Mark Twain considered too much of anything to be bad unless it was good whiskey, which, according to him, was barely enough.
Twain would probably turn in his grave if he learnt about the latest antics of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
In a bizarre move, CBFC reportedly blurred shots featuring alcohol glasses while certifying Ford V Ferrari.
A frontrunner for awards next year, the film stars Christian Bale and Matt Damon as the iconic racers Ken Miles and Carroll Shelby, who partnered with Ford to build a sports car to beat Ferrari at the 1966 Le Mans race.
As a norm, CBFC would blur brand name on liquor bottles, but to extend the same practice to shots of characters sipping a drink takes things to the next level.
An autonomous body constituted under the Cinematograph Act 1952, the CBFC reviews and certifies films for general public exhibition in India. On the one hand, the CBFC’s job is straight—view and certify films under pre-existing categories for exhibition—but on the other hand, the function becomes complex as it has to comply with the Cinematograph Act, which, to put it mildly, is a tad too archaic. A law framed more than six-and-a-half decades ago and hardly updated in tandem with the changes in the society is bound to make it difficult for the CBFC to function normally.
This is the reason why CBFC often ends up ‘suggesting’ specific changes to help a film fit into the available categories with ease.
At times, these suggestions are outrightly bizarre, such as former CBFC Chairman Pahlaj Nihalani asking to reduce the duration of a kissing scene in a James Bond film.
These suggestions can seem diktats as a denial of certification from CBFC essentially mean that the movie cannot be screened publicly. It’s not like the government has not made an effort to bring the law governing the CBFC into this century.
In 2016, a committee headed by Shyam Benegal was constituted to lay down norms for the benefit of the board to follow while ensuring sufficient artistic and creative expression.
The committee submitted a significant part of its recommendations to the then Information & Broadcasting Minister, Arun Jaitley. It suggested more specific categorisation of films by breaking the “U/A” (unrestricted public exhibition subject to parental guidance) category into UA12+ and UA15+ and “A” or Adult into AC (Adult with Caution) categories.
Since then, there have been four ministers in as many years, and even though the government accepted the recommendations, and considered updating the law, little has happened on that front.
The CBFC functionaries often take refuge in the Cinematograph Act for their actions, but what explains the sheer absurdity of blurring a glass of wine in this day and age?
What happens if one were to make a historical film today that featured Pandit Nehru and Mohammed Ali Jinnah smoking a cigarette each during the Simla Conference in 1945?
At a literary festival a few weeks ago, while in conversation with this writer, Prasoon Joshi, the incumbent CBFC Chairman, threw light on what impended the implementation of the Benegal Committee’s report or even tabling a new Cinematograph Act.
Joshi believed a lot had changed since the committee submitted its report. The growth of OTT has redefined the playfield, and it needed a relook in the light of such developments.
There is no harm in waiting a little longer for an updated law and new guidelines, but someone needs to tell the CBFC that there’s no wrong time to do the right thing.
*Clarification from Fox Studios India on Ford v Ferrari*
“This is to confirm that the masking of the glasses with alcoholic beverages, in the film Ford v Ferrari, were a result of editing errors at our end. We wish to clarify that these changes had not been asked for by the Censor Board and we would like to apologise for any misrepresentation that may have been caused due to misunderstanding thereafter. The editing has nothing to do with the Censor process.," said official spokesperson Fox Studios India.
You can reach out to the author - gautam@chintamani.org