The ‘Udta Punjab’ verdict fills me with enough hope to draw up a laundry list of wishes for our cinema.
The next time a demand for a ban comes up, I wish we’d remember the Udta Punjab verdict. I wish we’d stop being blackmailed by cultural policemen about the content in cinema. Most of us are fully capable of making the distinction that this is fiction, and while it may be based on life, it’s not real. And what about the others? That is not the film’s problem. You cannot ban a film because one madman could potentially pick up a gun after watching an assassination scene.
I wish we’d populate our Censor Boards with people who know and love cinema.
For the thousandth time, I wish we’d make subtitles mandatory, so that movies can cut loose from the “region” they are made in. It’s not just a question of more tickets sold, more profits. This is also a form of national integration. If a Sairat is telling us something important about caste in Maharashtra, if an Udta Punjab is telling us something about drug use in Punjab, if a Visaaranai is telling us something about the System in Tamil Nadu, then there’s no reason people in other states should be denied this information. Newspapers and TV transcend their base of operation and go “national.” Why not cinema?
And while on subtitles, I wish we’d make them a must even for ultra-mainstream films. When we go to specialised restaurants to sample cuisine that’s different from our own, why not be able to check out a Telugu masala pot-boiler, or a Punjabi musical?
I wish we’d grow up about sex and nudity. The things the censors don’t want us to see, they’re just body parts. Everyone has them. I wish they’d just slap an ‘A’ certificate and get on with it.
And I wish theatres enforce these ratings so that adults can truly see adult films – with more adult language, more adult situations, more graphic violence (if the story demands it). Part of the reason for the state of our mainstream cinema is that we’ve always infantilised audiences, deeming sex okay in item numbers that simulate sex, but shrinking back the minute the camera entered a couple’s bedroom. How strange that the latter situation, the more “normal” one, is the one we’re afraid will cause our morality to crumble, while audiences of all ages are allowed to watch Govinda and Karisma Kapoor executing steps that could be titled “How to Make a Baby.”
Not everyone across the nation, however, is going to watch adult films, grown-up films, so I wish we find a way to make these films viable. I wish we’d find a way around capping ticket prices, the way it happens in Tamil Nadu. These films are only going to play in urban multiplexes, and the more they earn from these venues, the better the chances of more such films being made. Bollywood has shown that it is possible to make niche films that are also profitable, even if released in only a few urban centres across India.
I wish we’d get rid of the “smoking/drinking is harmful” text. It’s a disgrace to art. If we are so concerned that people shouldn’t smoke, then we should ban cigarettes instead of mutilating a creator’s carefully composed frames.
I wish we’d figure a way to get serious cinema back into people’s daily lives. By “serious cinema,” I refer not just to grimly arty tales of drought-stricken farmers but also mainstream films that strive to offer more than entertainment and escape. Back in the Doordarshan days, we watched these films simply because there was no other channel, and thus we developed a taste for them. But what do we do in these ADD days?
So I wish we’d introduce cinema in our classrooms. I wish we’d tell students that cinema isn’t just entertainment, that it’s also art, that lyrics are similar to the poetry they study, that the screenplay is like the plays they enact on Parents’ Day. This could change the face of the audience, the face of our cinema.
I wish we’d be more careful about how we recognise our cinema. I wish we’d have serious standards for awards – both in terms of the films that get nominated as well as the judges called upon to make decisions.
I wish we’d invoke CSR and ask for specialised, dedicated theatres for non-mainstream cinema. Because multiplexes are always going to play films that make them the most money. There should be a way someone can watch an arty Kannada film in Chennai without having to book tickets for a “special” 10 a.m. show on weekends.
I wish, finally, that the State looks at funding cinema. In February this year, the Italian government increased cinema funding by 60 per cent, with a majority of the money going to new filmmakers. We have perfected the art of making entertaining films that make money. We should now see how we can make art, consistently and in a commercially viable way.
