 "The numerous cuts ordered by censor board to Udta Punjab will destroy the film: Shyam Benegal")
The battle between the makers of Udta Punjab and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has united the Bollywood fraternity in a rare event with even those unconnected with the film speaking out against the censorship demanded by the board. Reportedly, 89 cuts have been demanded of director Abhishek Chaubey's film and all references to 'Punjab' have to be removed. The crime thriller, starring Shahid Kapoor, Kareena Kapoor Khan, Alia Bhatt and Diljit Dosanjh, is themed around substance abuse primarily in Punjab. Veteran film maker Shyam Benegal, head of the Benegal Committee that is tasked with revamping the censor board, speaks to Nikita Puri about the issue. Excerpts:
You've recently seen Udta Punjab during a special screening. What did you think of the film?
I thought it was well made. Chaubey is a good film maker and his film narratives work well. I've seen his earlier films and have rather liked them. But the film has unfortunately been caught in something that has nothing to do with the film itself. It has largely to do with the issue it deals with. The problem is about the drugs that (some) young people are caught up with because there is easy availability of it. Punjab is a frontier state that also falls on the drug route, so often drugs go through it. That is why the government has to be extra vigilant. It has been fairly successfully in tapping it out, but where it is not successful, the problem affects a lot of young people.
There are certain kinds of films that may not be suitable for family viewing and they probably have to be shown elsewhere where there is no chance of a family viewing it. There are even those who don't enjoy certain films, so what you can do is offer restrictive viewing and advise the audience what kind of a film it is rather than banning it or cutting it up. I'm completely against censorship. I am for classification and certification. I would rather add more classifications than cut it.
The board wants the names of nine cities mentioned in the film to be removed and a dog called Jacky Chain renamed. Does the Benegal committee approve?
If you are referring to what CBFC is doing with the film, I wouldn't know because I am not following that story at all. And the committee doesn't have anything to do with an individual film itself; we will be submitting the final report before June 20.
Anurag Kashyap, one of the film's producers, has said that there is no film more "honest" than Udta Punjab. Isn't CBFC's censorship preventing the film from being a mirror to society?
Yes, films should be a mirror to society. You can show something that is an exact reflection, but we are not talking about an exact reflection. We are talking about a record that will lead to the betterment of something.
Personally, I've always believed that it is very important that a film should lead to a resolution that will eventually help society rather than destroy it.
The names of different political parties have also surfaced in this censorship controversy. How do we keep the certification body free of political interference?
I don't think there's much political interference in CBFC, at least as far as I know because no one has really complained about that. Politics of the state are different, of course. There are political parties for and against a ruling party. And if a film deals with a particular state, it becomes a handy ball to throw about. But I don't think there's by and large any political interference.
Film makers and actors have boldly stepped forward to stand by Udta Punjab. How has the film united the industry?
The CBFC has asked for numerous cuts, which means it will actually destroy the film in some ways. So obviously people will stand up and ask the CBFC - "how can you do that?" I can understand why the Bollywood community is standing together.
You've recently seen Udta Punjab during a special screening. What did you think of the film?
I thought it was well made. Chaubey is a good film maker and his film narratives work well. I've seen his earlier films and have rather liked them. But the film has unfortunately been caught in something that has nothing to do with the film itself. It has largely to do with the issue it deals with. The problem is about the drugs that (some) young people are caught up with because there is easy availability of it. Punjab is a frontier state that also falls on the drug route, so often drugs go through it. That is why the government has to be extra vigilant. It has been fairly successfully in tapping it out, but where it is not successful, the problem affects a lot of young people.
More From This Section
Is it fair to suggest 89 cuts to a movie meant only for adults?
There are certain kinds of films that may not be suitable for family viewing and they probably have to be shown elsewhere where there is no chance of a family viewing it. There are even those who don't enjoy certain films, so what you can do is offer restrictive viewing and advise the audience what kind of a film it is rather than banning it or cutting it up. I'm completely against censorship. I am for classification and certification. I would rather add more classifications than cut it.
The board wants the names of nine cities mentioned in the film to be removed and a dog called Jacky Chain renamed. Does the Benegal committee approve?
If you are referring to what CBFC is doing with the film, I wouldn't know because I am not following that story at all. And the committee doesn't have anything to do with an individual film itself; we will be submitting the final report before June 20.
Anurag Kashyap, one of the film's producers, has said that there is no film more "honest" than Udta Punjab. Isn't CBFC's censorship preventing the film from being a mirror to society?
Yes, films should be a mirror to society. You can show something that is an exact reflection, but we are not talking about an exact reflection. We are talking about a record that will lead to the betterment of something.
Personally, I've always believed that it is very important that a film should lead to a resolution that will eventually help society rather than destroy it.
The names of different political parties have also surfaced in this censorship controversy. How do we keep the certification body free of political interference?
I don't think there's much political interference in CBFC, at least as far as I know because no one has really complained about that. Politics of the state are different, of course. There are political parties for and against a ruling party. And if a film deals with a particular state, it becomes a handy ball to throw about. But I don't think there's by and large any political interference.
Film makers and actors have boldly stepped forward to stand by Udta Punjab. How has the film united the industry?
The CBFC has asked for numerous cuts, which means it will actually destroy the film in some ways. So obviously people will stand up and ask the CBFC - "how can you do that?" I can understand why the Bollywood community is standing together.