CBFC chief Pahlaj Nihalani is at it again. The chairman has now vowed to take strict action against filmmakers, who in a rush to undertake the process of film distribution before the release date, send off their films abroad without proper certification. Livid and armed with a long list of culpable producers, he said that the CBFC is all set to take the strongest criminal action against the practitioners of this offence. We talk to filmmakers and industry insiders about whether or not this proposed move is justified, and what the ramifications of such a measure can be.
‘A portrayal of india’s cultural heritage’
Imran Sardhariya, Sandalwood director
A lot goes into the CBFC’s decision regarding a movie’s verification than just strict censorship. It’s probably why releasing movies, without ensuring the edits required by the board, is not only wrong, but a very careless thing to do too. As a director, I feel it’s of primary importance to respect the law, in order to ensure the sanctity of a particular lineage of art. As for ramifications regarding rule breakers, not allowing them any sort of certification seems like the right way to go about it. This is because no matter how commercially set up a movie’s spread abroad is, at the end of the day, it is a portrayal of our nation’s cultural heritage.
‘Every small issue is being looked at with a microscope’
Vamshi Paidipally, director
First of all, no producer will be foolish to risk creating a problem for their film by means of bypassing the CBFC. They won’t take such a huge risk as there is a lot of money at stake. The distribution process of a film is the most important one as that’s what decides the viewership of the film. I think since the chairman has come into the picture, every small issue is being looked at with a microscope and minute things are being blown out of proportion. Like this issue for instance. Do you think makers would bypass norms like that? Censorship is important and there’s no two ways about it.
‘Difficult to ascertain if he’s ignorant or wilful’
Ashwini Chaudhary, filmmaker
Pahlaj Nihalani is on the wrong wicket once again. It has become difficult to ascertain whether the CBFC chief is actually ignorant or a wilful person. No film requires a certification from the parent country before a release in any international market or festival. The rules or certification of the player market apply on the film. Has he forgotten how the CBFC under his patronage imposed further cuts on the length of the kiss in the Bond film already certified in USA? He needs to grasp that producers do not need certification from CBFC to play in international markets. His vision or lack of it does not apply to cinema and its distribution worldwide.
‘A regressive move like this will only harm the film industry’
Faraz Arif Ansari, director of Sisak
A regressive move like this will only harm the film industry; even worse considering how the revenue generated for 2017 has been only average with several films making a lot of losses. The role of the CBFC is to only grant a certificate to movies that are in the pipeline to release in the country; they have nothing to do with a director taking his movie internationally. When it comes to that, the director should only be concerned with getting a certification from the country in question. Even if I want my film to see an online release through a portal like Netflix, or Amazon Prime, I have to only consider my contract with that portal and not the CBFC! Very unfortunate to see a person in such an influential position making such decisions. Needless to say, there are going to be repercussions of such a decision. And it will tragically hit independent filmmakers. Even some mainstream directors who want to bring a change in the field. The man has clearly misunderstood his role as the chairman.
‘We’re not north korea; a rule like this can’t exist’
Anand Gandhi, director of Ship of theseus
What he is saying is completely unconstitutional and arbitrary. There is no such rule, there has never been such a rule in the Cinematography Act. A rule like that cannot even exist because that will amount to cultural censorship. We are not North Korea, though Nihalani would like that situation very much. We are not a country that censors dialogue with the world outside. As long as India stays democratic, I don’t think such a law should or could exist. Giving such arbitrary statements while holding such an important office is complete abuse of power. It is also abuse of the responsibility that we, the citizens of the country, have accounted him for. Such an abuse, if it goes unchecked, will only lead to a dangerous situation for movement of thought and culture in this country. He should under no circumstances be making such statements, because that is also spreading a fake notion about what the law is. That should be accountable in court. We should be able to raise a lawsuit against him just for saying such things.
