Let’s KISS (Keep It Short and Simple)

Be it Daniel Craig or Ranbir Kapoor, in India kissing is allowed only as long as it’s short. We find out what industry insiders have to say about the censor board’s newest rule

The censor board appears to have struck again and this time on the receiving end is none other than special agent 007. The board has snipped two of Daniel Craig’s passionate kissing scenes in Sceptre, (that releases this Friday) because they were deemed too long. Twitter lost no time in retaliating with the hashtag #sanskariJamesBond. The Ranbir Kapoor and Deepika Padukone-starrer Tamasha’s fate too has been similar with the makers cornered into shortening a kissing scene to please the board. The word “saali” too has been chopped off from one of the dialogues. And this could very well be the tip of the iceberg because it has also been learnt that CBFC chairman Pahlaj Nihalani has internally circulated among the board members a new list of words to be banned. And it appears, it is not just the film industry that is against such directives — Nihalani is facing opposition from within the board itself.

Nandini Sardesai, CBFC’s Revising Committee member says that the chairperson has a “knack for keeping policymakers out of the loop”. Referring to the Spectre and Tamasha cuts in particular, she said, “I don’t approve of such censorship. I haven’t seen the film yet, so I cannot comment on the scenes, but how can one determine if the kiss is too long Or short It’s a subjective decision.” She goes on to talk of the internal workings of the board. “There is no uniformity in the thinking of the board members. Out of 100 people in the committee, four are randomly selected to examine the film in the first stage, and the members keep changing. In this case (Spectre) the film was screened only for the four members and an officer. If the members weren’t too convinced with the verdict, they had an option of approaching the revising committee and later the tribunal. I come in at the second stage, as I’m a part of the revising committee. I heard about the circular on

profanities being circulated again, but this chairman has a knack of taking unilateral decisions without keeping the policymakers in the loop.”

She’s not the only one within the board who has taken up against Nihalani. Fellow board member Ashoke Pandit didn’t mince words either. “This is a mockery of the institution. He is simply imposing his decisions like it is his personal censor board. He should also then change the name of CBFC to Pahlaj Nihlani Board of Film Certification. He is not allowing creative people to express themselves. He has purposely reissued the list (of profanities) in spite of all the board members rejecting it. He recently decided to delete the word ‘rakhel’ in Prem Ratan Dhan Payo because he found it inappropriate. Calendar Girls and a few other recent releases too had a

similar fate. He has instilled a fear psychosis in the mind of filmmakers and if this continues people will stop touching upon issues that matter to the society the most.”

Not too long ago it was Luv Ranjan’s film Pyar Ka Punchnama 2 that fell under the axe. And in spite of several beeps and cuts, the film was only passed with an A-certificate. “The adults in the country have a right to choose their PM, marry, produce children but they have to watch films certified as ‘A’ with all the profanities beeped My only bone of contention is that if you are giving it an ‘A’

certification, you might as well maintain everything that is necessary for the script,” Luv said. Mahesh Bhatt opines that any kind of censorship ultimately backfires on the imposers. The filmmaker says, “This can only be seen as a pathetic attempt of using an extraneous rule of law to feed an ideology. The problem is that the board’s chief assumes that he is in the driver’s seat, while truth is that he has no control whatsoever on what shape Indian cinema takes. You can’t forcibly restrict what the people want to watch and that will eventually backfire.”

But he also believes that criticism alone won’t get the film fraternity anywhere — filmmakers need to stop meekly submitting to the board, he says. “If you want to say something, it is your right by the constitution to say it. I have, in the past, fought hard for my films and did not stop at the revising committee but took the fight to the Home Ministry and even the court. Admittedly, I got burned and bruised, but I came out stronger. Filmmakers nowadays don’t have the inclination to fight the good fight. Ultimately, they are also businessmen and make no

mistake, this is the ‘business’ of cinema,” Bhatt says. However, Luv argues that the filmmakers’ hands are often tied. “Filmmakers cannot fight because they fall short on time. They go to the censor board two weeks before the release of the film and they have to agree to everything that the board says because there is hardly any time to argue. And there is a huge amount of money involved,” he says.

Ashoke gave out some indications of upheavals within the censor board. He said that the members are planning to take action against the chairperson. “We are all planning to write to the

chairman, because being members of the board, we do not want to be seen as unreasonable. The I&B ministry should take cognisance of the issue and do something about it.” Echoing this view, Nandini added, “He (Nihalani) is a political appointee, but what we need at the CBFC are learned, knowledgeable people. I hope the I&B ministry is attentive of this fact since the CBFC directly falls under them.

Repeated phone calls and messages to Nihalani went unanswered. Meanwhile, speaking to a Hindi publication on the matter, the CBFC chairman called the Spectre episode a “meaningless controversy”. He also called the alleged new list of objectionable words a “baseless accusation.”