banning films – The Metrognome

This being banning season, Prashant Shankarnarayan compiles a list of the things and the people he wants to outlaw forever.

The situation – Yet again another series of bans.

The observation: Our sentiments could be considered careless and weak because they seem to be getting hurt left, right and center. So much so that bans are being demanded, ordered and granted like the free masala puri at a chaat stall. Will these upholders of sentiments ever realise that if everybody starts banning things around, they and their ilk would be out of business very soon? These ‘banatics’ have instilled confidence in me such that even I would love to ban a few things as they hurt my sentiments, for instance:

When three young girls from a certain State (from the rock band ‘Pragaash’, in the featured picture) are banned from singing and performing.

When other youngsters in the same State are armed with AK-47s instead of education and jobs.

When someone bans a movie citing their God has been portrayed in a negative light.

When someone believes that only his God is the best God.

When someone bans a book believing that it has offended his community.

When someone believes in a book so much so that it shapes one’s very idea of life.

When a random godman says that a girl on the verge of being raped should bow in front of the monster and call him her brother.

When people still believe in godmen and godwomen…and Gods.

When someone expects me to consider a 17-year-old rapist and murderer as a child.

When someone stresses on the human rights of the accused, ignoring those of the victim.

When people don’t lease out or sell their flats to members of a certain community.

When people don’t get out of their ghetto mentality.

When people blame Western culture for everything that’s wrong with their society.

When the same brag about their children being settled in the West.

When someone bans a painting on the grounds that his Gods and Goddesses were painted in the nude.

When the same person doesn’t think twice before insulting someone else’s God.

When someone equates religion with morality and benevolence with God.

When the same person believes that God expects us to fear him, else he will burn us in hell.

When someone believes in an unknown God, but doesn’t trust a known conscience.

When I know that despite wanting to ban Religion and God forever, I still believe in a person’s right to practice his/her faith freely simply because I am not a ‘banatic’!

Prashant Shankarnarayan is a media person who is constantly on the lookout for content and auto rickshaws in Mumbai. ‘Soft Coroner’ tries to dissect situations that look innocuous at the surface but reveal uncomfortable complexities after a thorough post mortem.

(Picture courtesy theage.com.au)

Banning films is our new pastime

If we’re banning films anyway, can the State ban films that hurt our intelligence, several of which release this year?

by M@themetrognome.in

This has been some week for the film fraternity. SRK’s ‘victimised’ (or not) statement created quite a stir and a ban on Kamal Haasan’s Vishwaroopam proved how flat the fraternity falls in a face-off with the State. But Vishwaroopam is not the first film to go perilously close to getting the axe. Many films in the past have been ‘modified’ to suit the sensibilities of a few people who find some material in it ‘objectionable’. Some films like Anurag Kashyap’s Paanch are still in the cans due to this.

Even Hollywood is not spared. Remember how David Fincher gave the Indian Censor Board the finger when he was asked to remove three scenes from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, that were apparently gore and sexual in nature? People who managed to get a bootlegged copy of the film and have seen it, will tell you how important the ‘unsuitable’ scenes are to the plot of the film. Similarly, The Da Vinci Code was banned in States like Goa, Andhra Pradesh and Nagaland because of its controversial plot revolving around the manifestos for Christianity.

In Malaysia, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ was banned only for Muslims, while the film was deemed suitable for Christian and Buddhist audiences. The film had the potential to create unrest amongst Muslims, thus the unusual ban. In retrospect, it seemed like a wise decision – it makes sense to not watch it if you don’t like it. But now, the Malaysian Government has failed to do the same for Vishwaroopam; the film was removed from theatres just a day after its release.

If banning films in the name of religion irks you, then this would definitely make you furious. In 1917, Birth Control, a film on family planning was banned in the United States of America in the interest of ‘morality, decency, public safety and welfare.’ The only reason one can let this pass is the year of the ban, when a not-so-modern America upheld a stereotypical image of the real woman and her moral values. Maybe a hundred years from now, even we will stop banning films for unjustifiable reasons.

But, can a ban really make the filmmaker bankrupt? The answer is ‘yes’ and ‘no’. Hollywood film that don’t get a release in a few foreign countries are seldom affected. They recover their costs on the home turf. But Indian movies banned in Indian states take a severe hit at the box office. Indian films are specifically made keeping the Indian (sometimes regional) audiences in mind. While some movies do extremely well with the Indian diaspora overseas, most of the moolah is generated at home. The ban on Vishwaroopam can cost Mr Haasan a whopping Rs 95 crore, by trade estimates.

Instead, there should be a ban on Non-Entertaining Films. These are movies that serve no purpose whatsoever, and require the viewer to keep his brains in the freezer before watching them. Like the No.1 series of Govinda – Aunty No.1, Anari No.1, Beti No.1 etc. These movies impair one’s judgement to the extent that one spends his hard-earned money to watch a grown-up man behave like a monkey. Maybe in the future, the Censor Board or the State can do the people a huge service by banning films that should have never be released.

Just to make the task easy for the Censor Board, here are a few upcoming films in 2013 that are very suitable for imposing a ban on:

Rangrezz. It stars Jackky Bhagnani. Censor Board, there’s your reason.

Zanjeer remake – The Classics should be sacrosanct and not allowed to be re-made, especially if Apoorva Lakhia is directing them.

Mere Dad Ki Maruti – Really? There is a big brand in the title. YRF has already recovered its production costs, so this one doesn’t need any box office collections.

Raanjhnaa – Sonam Kapoor cannot act. Period. Remember Mausam, with its riots, wars and 9/11? Sonam was worse than all these disasters combined.

These films (and more are coming up this year) are a bigger threat to the nation and hurt sentiments across religion. They should be banned purely on the grounds of offending the religion of Sanity. If the Censor Board fails to be the do-gooder, then maybe it’s time we take the matter in our own hands. Let’s impose our own ban on crappy films, by not watching them on the big screen and forcing distributors to take them down. It’s a thought fit for a utopian world, but hopefully we’ll get there soon.

M is a media professional with an eye on entertainment.

(Picture courtesy ndtv.com)