The information and broadcasting ministry is all geared up to expand censor classification to notify about sleaze and violence in films. While U, A and U/A will continue to exist, A+ (indicating excessive gore, violence or sleaze) and 12+ and 15+ would be introduced. The proposed changes amending the Cinematograph Act will be implemented by October 2012.
The new categories have been proposed keeping in mind changing sensibilities and requirements of time. CBFC officials said the need for devising new categories was felt as the film industry pressed for classification along international lines.
Author Jaishree Misra, who has worked as a film classifier at the British Board of Film Classification in London, thinks it’s an extremely positive step to have a more refined system than the one India has had so far. “The pressure has been growing (both from filmmakers and society) to move from less censorship to more classification. Consequently, parents rely more and more on the system to guide them and so the more ‘signals’ they get from the symbols, the better it is. The film industry can only benefit when audiences trust them not to have harmful content in their films and their regulatory system is the best way to achieve this,” says Misra.
Director Nila Madhab Panda, whose film I Am Kalam won many national and international awards, too feels that in our cinema we have nothing specific for children and families. “The proposed additions will definitely benefit the society. Today, a three-year-old child’s anthem is Sheila ki Jawaani and Bhaag Bose DK so one can imagine how we don’t consider what’s detrimental for the children. The industry’s focus has always been the BO collections and hardly the impact of cinema on the audience. In Europe, it’s very important to have classifications for different age groups like 3+, 5+, 8+ 11+, 15+ and here too we need to focus on what we are delivering to the audience,” he says.
“I’m not in favour of censorship, but because it’s the law in this country, I observe it respectfully. And within these constraints it’s a good decision to have several ways to judge a film, and this is a step in the right direction,” says director Tanuja Chandra and adds, “If the censorship process becomes more nuanced, filmmakers will be able to exercise more creativity with freedom in their scripts and storytelling. Any nation that really gives any true importance to progress, will consciously try to learn from its mistakes. If those mistakes, brutalities, follies and injustices are never even questioned or debated, how does one take even one step ahead in the direction of positive change? So when you judge something as material that may not be fit for a 10-year-old but certainly okay for a 15-year-old to watch with an adult, then you allow that topic to become a part of a larger public domain.”
However, with the Internet today, there is hardly anything that is hidden or out of the reach of children. The more we label something, the more young people will be drawn to it. Once you bring it out in the open, it loses its mysterious allure, and even young people then approach it with more ease and sanity. Filmmaker Q says that censorship has affected the whole idea of filmmaking. “Censorship has existed since before our independence. In fact, it is the very same law that governs us even now, with minor amendments, which is a ridiculous idea anyway. What it has done is to install a self-censorship mechanism in the minds of the filmmakers and screenwriters. The censor board should be abolished soon. A ratings board is the only way out in such a scenario,” he says.