|
Post by James on Jul 25, 2014 18:58:27 GMT
Disappointing that they're going this route instead of just instituting a better rating system... No more 'beeping' and 'blurring' says CBFCIn an interview to Mirror (January 16), CEO of the Censor Board of Film Certification (CBFC), Rakesh Kumar expressed his displeasure over objectionable content being passed in films. "We want to nip this trend in the bud," he had asserted. Recently, CBFC passed an order that instead of blurring out images deemed offensive, the scenes will have to be edited out. Another order passed says: Beeping of cuss words will be done away with, instead the scene will go mute in the portion where the expletive is used. Confirming this, Rakesh Kumar told Mirror, "Blurring toh bilkul nahin chalega (Blurring simply won't do). And if there are gaalis (curse words), a 'U' certificate will only be given if the objectionable part is muted in its entirety. Cuss words become obvious if beeped out." This order stems from the frontal nudity scene in Ashu Trikha's Vinod Khanna starrer Koyelaanchal and the lovemaking scene between Arshad Warsi and Huma Qureshi in Dedh Ishqiya. Said a source, "CBFC received a lot of flak for these two scenes." Mirror has it that after the backlash, the censor have chopped several scenes, including a sequence of Jacqueline Fernandez' father getting a massage in Kick. The violence depicted against Shraddha Kapoor and Aamna Shariff in a recent film was also toned down, as also scenes of Randeep Hooda hitting Alia Bhatt in Imtiaz Ali's Highway. The CBFC is now taking steps to ensure that violence against women and children committing crimes is not highlighted. More importantly, every single member of the CBFC will sit for screenings in rotation. Added the source, "Earlier, only select members were invited to screenings which lead to accusations of bias towards certain bigwigs. But now, every one of the 150 members will get his chance to vote." Added Rakesh, "We are trying our best to do a fair job."
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 19, 2014 2:37:15 GMT
Censor Board Chief Arrested by CBI Allegedly For Taking Bribe Reported by Sunetra Choudhury, Edited by Amit Chaturvedi | Updated: August 18, 2014 21:41 IST New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) today arrested Censor Board chief Rakesh Kumar for allegedly demanding Rs. 70,000 from an agent to clear a regional film. Mr Kumar was questioned by the CBI over the weekend and the investigators found enough prima facie evidence to suggest he had demanded the bribe, sources said. The CBI had last week arrested an agent and advisory panel member in connection with the case. Sources said an authorised agent for censor certification had approached the CBI alleging that another agent Shripati Mishra has been demanding Rs. 70,000 on behalf of Mr Kumar for issuing the censor certificate for regional language film from Chhattisgarh "Mor Dauki Ke Bihav". After getting the complaint, the CBI laid a trap at to catch the suspects red handed, said sources. The film was not released as the arrests were made before the clearance was given. Sources also said that producers of the film wanted an urgent certificate as the date of the release of movie was on August 15. An Indian Railways Personnel Officer (IRPS), Mr Kumar joined as CEO of Central Board of Film Certification in January this year.
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 19, 2014 14:53:27 GMT
Corruption scandal reveals how Bollywood certification process actually worksThe CEO of the Central Board of Film Certification allegedly demanded a bribe from a film producer through an agent, but middlemen have been getting censor certificates for producers for years.Aarefa Johari · Aug 15, 2014 · 09:27 pm Many filmmakers in Mumbai get their films cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification by paying hefty commissions to agents. However, none of these middlemen actually have official authorisation. On Thursday, the Central Board of Film Certification – popularly known as the censor board – found itself in the midst of a corruption scandal when the Central Bureau of Investigation arrested one such certification agent, Shripati Mishra, for allegedly demanding a bribe of Rs 70,000 to get a regional film from Madhya Pradesh cleared. Mishra was arrested along with a member of the CBFC’s Mumbai advisory panel. But the controversy escalated when the Board’s chief executive officer, Rakesh Kumar, was himself booked for allegedly asking for the bribe through the agent. Most news reports described the middleman as an authorised or certified agent who was serving as facilitator between the film producer and the censor board, but according to filmmakers as well as a senior member of the board, such agents have no authorisation at all. Attempts at transparency“These agents are not certified by anybody and are not supposed to have any role in the process of acquiring a censor certificate,” said Leela Samson, chairperson of the