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2016 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Madhu
June 18, 2016
And I wish there would be a way to bring in international releases via OTT content providers at the same time as the theater releases are made in India. People living in small obscure towns out of India would then get to see them, er, legally, that is.
Your wishlist BR, definitely needs to happen. Mine is more of ‘please, please, please, poor us, please’ wish.
LikeLike
Madan
June 18, 2016
“I wish we’d populate our Censor Boards with people who know and love cinema.” – I appreciate the sentiment behind this but I do believe it is more a matter of principles than of understanding cinema. An adult does not need to be told what he may or may not watch, period. Because that is what the CBFC does when they deem scenes unsuitable for viewing. You (as in the CBFC) are telling me I can’t take it. Well, if I can’t take it even as a full grown ox, surely I have to own responsibility for that? I don’t think there should be cuts in any case once you have certified the film as suitable for adults only. Since TV channels cannot show A films in primetime hours, that already inflicts a potential loss of revenue on the film, so enough damage done.
On another note, I think Indians in general are pretty tolerant and passive people but also easily provoked into outrage even by a random watsapp forward. So if the friggin’ politicians would just shut up and let Indians grow up, we bloody well will. That again demands a set of principles that most of our political class do not possess. Divide and rule continues in full earnest nearly 70 years since the British left India.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Vikram s
June 18, 2016
Finally…:)) we get to read your views on this…when are you reviewing the film…look forward…
LikeLike
Rad Mahalikudi
June 18, 2016
That cigarette and liquor warning is highly childish and condescending. Woody Allen refused to release his movie in India due to that. While he can take that stand, unfortunately not everyone would be able to do that due to commercial constraints and pressures. We have a long way to go with respect to this “ban” culture – books, magazines, art work, movies, food, …
Not able to watch a movie like “Fandry” in bangalore – no possibility of those movies getting released here. Everyone loses…
LikeLiked by 1 person
olemisstarana
June 18, 2016
Loved the liberal bitch slapping the Bombay High court subjected Pahlaj Nihalani to… “Don’t be a grandma, hataaaa…”
LikeLiked by 2 people
awkshwayrd
June 18, 2016
“I wish we’d populate our Censor Boards with people who know and love cinema.”
Nihalani surely qualifies for the latter (at least his own) .. just not sure he’s any good at the former 🙂
I wish someone would file a PIL asking for Nihalani’s removal citing that he’s hurting our cinematic culture by being an uncultured imbecile wholly unsuited to his post. Of course they might as well file a PIL asking for the Censor Board to be disbanded as it is detrimental to our cinema and deprives the populace of the movies we wish to watch. Would that work?
LikeLike
Kitizl
June 18, 2016
You have no idea how happy you have made me by writing this post. This is literally all the rants that are in my head condensed into proper readable format. Thank you so much for writing this.
LikeLike
sanjana
June 18, 2016
We can make our wishlist and dream. If wishes were horses without someone riding and controlling them, where will they go?
That smoking warnings take away the thrill of watching a movie and I actually stare at the warning more than what is happening.
We must actually thank Nihalani for indirectly fuelling a debate allover.
How about someone like BR becoming the next chief after the present one? But then he may not be allowed to write reviews.
LikeLike
Anu Warier
June 18, 2016
I read in the news that the committee chaired by Shyam Benegal came up with the idea of an ‘Adult with caution’ certificate. Seriously?
Loved that the High Court took the tack it did; appreciate the fact that the Supreme Court batted the case filed by the NGO against the film back to the High Courts of Punjab and Haryana, and that both courts squashed the case. One lives in hope that good sense will continue to prevail.
Someone please kick Nihalani to the kerb. That he, of innuendo-filled dialogue and lyric fame, should be the guardian of our collective morality, is an insult to us all. That someone else gets to decide what I should watch or read or listen to should be a crime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
apala
June 19, 2016
BR-ji…….good laundry list. Also we should add the wish that the mainstream media (print and otherwise) stops branding any bold/gritty/violent/adult film as “குடும்பத்தோடு பார்க்கும்படி இல்லை!”. If that’s what we need (wanting to see every film with whole family) then அம்புலிமாமா கதைகளைத்தான் படமா எடுக்கணும்!
