Movie censorship

Benegal panel on film censorship takes a stand for creativity, but who will watch the watchmen?

Much depends on the reconstitution of the Central Board of Film Certification, currently headed by the scissors-happy Pahlaj Nihalani.

Should films be censored or certified? The committee headed by eminent filmmaker Shyam Benegal to provide guidelines to the Central Board of Film Certification has firmly voted against censorship and made a case for respecting the collective intelligence of the movie-going public.

The committee submitted its report to Information and Broadcasting Minister Arun Jaitley on April 26. The members (Kamal Haasan, Rakeysh Mehra, Piyush Pandey, Goutam Ghose, Bhawana Somaaya, Nina Lath Gupta and Sanjay Murthy) agreed that the CBFC needs to categorise films according to age groups rather than mutilate scenes. “Artistic expression and creative freedom are not unduly curbed in the process of classification of films,” recommended the committee, and “ the process of certification by CBFC is responsive, at all times, to social change.”

There was no immediate word on rolling back the rampant muting of profanity, an initiative spearheaded by CBFC chairperson Pahlaj Nihalani. Will kissing not be reduced any more “by 50%”, as the producers of a recent James Bond film were asked to do? The devil is always in the details.

Film industries across the country will welcome the recommendation that viewers need to be treated like grown-ups, but how many producers will comply with the suggestion that “the applicant must specify the category of certification being sought and the target audience”? The notion of what is “harmful or unsuitable content” for children is subjective and debatable. Besides, filmmakers who wish to increase their market reach push for UA certificates even when their movies are clearly meant only the 18-plus population.

The Benegal committee has a solution: apart from the three main categories, there is a recommendation to sub-divide the UA category into UA12+ & UA15+. “The A category should also be sub-divided into A and AC (Adult with Caution) categories,” recommends the committee. If these categories are created, the onus of the implementation will ultimately rest with cinema chains.

The Mudgal committee report

The creation of new categories also features in the reported submitted by the committee headed by Justice Mukul Mudgal to the previous Congress-led coalition government in 2013. The Mudgal committee members included former CBFC chairpersons Sharmila Tagore and Leela Samson and poet and lyricist Javed Akhtar. None of their suggestions has thus far been implemented.

Both committees also warned against banning films on the specious grounds of unsuitability, except when they contravene the provisions of the Section 5B (1) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. According to this wide-ranging clause:

  “A film shall not be certified for public exhibition if, in the opinion of the authority competent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interests of 1 [the sovereignty and integrity of India] the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or involves defamation or contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of any offence.”  

The more far-reaching recommendations of the Benegal committee concern the CBFC’s functioning. The Board, which includes the chairperson and members picked by the I&B Ministry, is exhorted to play “the role of a guiding mechanism for the CBFC, and not be involved in the day-to-day affairs of certification of films”. One member should represent each of the nine regional offices (the current constitution of the board tips the balance in favour of Delhi and Mumbai).

Nothing short of an overhaul will be necessary to implement a fresh process of appointing "examining officers", as the people who watch and rate films are known. Several examiners are political appointees who are affiliated to the ruling party. They are a part of the CBFC not because of their understanding of cinema but their contacts, and they are often the culprits behind the sanctimony and righteousness that govern certification.

Even the selection of the CBFC board is routinely politicised. The current crop includes BJP members Vani Tripathi Tikoo, Jeevitha Rajasekhar, George Baker SVe Shekher, Rashtriya Swayamsewan Sangh activist Ramesh Patange, and Narendra Modi cheerleaders Ashoke Pandit and Mihir Bhuta.

Observed the Mudgal committee report:

  “At certain locations, members of such advisory panel lack any form of cinematic understanding, they perceive their role to be that of a Censor Board to cut and chop scenes and in some cases being affiliated to some political, religious or social group, impose without restraint, such political, religious or personal opinions upon content permissible in a film.”   