CBFC, who claims that the board has been working for several years to introduce transparency into the process of applying for certification clearances by moving it online. “But producers are often not willing to take to the new system and push for out-of-turn requests through agents,” said Samson. Films in India cannot be screened in public or on television without a certificate from the CBFC stating whether they are appropriate for general audiences or should be restricted to viewers of a certain age. To apply for the certificate, producers have to submit their film, along with the script, title credits and other documents to the board. The fee for getting a Hindi or English feature film certified could range from Rs 25,000 to Rs 50,000, depending on the length of the film. Regional language films pay lower fees. If a film does not require many edits or changes, it could get cleared within two or three months of application. Most producers, however, find it convenient to get the process handled by agents, who manage everything from preparing the final edit of the script and filling out the forms, to getting a date allotted for the censor board committee to view the film. The agent arrested by the CBI on Thursday was trying to get the board to hasten the process of certification so that the producer could have his film ready for release on August 15. “On an average, agents in Mumbai charge Rs 50,000 for Marathi films and up to Rs 15 or Rs 20 lakh for Hindi films,” said a Marathi film producer who did not wish to be named. “They know people at the censor board committees and can negotiate with them on edits and ratings. They get work done, and no one wants the headache of going and talking to the board people.” The producer claims there are at least 15 or 20 such agents in Mumbai, but is not really sure what their backgrounds are. “The agent I used to go to was an assistant director on some films,” he said. Rooting out corruptionAccording to filmmaker Ananth Mahadevan, certification agents may not be authorised, but they are not illegal either. “They are not necessarily touts, but they act as facilitators,” said Mahadevan. “They have been around for a long time, and one can’t say for sure that there would be no instances of corruption in the censor board if the agents were to go.” Samson believes one of the reasons the board finds it difficult to check corruption is that the members of the CBFC’s advisory panels – which issue the certificates – are usually appointed by local political leaders. “We have been saying for a long time that panel members should be selected by us, so that we can appoint people who are artistic, interested in films and have a strong sense of editing,” said Samson. “But avarice has taken over everybody’s sense of judgment, and people want a system with agents.”
|
|
|
Post by James on Aug 20, 2014 4:58:23 GMT
Really interesting to read these reports, Prem Rogue, thanks for sharing. These people essentially sound like lobbyists to me, and I suppose like all lobbyists, they can be involved in shady dealings when their clients are prepared to pay anything to get what they want. Sounds like a good reason to get rid of the censor board, or at least reduce political interference by stopping the gov't from appointing people to the board as mentioned in the article.
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 21, 2014 6:09:30 GMT
James, I think the CBFC is inherently political. Unless the board is run by people who actually appreciate film, it will continue to be that way. They're more interested in moralizing and censoring anything politically touchy than in anything else. Censor Board chief took bribe to clear Singham Returns, Bobby Jasoos, KickAbhishek Bhalla | Mail Today | New Delhi, August 20, 2014 | UPDATED 10:16 IST The Censor Board chief's tale of graft has sloshed over into blockbuster territory, and shows no signs of slowing down. A massive bribery scandal has hit Bollywood after the arrest of the Chief Executive Officer of the Central Board of Film Certification, Rakesh Kumar. The new twist in the plot leaves behind the old stuff of exploited small-time filmmakers to feature big ticket Bollywood producers allegedly greasing the palms of CBFC officials for censor clearance. