As head of the Central Board for Film Certification, there have been numerous instances where Pahlaj Nihalani had displayed his regressive mindset, his prudery, and his complete incomprehension of the creative process of filmmakers by ordering cuts and refusing to certify films. Now Mr. Sanskari is out and countless people who would have borne the brunt of the censor’s scissors are hugely relieved.
After objecting to the use of the word ‘intercourse’ in When Harry Met Sejal, the CBFC members asked producer Kiran Shyam Shroff how she could make such a film “despite being a woman” and why, wait for it…"How can she be a woman as she is wearing a pant and shirt?" The board asked for 48 cuts before certifying the film ‘A’.
His term would have ended in January 2018 when he would have completed three years of his tenure. However he was sacked before that. Not only were filmmakers exasperated at his way of operating, his moral policing and arbitrariness, his colleagues also felt that he treated the CBFC as his own personal fiefdom and acted in a dictatorial fashion.
Well known ad man and lyricist (he has won the best lyricist Filmfare thrice) Padma Shri Prasoon Joshi will take his place as CBFC chairman. His filmography includes Neeja, Bhaag Milkha Bhaag, Delhi 6, Tare Zameen Par, Rang de Basanti, Fanaa, Black and many others.
According to Nihalani, the CBFC’s job is to censor and not merely certify. He feels that now, with him no longer heading the board, filmmakers will “resort to showing pornography and vulgarity even in normal films". In his view, censorship is necessary to “preserve the culture of the country and uphold its traditional values”.
While many in the film industry would have been happy with the decision, people such as Shyam Benegal and Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra chose to comment instead on why Prasoon Joshi was an excellent choice and how his experience and artistic sensibility would be an asset to the board. Meanwhile Twitter had its own say.
Commentators have pointed out that Nihalani was able to impose his own personal moral code upon an entire nation of filmgoers because the Cinematograph Act 1952 gave him wide ranging powers to do so. Some of the guidelines of the act are quite archaic and many are open to being interpreted in arbitrary and narrow ways. The first guidelines states: “anti social activities such as violence are not glorified or justified” which can be interpreted in so many different ways. This screen grab from the CBFC’s Wikipedia page listing the guidelines shows us just how open to interpretation the guidelines are and how subjective they can be.
The Cinematograph Act 1952 and its guidelines need updating and need to be brought into the 21st century. It needs to be clarified that the job of the CBFC is to certify and not to censor. Until some fairly big changes are made, filmmakers and filmgoers will continue to be at the mercy of individuals imposing their own vision, moral codes and personal beliefs upon an entire nation.
Do you have something interesting you would like to share? Write to us at [email protected]
