Foolish to think censor board is still relevant: RGV on Jana Nayagan row
The recent controversy surrounding Vijay’s film ‘Jana Nayagan’ not getting a censor certificate from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has sparked a heated debate about the relevance of the censor board in today’s digital age. Renowned filmmaker Ram Gopal Varma has weighed in on the issue, stating that it’s “foolish to think that the censor board is still relevant today.” Varma’s comments have ignited a fresh discussion about the role of the CBFC in the film industry and whether it’s time to rethink its purpose.
Varma blamed the film industry for allowing the CBFC to exist for so long, arguing that the board was born in an era when the state controlled the media, and its purpose was to regulate and censor content that was deemed inappropriate or sensitive. However, with the advent of the internet and social media, the dynamics of content consumption have changed dramatically. Today, anyone can access a vast array of content from around the world with just a few clicks, making it impossible for any form of control to be effective.
The CBFC, established in 1952, was indeed created to regulate and certify films for public exhibition in India. At the time, the board’s role was to ensure that films conformed to certain standards of decency and morality, and to prevent the exhibition of content that was considered objectionable or inflammatory. However, over the years, the board’s decisions have often been criticized for being arbitrary, subjective, and sometimes, even biased.
Varma’s argument is that the censor board insults viewers by assuming that they are not mature enough to make their own decisions about what they want to watch. He believes that the board’s attempts to control and regulate content are not only futile but also undermine the intelligence and autonomy of the audience. In an era where people have access to a vast array of content from around the world, it’s absurd to think that a single board can dictate what is acceptable and what is not.
The ‘Jana Nayagan’ controversy is just the latest example of the CBFC’s outdated approach to film certification. The board’s refusal to grant a censor certificate to the film has been seen as an attempt to stifle free speech and creativity, and has sparked widespread outrage and criticism from the film industry and audiences alike.
The issue raises important questions about the role of the censor board in the digital age. Is it still relevant to have a board that dictates what content is acceptable and what is not? Shouldn’t the audience be trusted to make their own decisions about what they want to watch? And what about the impact of the board’s decisions on the film industry and the creative freedom of filmmakers?
Varma’s comments have resonated with many in the film industry, who believe that the CBFC’s approach to film certification is outdated and in need of reform. The board’s decisions are often seen as arbitrary and subjective, and its attempts to regulate content are often at odds with the principles of free speech and creative freedom.
In recent years, there have been numerous instances of the CBFC’s decisions being challenged and criticized. From the board’s refusal to grant a censor certificate to films like ‘Udta Punjab’ and ‘Lipstick Under My Burkha’, to its demands for cuts and modifications to films like ‘Padmaavat’ and ‘Aiyaary’, the CBFC’s approach to film certification has been widely criticized for being heavy-handed and restrictive.
The ‘Jana Nayagan’ controversy is just the latest example of the CBFC’s outdated approach to film certification. As Varma argued, it’s foolish to think that the censor board is still relevant today. The board’s attempts to control and regulate content are not only futile but also undermine the intelligence and autonomy of the audience. It’s time to rethink the role of the CBFC and to consider a more nuanced and progressive approach to film certification, one that trusts the audience to make their own decisions about what they want to watch.
In conclusion, the controversy surrounding ‘Jana Nayagan’ has highlighted the need for a fresh debate about the relevance of the censor board in the digital age. Ram Gopal Varma’s comments have sparked an important discussion about the role of the CBFC and the need for reform. As the film industry and audiences continue to evolve, it’s time to rethink the purpose and function of the censor board and to consider a more modern and progressive approach to film certification.
About the Author