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has gathered information that producers of movies starring Shah Rukh Khan, Salman Khan, Vidya Balan and Ajay Devgn allegedly approached Kumar and offered bribes to get clearances as they feared item numbers and other scenes could be chopped, leading to a delay in the release of films. Sources said Kumar demanded Rs.1.5 lakh for screening a film in three to four days for clearance; Rs.25,000 for screening in seven to eight days and Rs.15,000 for a short film. Sources said the recent Ajay Devgn-Kareena Kapoor film Singham Returns, Vidya Balan's Bobby Jasoos and Salman Khan's Kick all ran into trouble with the censor board and Kumar was allegedly paid off for their clearance. "He threatened to cut item numbers and scenes. He demanded a bribe for these and film-makers had no choice but to pay up, fearing heavy losses if the release got delayed," said a CBI officer. Under scannerA source said Kumar demanded a bribe from the producers of a film starring Shah Rukh Khan that is yet to be released. Presumably, this is Happy New Year, slated for a blockbuster Diwali release with 3,600 prints. Sources said all movies cleared after Kumar took over as CEO in January were under the CBI's scanner as the agency suspects him of running a well-organised racket. The CBI arrested Kumar in an alleged bribery case on Monday, four days after carrying out raids at his residence in Mumbai. The agency has informed a court in Mumbai that Kumar, along with others, was part of a big conspiracy that needs to be investigated. "It needs to be investigated for whom he issued the certificates (at different points of time) and we also need to get the names of producers, directors and agents," the CBI told the court while seeking his custody. Out of turnThe CBI has further alleged that Kumar used to issue certificates out of turn. Thirty-three watches of expensive brands like Rolex and Rado were found at his home; he did not disclose how they were obtained. Sources said properties owned by Kumar are under the scanner, and the CBI is likely to register a case of disproportionate assets against him. Earlier, the agency arrested an authorised agent and a CBFC advisory panel member for allegedly taking bribes on behalf of Kumar. The CBI stumbled on these big revelations as it began its probe into allegations by an authorised agent for censor certification that another agent, Shripati Mishra, had been demanding Rs.70,000 on behalf of Kumar for issuing the censor certificate for a film from Chhattisgarh called Mor Dauki Ke Bihav. Mishra was trapped while demanding and accepting the bribe of Rs.70,000 on behalf of Kumar. Sarvesh Jaiswal, advisory panel member of the CBFC, was nabbed while accepting the bribe on behalf of Kumar. Mishra, during his interrogation, revealed he allegedly paid Kumar Rs.5 lakh after being directed to accept bribes on his behalf. Sources said Jaiswal spilled the beans and told interrogators that Kumar had been demanding bribes from top producers. "He named some of them. We have got a three-day custody of Kumar and will be grilling him about his network," a CBI officer said. Meanwhile, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry has decided to suspend Kumar. An officer of the Indian Railways Personnel Service, Kumar took over as CEO of CBFC in January. He was a rank outsider with no experience in censoring films as he had never even worked as a regional officer in CBFC, which would have equipped him to do the job. He holds a diploma in films.
I wonder if any action will be taken against the producers of these films.
|
|
|
Post by MrB on Aug 21, 2014 11:47:27 GMT
I wonder if any action will be taken against the producers of these films. It feels difficult to tell whether this is a case of bribery or extortion. Assuming the various allegations are true, were the producers paying to receive special treatment, or has the system become so distorted that people have to give backhanders to get "normal" treatment, and those who don't pay are punished by receiving even worse treatment than those who do? India is riddled with cases of the latter, and there would not be much to be gained by prosecuting those who give in to extortion. And it's India so, even if this is a case of outright bribery by the producers, chances are that no action will be taken.
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 21, 2014 17:19:23 GMT
Good point. It seems to that these deep-pocketed producers are being extorted, though there might be some bribery going on too.
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 22, 2014 16:18:07 GMT
Lights, Camera, Conversation… “Cutting questions”August 22, 2014 · by Baradwaj Rangan So we know now the censor board is corrupt. But how necessary is it in the first place? About the recent fuss around the censor board chief caught taking bribes, I have just this to add: I am not surprised. This was bound to happen. Over the years, censorship has become some sort of minor annoyance, something that has to be done or else your film won’t get released. It’s like making prints or booking theatres or putting up posters and banners. It’s just another bit of logistics in the long chain of events leading to a film’s release – and it’s an utterly unimportant step. Once the censor certificate is obtained, no one cares about it. Filmmakers don’t care to showcase the rating in any meaningful way. Theatres don’t take care to implement this rating. And we don’t seem to care whether our children end up seeing films they shouldn’t be seeing. So who, really, is being benefited through this rating? At least in Tamil Nadu, there seems to be some sort of financial gain from obtaining a “U” certificate, some sort of tax exemption. But elsewhere? The