeks, even after the Supreme Court judgment, with token coverage on select channels. One cannot rule out another ‘soft instruction’ playing a role here.
The next six days will bring in their share of twists in this matter. In an ideal scenario, the states that banned the film should now officially welcome the film, and reiterate that it’s their “duty†(as described by the Supreme Court) to ensure a safe release of the release.
But we don’t live in an ideal world. And no such announcements will happen. The only thing we have heard from the states since yesterday is a vague. we-are-studying-the-judgment response. I predict no action over the next 3-4 days, leading to a free-for-all situation on Jan 24-25, which the states will then “step in†to control. If private or public property is damaged in the process, or human lives are lost, you can expect a ‘that’s why we banned it in the first place’ type of response.
After messing up with sports in the country, politicians have now taken to films in full force.They have six days to surprise many like me, and handle this differently from what we think they will do.