And even the so called “family” films are not so family friendly. And about those pelvic dances, we do let our 3/4 year old kids to make those “how to make baby” dance moves and enjoy that too……..we have to get that perversion out from people…………….
LikeLike
kasthuri
June 19, 2016
I think everyone will see the smoking and drinking notice foolish till you actually see a 7year boy idolizing rajnikanth as he flips his cigarette and trying it out with his pencil only to be reminded by his mother that this is wrong even though it looks cool. The little notice below may annoy viewers but it’s the only support the mother has to her claim.
LikeLike
Bunny
June 19, 2016
“So I wish we’d introduce cinema in our classrooms. I wish we’d tell students that cinema isn’t just entertainment, that it’s also art, that lyrics are similar to the poetry they study, that the screenplay is like the plays they enact on Parents’ Day. This could change the face of the audience, the face of our cinema.”
Isn’t this already going on? Well, okay, not formally in schools but this sentiment is quite prevalent. But the trouble is, you see, here in India we skip the word “just” from your “cinema isn’t just entertainment” and declare entertainment a sin. This is what AIB and cohorts have successfully done by butchering anyone who watches cinema for entertainment. Now any movie that deals with a serious topic is deemed art by our custodians of cinema. For instance, “if you don’t like ‘Neerja’ or ‘Airlift’, you have a low IQ”. That sentiment itself is close-minded and inflammatory. If Hitchcock’s films like “Psycho”, “The Birds” etc. were made here, they’d ridiculed by so-called intellectuals because they don’t deal with realism or “serious” issues.
The day when Adi Choprian values, Kashyapian values, Dibakerian values, Kukkonoorian values, Ghaian values, Hiranian values i.e. masala cinema, highbrow cinema, no-brainer cinema, austere cinema, “serious” cinema or “good old entertainment” will exist side by side without bullying one another, only then we’d have truly open minds. Right now, we still have a tunnel vision. Media and the self-appointed custodians of highbrow cinema keep saying that we have evolved (a tip in the hat to your views on ‘Rajneeti’), but the truth is that we are still closed-minded, our perception of cinema is still blinkered. If only we movie buffs could live and let live. Now that’s wishful thinking.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bunny
June 19, 2016
p.s. In case my comments hurt anyone’s sensibilities. Let me clarify, we Indians are tolerant people but there are certain rabble-rousers in our society who keep dividing us by spreading hate and bigotry.
LikeLike
Madan
June 19, 2016
“For instance, “if you don’t like ‘Neerja’ or ‘Airlift’, you have a low IQ”.” – I know there are people who do this, but isn’t your argument pretty one sided? I mean, what about the majority who not only watch only entertainment-product films but insist that anyone who is less than effusive about YRF/Adi camp films is a snob (and not just because his tastes may happen to be different)? So it goes both ways. But this issue again has nothing to do with censorship. Some amount of censorship is built into the Indian psyche per se, even if there may be a small minority that resists it. I bet anything the top honchos of the same film production houses who beg on both knees for freedom of expression don’t like to hear the truth from a low level employee in open house sessions. I work for a large corporate that shall remain unnamed and have seen a ‘take down’ first hand. If our companies operate like insecure mafia networks, why do we expect something different from Pahlaj Ji?
I am not defending Pahlaj for a minute and would like to see him be gone from this post but the double standards in the way this argument about freedom of expression goes always irks me. We have very low tolerance for politically incorrect speech and get very easily offended, that is what I have observed. So you take somebody with that attitude and make him a censor, sorry, certification board chief and he will reflect the same attitude which our big bellied top management guys also impose…and then blame govt for not creating the right conditions for business when they cannot even put aside their ego and listen to people who may know a little more about the ground reality.