system is broken because the people on the censor panels are often people who have no real relationship to films except as viewers. They seem to be unable to differentiate, among other things, between implied and overt sexuality, between psychological and physical violence. The minute there’s a lovemaking scene, the censors get uncomfortable and reach for a more adult rating, but they routinely let pass dance sequences where the suggestive, rain-soaked choreography is pretty much like lovemaking, except the participants have a bare minimum of clothes on. And let’s not even get to the bleeping out of “offensive” words, with scant regard to context. Someone who wants to bypass this system can easily do it. Many skilled dialogue writers and lyricists have gotten away with double-meaning lines or lyrics that seem to have flown over the heads of the censor committee. And we’ve all heard of filmmakers who include a lot more blood and gore (or swear words, or sexual content) in the print they submit to the censors. The censors cut a bit of all this and feel they’ve done their job. The filmmaker comes away smiling because he still has the adult content he wants. And now, with the Internet, this sort of censoring is even more suspect. At least in earlier days, you could justify these cuts saying that you are protecting young viewers (or whatever), but now, when the most hard-core material is just a mouse click away, what is really being achieved? I am not saying that censorship is unimportant or unnecessary. I’m saying that we need to have a long, hard look at what it aims to do and whether these aims are being achieved. Instead of focusing only on censorship, do we need a campaign to target parents and tell them that this ratings thing is a serious business and they have to be careful about what they expose their kids to? Let’s consider violence. When I was in school, I routinely watched action sequences, but the action choreography then was just a bunch of karate or kung fu moves – what used to be called dishoom-dishoom – and no one took any of it seriously. Even the blood looked fake. It looked like the red paint it was. So there was no question of being traumatised or becoming immune to violence – because it was all so clearly make-believe. But now, stunt choreographers take more trouble to ensure that the fights look real, the blood looks real. Is it okay, then, for kids to watch the endless shootouts in Singham Returns or the scenes in Anjaan where one bad guy is shot in the forehead and another one’s head is smashed in by a rock? Perhaps the best kind of censorship is no censorship at all. I realise this sounds extreme, but when little children on TV end up doing the kind of dance moves that were once the prerogative of cabaret dancers in the movies (and with proud parents approving), and – of course – with the Internet all around us, do we really need a panel to decide what’s good for us and what isn’t? How many parents ask their children to change the channel when one of those lewd Govinda-Karisma Kapoor dances come on? Without censorship, at least the adult-skewing foreign films would come to us intact, without being butchered because, say, a demure housewife on the panel couldn’t handle Quentin Tarantino’s brand of violence. This, to my mind, is a worse crime than taking bribes.
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 23, 2014 8:38:22 GMT
Film cert CEO took laptop, iPad to clear Tamil film: CBITNN | Aug 22, 2014, 11.19 PM IST MUMBAI: The CBI has found that Rakesh Kumar, CEO of the Central Board of Film Certification, had accepted a laptop and an iPad for arranging speedy screening of big-budget Tamil movie Anjaan and another Rs 50,000 for screening its Telugu version. The movie was issued the clearance certificate on August 5 this year. Anjaan, starring Surya and Samantha, is produced by Siddharth Roy Kapur. Kumar was arrested on Monday. On Friday, the court extended Kumar's custody till August 28. The CBI found CCTV footage of Kumar accepting money and gifts at a coffee shop in Andheri. The investigating agency has also found footage of him accepting money from some authorized agents who act as the interface between the producers and CBFC. Kumar was arrested on Monday after an agent, Shripati Mishra, and advisory panel member Sarvesh Jaiswal were caught accepting Rs 70,000 bribe for issuing clearance of a Chhattisgarh movie. Both are in judicial custody. Kumar had invested Rs 2.34 crore in properties and spent Rs 1.27 crore on purchase of gold and diamond jewellery. The CBI also seized 2kg gold and diamonds worth Rs 65 lakh that were found in a bank locker maintained by Kumar and his wife. The properties included land and flats in New Delhi and Noida. The CBI has examined eight agents who have approached Kumar since he took over as CEO in January this year. The agents told CBI that they used to send text messages to Kumar seeking speedy clearance of movies. "They used to pay money for speedy work," CBI's remand application said.