The Benegal committee has offered a practical solution: it has recommended that the National Film Development Corporation, the Federation of Film Societies of India, the National Council for Protection of Child Rights and National Commission of Women, and the Film Federation of India each recommend 25% of the examiners. Women should have 50% representation on each advisory panel from each regional office. This suggestion, if implemented, will go some way towards improving the certification process and ensuring that at least half of the examiners have more to do with cinema than politics.

Age of Pahlaj

Another important recommendation is that the original uncensored version of a film be despoted with the National Film Archive of India rather than the censored version. This will enable future scholars and students of cinema to watch a movie that reflects the filmmaker’s vision rather than the prejudices of the examiners.

There is also hope for filmmakers on the issue of the obtaining clearance from the Animal Welfare Board of India and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. The AWBI’s hyper-vigilance has held up or interfered with several films that feature animals and birds. The ministry’s insistence on running a scroll every time a character lights up over and above a general health advisory that runs in the opening credits is proof that the CBFC doesn’t trust the intelligence of the average viewer.

The Benegal committee has sought more time to offer recommendations on the certification of films that feature animals and birds and/or smoking. The final report will be handed over to the I&B Ministry on June 20. The ministry’s decision will affect filmmakers and fans as well as influence the current functioning of the CBFC.

Will the Age of Pahlaj finally be behind us?

Support our journalism by paying for Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Bringing the glamour back to flying while keeping it affordable

The pleasure of air travel is back, courtesy of an airline in India.

Before dinner, fashionable women would retire to the powder room and suited-up men would indulge in hors d’oeuvres, surrounded by plush upholstery. A gourmet meal would soon follow, served in fine tableware. Flying, back in the day, was like an upscale party 35,000 feet up in the air.

The glamour of flying has been chronicled in Keith Lovegrove’s book titled ‘Airline: Style at 30,000 feet’. In his book, Lovegrove talks about how the mid-50s and 60s were a “fabulously glamorous time to fly in commercial airlines”. Back then, flying was reserved for the privileged and the luxuries played an important role in making travelling by air an exclusive experience.

Fast forward to the present day, where flying has become just another mode of transportation. In Mumbai, every 65 seconds an aircraft lands or takes off at the airport. The condition of today’s air travel is a cumulative result of the growth in the volume of fliers, the accessibility of buying an air ticket and the number of airlines in the industry/market.

Having relegated the romance of flying to the past, air travel today is close to hectic and borderline chaotic thanks to busy airports, packed flights with no leg room and unsatisfactory meals. With the skies dominated by frequent fliers and the experience having turned merely transactional and mundane, is it time to bid goodbye to whatever’s enjoyable in air travel?

With increased resources and better technology, one airline is proving that flying in today’s scenario can be a refreshing, enjoyable and affordable experience at the same time. Vistara offers India’s first and only experience of a three-cabin configuration. At a nominal premium, Vistara’s Premium Economy is also redefining the experience of flying with a host of features such as an exclusive cabin, 20% extra legroom, 4.5-inch recline, dedicated check-in counter and baggage delivery on priority. The best in class inflight dining offers a range of regional dishes, while also incorporating global culinary trends. Other industry-first features include Starbucks coffee on board and special assistance to solo women travellers, including preferred seating.

Vistara’s attempts to reduce the gap between affordability and luxury can also be experienced in the economy class with an above average seat pitch, complimentary selection of food and beverages and a choice of leading newspapers and publications along with an inflight magazine. Hospitality aboard Vistara is, moreover, reminiscent of Singapore Airlines’ famed service with a seal of Tata’s trust, thanks to its cabin crew trained to similarly high standards.

The era of style aboard a ‘flying boat’ seems long gone. However, airlines like Vistara are bringing back the allure of air travel. Continuing their campaign with Deepika Padukone as brand ambassador, the new video delivers a bolder and a more confident version of the same message - making flying feel new again. Watch the new Vistara video below. For your next trip, rekindle the joy of flying and book your tickets here.


This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Vistara and not by the Scroll editorial team.