LikeLike
udhaysankar
June 19, 2016
Kasthuri : I as a kid used to imitate vijay removing a cigarette from his shirt-collar(Thirumalai) with my grandfather’s cigarette. And a miniscule warning in the corner of the screen wouldn’t have made a difference.
LikeLike
Bunny
June 19, 2016
@Madan: The whole point of my argument was peaceful coexistence of various types of cinemas.
“I mean, what about the majority who not only watch only entertainment-product films but insist that anyone who is less than effusive about YRF/Adi camp films is a snob (and not just because his tastes may happen to be different)?”
And calling someone is snob is not as bad a criticism as abusing someone for not liking a supposedly lowbrow movie. Btw, I was called a “traitor”, “anti-national” for not giving 10 on 10 to the movie Neerja, as much I admire the great lady. I have never abused or trolled anyone for not liking Sholay. Naseer Saab calls Sholay a con and he’s fully entitled to his opinion.
p.s. Since you talked about the double standards of free speech, how about the double standards of AIB and their cohorts? Last year when Aamir Khan politely — let me emphasise the term politely — criticised AIB Roast, he was trolled and subject to character assassination. He didn’t file lawsuits against them or abuse them, yet he was trolled. Shouldn’t AIB have respected his views? Free speech works both ways.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Raj Balakrishnan
June 19, 2016
I wish different yardsticks were not applied when it comes to depiction of minorities/minority religion and Hindus/Hinduism. Minorities are the holy cows of India, all these defenders of free speech will turn the other way when minorities start protesting against a film/book etc. Wondering where Mahesh Bhatt was Vishwaroopam’s release was delayed due to minority protests.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sachita
June 19, 2016
What is so wrong with PSA about cigarette smoking? people will do what they will do but trying to keep reminding them about the ill effects isnt wrong, is it?
Dont see this linked to censorship issue at all. I was already planning to watch udta punjab but now would def. watch it just to spite Nihlani.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
June 19, 2016
“And calling someone is snob is not as bad a criticism as abusing someone for not liking a supposedly lowbrow movie.” – Abuse is bad, yes, no two ways about it. Being called a traitor for not liking Neerja/Airlift is pretty ridiculous though par for the course in this crazy country. But I don’t see the qualitative difference between low IQ and snob. One implies that you are dumb and the other implies that you are arrogant/stuffy. Perhaps you think it is alright to call someone arrogant for not liking a mass film but I wouldn’t necessarily go along with that.
“Last year when Aamir Khan politely — let me emphasise the term politely — criticised AIB Roast, he was trolled and subject to character assassination. ” – I remember that incident well and while Aamir was polite, he was also hypocritical. It was a time when AIB was under assault and some of the comedians who participated in it were threatened with either arrest or death. I completely disagree with Aamir’s sly way of equating physical and verbal violence. They are not equal, first of all. And secondly, when something is already announced to be a roast, it cannot be taken to mean real, malignant verbal violence. His point that it is juvenile is well taken but I think mostly everyone would have preferred if he had emphasised the threat to freedom of expression first and then focus on the content of AIB itself. Further, who exactly trolled Aamir (since I am not on twitter and don’t follow it) If AIB fans trolled Aamir, that’s par for the course. If they themselves did, it’s brattish and stupid. But again, it’s part of the internet universe, right? Fill me in on the details. What kind of trolling was it? Did they roll out the MCs and BCs (which nobody should be asked to put up with) or was it just normal ridicule (which celebrities should be man enough to handle if they want to be on twitter)?