|
|
poornima
Dancing in the chorus
Posts: 37
|
Post by poornima on Aug 25, 2014 8:00:37 GMT
Brangan gets it right. We really don't need the pretence of a censorship board. I do wish the government would use this opportunity to come up instead with an intelligent ratings system and also persuade the media to educate viewers on adult content/suitability for children, etc in their reviews. But I am not hopeful. The culture types in the ruling BJP party seem more inclined to promoting 'traditional Indian values', ignoring the changing cultural mores on the ground. If India must have a Censor Board, at least we could do better than hiring ex-railway personnel for this job? I recalled reading Leela Samson (the noted Indian dancer who formerly headed the Censor Board)on this topic several months ago: 90% of my colleagues uneducated,an embarrassment: Censor chief Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) chairperson Leela Samson has claimed that 90 per cent of the panel members clearing movies in India are uneducated and an embarrassment. Samson,a noted Bharatanatyam dancer who was appointed CBFC chairperson in 2011,has said that 200 such panel members largely insensitive individuals,politically ambitious people and party workers are handpicked by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting every two years,and that the board is left to face the flak for their irresponsible decisions. indianexpress.com/article/news-archive/web/90-of-my-colleagues-uneducated-an-embarrassment-censor-chief/
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 25, 2014 16:35:57 GMT
I'm fine with a CBFC whose primary roles is classification and rating of films based on content, and censoring only the most extreme stuff like, say, child pornography, from films. But they overreach when they are overly paternalistic towards adults, bleeping and censoring content in "A" rated films that are for adults only, and banning films with whose values (political, religious, etc.) they disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Aug 26, 2014 14:27:57 GMT
No wonder people use agents to deal with the CBFC. The process sounds like something out of Kafka! Why touts thrive in censor board officeAn Independent filmmaker's first hand account of getting a censor certificate in IndiaBy Bikas Mishra • Published on August 26, 2014 Thankfully films don’t require a censor certificate for screening at film festivals. But if you want to submit your film for the Indian Panorama of the International Film Festival of India or the National Awards, you need to get a censor certificate. The date of certification will be considered as the date of completion of your film. That’s precisely the reason why many independent filmmakers apply for the certificate knowing very well that they won’t ever use it as their films won’t be exhibited commercially. In 2011, I applied for certification of my short fiction film to be able to submit to a government-run festival. I knew that agents existed to make the process hassle-free for filmmakers like me for a fee, but I decided to apply directly to understand how the system works. At the time, we had published a news story on DearCinema that CBFC had made the process online. I happily registered on the CBFC website and waited for weeks but never got a confirmation on my account. I didn’t give up and downloaded the PDF application form and filled it up. I calculated the applicable fee for my film using the charts provided on the CBFC website and got a demand draft made in the prescribed name and headed to the censor board office in Malabar hills. I was well prepared, I had read the FAQs on their website, was equipped with DVD screeners, printouts of synopsis, a filled up form and mostl importantly a demand draft drawn in favour of the pay and accounts officer of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Despite all that, I failed in my first attempt as I was informed by the lady behind the reception desk that new applications are only accepted in the first half of the day. I told her that it’s nowhere written on the website; she gracefully informed me that it’s the problem of the website but everybody knows the timings! The next day, I was there again and this time, I was lucky that she accepted my documents but after a cursory glance at them told me that it’s a wrong form and handed me over the ‘right’ form. I tried to match the two forms to realize that the only difference between them was that the form I had filled was not printed by the CBFC but had been downloaded by me from their website! I had learnt by now that convention, more than transparent rules, dictated the terms there. While filling up the form, I also realized that CBFC lives in its own idea of time. According to the form, a film can either be a film shot on celluloid, or a video shot on video cassettes. There is no space in-between. They are yet to come to terms with digital cinema. I had shot my film on an HD camera and had got a 2K DCP made for theatrical exhibition. But I had no choice but to declare it a video and say it has one cassette only. The second correction I had to make on their advice was to declare my film as “Music”! Strange, but that was the only way out. In the form you need to fill up a column for the language of the film. My film had no dialogues. The lady was baffled. She thought for a while and asked if it had music. I told her that since the film is about a dancer, in one sequence he dances and drummers beat their drums; and she promptly put “music” against the column. There was no scope for declaring it a film without spoken words. It explains how far removed the people working for the censor board are from filmmaking. My film is anything but “music”! Filling up the form all over again was annoying enough but what came next was a complete shock. She refused to accept my demand draft drawn in the name of the payee as prescribed on their website and wanted me to get a new demand draft made. I told her that the payee’s name is as prescribed on their website. Her answer was simple – it’s a problem of the website. I tried to argue. She advised me to meet the Regional Officer and complaint to him about the errors on the website. The next stage involved waiting for weeks to receive a call from the CBFC that never came. I kept calling to check the status and finally, after a month, I was happy to be informed that my film had been seen by the examining officer. The next stage was to submit my file along with the DVD in a sealed envelope and wait for another call to get the certificate. So, my first challenge was to find the DVD that I had submitted to them. Peons and clerks kept me waiting for one entire day and then asked me to come the following day as they couldn’t find my DVD. On my second visit, after waiting helplessly for half a day, a gentleman probably took pity on me and took me to a room which seemed like a screening room. He advised me to search the DVD there on my own. What a privilege after paying a hefty fee! I searched through the pile of DVDs kept on a television trolley. I thanked the man profusely and he smiled and gave his card in return. He was a censor agent, meant to save people like me from the ordeal of getting a film certificate. After having found my DVD, the battle was only half-won. The next part of the battle was to find my file. Yes, my file was nowhere to be found! I have to admit that the people there aren’t always bad. After waiting for another day, I walked into the office of Mr. P. B. Bansode, the examining officer, and narrated him the whole story. He was kind enough to take me to the nooks and crannies of the CBFC office and hunt for the file with me. Finally, we found it lying under a pile of files. Another unspoken rule of the CBFC certification process is that the applicant is expected to do half the job for the office despite having paid an examination fee. You’re expected to know who sits where and what is kept where to be able to get a censor certificate. And it’s incredible the kind of free access the CBFC office provides to applicants and touts alike. I wonder if anybody would have noticed had I picked up somebody else’s DVD lying in the screening room! Mr. Bansode was extremely nice, he called me again the next day in the evening and handed me my censor certificate. It felt like victory. I still have the certificate that no one else asked for except the government run festivals. I made another short after a year and took the services of the gentleman (who is technically a tout) who helped me find my lost DVD in the CBFC office. I always wonder – why did I need a censor certificate at all if my short film can be shown at festivals “uncensored” and there is no prospect of it getting a commercial release. Corruption breeds in the crowded office of CBFC because it’s inefficient and the process – lengthy and bureaucratic. When filmmaking has been democratized with advent of new technology, shouldn’t government re-evaluate the very need of censor board? And if it has to stay, shouldn’t it be made transparent and accessible for filmmakers?
|
|
|
Post by Prem Rogue on Mar 21, 2015 23:25:32 GMT
MAULVI AND PANDIT TURN CENSORSBy Ankur Pathak, Mumbai Mirror | Mar 21, 2015, 12.00 AM IST Two religious heads sat in at the screening of Dharam Sankat Mein and asked the makers to delete two 'offending' scenes from the film. Whatever you do, beware of God - that seems to be the mantra the censor board is following. Mumbai Mirror has learnt that the Central Board of Film Certification invited a Muslim maulvi and a Hindu pandit for a screening of Dharam Sankat Mein. The Board's reasoning seems to be that if the religious leaders gave the film a 'clean chit' Before certification, it would save the Board and the makers from controversies later. In recent times, films have begun to attract the ire of the overfaithful. Aamir Khan's blockbuster PK is a good example - the Bollywood superstar had to apologise for his film that poked fun at godmen and religion. In the new film's case, quite evidently, the Board didn't want to get into a dharam sankat. In the film due for release on April 10, Paresh Rawal plays a Hindu who, at the age of 55, discovers that he was born a Muslim and adopted by a Hindu family. According to a source present at the screening, the pandit objected to a scene where he is seen spitting out cow urine. "He argued that cow urine is holy water and can't be spat out," the source said. "Eventually, he got the scene deleted." Shankarbhai Vegad, a BJP member of the Rajya Sabha from Gujarat, had on Thursday declared in the House that cow dung and urine are more potent than medicines and can cure deadly diseases like cancer. When lawmakers are saying such things, woe betide filmmakers who don't take note. The maulvi, the source at the screening added, "was offended by a suggested circumcision, and insisted on a cut." So filmmakers can't even hint at things anymore. The makers of the film - which also features Naseeruddin Shah and Annu Kapoor - complied with the religious leaders' demands, and walked away with a U/A certificate. When contacted, one of the film's producers, Sajjad Chunawala said, "The [Board] chairperson, Pahlaj Nihalani, was extremely cooperative. Yes, there were religious heads at the screening who wanted us to make some changes. We've taken those bits out." There's a meme doing the rounds on social media that states, 'vegetarians are deciding what meat non-vegetarians should eat, sanyasis are deciding how many kids married people should have' and so on. You may now go ahead and add: Men of God are deciding what we mere mortals can - or cannot - watch.
|
|