I do not understand your hostility towards AIB. If it’s lame and childish, just ignore it. Asking for something to be done about it is like asking for internet trolls to be banned. In a way, stand up comedy is like trolling. I prefer it when it’s done with wit and irony like a Jon Oliver but essentially they all, at least the ones who get political, give offence in different ways. Stephen Colbert just slyly called Trump a Jefferson-like racist. He did it so brilliantly it probably went right past Trump’s head else he would have surely filed a defamation suit by now. But it’s still offensive. It’s just the tone and nature of humour that softens the blow. But law cannot sit in judgment of tone. I don’t see AIB as a threat to freedom of expression except in the sense that they are testing the limits of tolerance of free speech in India. Which is something more of our artists should do. I’d prefer it to be done differently and for our filmmakers to ask more tough questions of our politicians (fat chance) but any effort in that direction is fine because we really need to get more thick skinned.
On another note, your post is very confused. I am not able to make out what all did AIB and their cohorts do; did THEY troll you for disliking Neerja ? Because that’s how the way you have written it reads. If they are generally boorish, that;s their style. I guess don’t engage with them if you dislike their style. They thrive on people getting offended. I am no fan of AIB; rather I have barely watched any of their ‘work’. But it seems to me that getting worked up about AIB is exactly what AIB wants. It’s the most base form of humour. But it’s still just humour. Much more benign than 91 cuts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
vishal yogin
June 19, 2016
@BR Once these wishes were fulfilled, I am sure this would make it to wish list version 2.0,
“I wish that people who wrote those subtitles were paid well enough, such that the task of making subtitles got elevated to a mini art form in itself.”
Usually, the subtitles are not always up to the mark – I remember that one half of GoW had really lame subtitles – like it was given to someone who just knew something as crude as literal translation. It could have been much much better.
Btw, I read GoW part three might come out. If so, some cinema halls should indulge us with a marathon of all three parts back to back. Would you go ? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rad Mahalikudi
June 19, 2016
There is no harm in public education against smoking and drinking. Why target movies? Is that because it is a risky business and you can force them in to carrying the warning. Why target artistes – book, plays, art work? As BR said, if they are serious about it, stop the sale of cigarettes and drinks. Another way to look at is, we all know pollution is bad. Driving fossil fuel vehicles causes pollution. How about pasting a sticker on every motor vehicle with the warning that “pollution causes cancer, respiratory diseases….” front and back of cars.IMO, by doing that we take away the guilt psychologically. Now that I have put the warning (or paying extra tax), I can go around doing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Usha Pisharody
June 19, 2016
Reblogged this on A Quest on Overdrive … 🙂 and commented:
Very very insightful and pertinent read by that one voice of reason, Bharadwaj Rangan.
An important part of it being how it ought to be discussed in classrooms, and analysed as we do literary pieces. If only.
But in most cases, one would simply slap a ban, or maybe cry taboo!
LikeLike
UmaS
June 20, 2016
I’ve always hated the tagline during every smoking and drinking scenes even in movies shot way back !! From a society with free views we are moving towards narrow views all in the name of moral policing.
Loved the read…I wish too that cinema is viewed as art and that students are taught to appreciate good things and the effort that goes into making a few reels of movie !!
LikeLike
Bunny
July 31, 2016
[quote] I mean, what about the majority who not only watch only entertainment-product films but insist that anyone who is less than effusive about YRF/Adi camp films is a snob (and not just because his tastes may happen to be different)? So it goes both ways. [/quote]
It’s like saying that white people face racism and men face sexism. So, no it doesn’t go both ways!
These days just pretending to like highbrow cinema can make one an intellectual. Take for instance the idiot, Kamaal Rashid Khan: he is given so much importance by the media, he is treated like an intellectual just because he is a ‘strict’ film critic and has a ‘good’ taste in cinema. Even the self-appointed representatives of India’s youth, All India Bakchod, called him one of the top film critics of India. All this just because of his supposedly highbrow values.
[quote] I bet anything the top honchos of the same film production houses who beg on both knees for freedom of expression don’t like to hear the truth from a low level employee in open house sessions. I work for a large corporate that shall remain unnamed and have seen a ‘take down’ first hand. If our companies operate like insecure mafia networks, why do we expect something different from Pahlaj Ji?[/quote]
Say this only when you eat with your servant on your dining table.
LikeLike