Bollywood goes #*@% beep, beep
Nonika Singh
The hero contorts his face and expresses his anger with patent dialogue mein tera khoon pee jaunga followed by some harmless derogatory word. The villain retorts with an equal degree of menace and sneer. However, the language never crosses what puritans would call the limits of decency. But this was the movie scenario some decades ago.
Move over, unwind to last few years of Indian cinema and gaalis have become as commonplace as perhaps these are in everyday life. As cinema is becoming more relatable, as makers have begun to delve into the dark recesses of mankind, gaaliyon ki rasleela has all but become a norm. Yet even though many of us turned red in the face, few among the viewers object to the torrent of abuses. Why, films laced with choicest of abuses have even received tremendous critical acclaim. Till recently that is.
The change of guard at the Centre meant a change was in the offing in the film censor board, too, which has, over the years, become a conglomeration of political appointees. As Pahlaj Nihalani was appointed the chief of the board he issued a fatwa against a list of abuses, 38 in all. Expectedly makers, who believe creative license is their inalienable birthright, took affront. With reactions varying from indignation to humour to cynicism, they tweeted and tweeted. Nihalani was quick to defend his stance and responded with a rhetoric, “I am following rules….you have a problem approach the I & B Ministry.”
Anurag Kashyap, whose films invariably come laced with a generous dose of expletives, did. Before the makers could truly vent their spleen and flex their collective muscles, the matter reached a head. The list was put on hold. All is well that ends well. But there was a twist.
During the brief cleanup operation the first axe fell on otherwise critically acclaimed Badlapur which had to cut out two abusive words. However, the latest film that came under censure is Anushkha Sharma’s NH10. Once again the examining committee’s fingers pointed at abusive language and violence.
So how significant swear words really are to the film’s narrative. Did we really miss them in Badlapur which remained a dark exploration of human psyche with or without gaalis. So if we beep them out just as television programmes repeatedly and dutifully do, would the narrative fall flat? Makers are unanimous that it would and argue that abusive glossary is in sync with the world we live in.
Madhur Bhandarkar thinks language is what distinguishes a good character from a bad one, implying a villain must be armed with a suitably fired vocabulary. If you think Amjad Khan, as Gabbar, could sound menacing without the firepower of gaalis, why can’t those playing bad guys in today’s movies, then you are missing the point. Or at least their point of view that screams loud and clear — cinema has moved on and what rang true two decades ago need not appear authentic to today’s generation. Of course, the line between villains and heroes itself has fused. Protagonists are as comfortable with swear words as badmen.
Director Raj Nimodru, two of whose films got an adult certificate, feels cinema has changed phenomenally. For his movie Go Goa Gone he settled for an A certificate but was not willing to remove swearwords. And his is not a one off example. Movies like Gangs of Wasseypur, Delhi Belly, Omkara, among many others, have given credence to the lingo and a cinematic lease of life to what most Indians, otherwise grow up listening to in streets perhaps even in homes. So what’s the fuss…is it much ado about nothing? A big yes from the makers to that query.
In fact, expletives are no longer a male domain either. Actresses are spewing gaalis with as much flourish if not relish and gone on to win best actress awards for their bold portrayals. Actress Mahi Gill has had no compunction in mouthing swearwords and is ready to do so in future if the script so demands. The right to use abuses, she asserts, is the director’s prerogative who must have the freedom to choose his lexicon. However, she does agree that films just can’t be peppered with expletives for the heck of it and cinema has to be socially responsible.
Director-producer Vikram Bhatt, however, fumes, “What responsibility?” GS Chani, chairperson, Chandigarh Sangeet Natak Akademi, echoes similar thoughts and questions “Towards whom?” In the age of internet where people have access to all kinds of films he wonders, “Which island are these board officials marooned on? Cinema is not a religious place where makers have to mind their language. What purpose bad language serves in a film has to be left to the discretion of directors. And the public the right to reject the same.” But in films like Ishqiya and Omkara, these did add layers and nuances to its quaint characters, thinks Chani.
Bhatt believes films are supposed to capture the current state of affairs and depict the same for entertainment, nothing more nothing less. Indeed, the definition of entertainment is not constant and depends entirely upon who the viewer is. Back in time Sharmila Tagore in her capacity as censor board chief remarked: “There’s a cultural difference between India and the rest of the world.” Today, India is watching exactly what the rest of the world is. But within India different people could not only be watching different kind of cinema but also reacting differently. Clearly when sensibilities vary so what qualifies as objectionable. What is irreverent and fun for urbane viewers could be outright vulgar for their rural counterparts and the reverse equally true. Back to square one.
Not exactly. Makers don’t disagree that there shouldn’t be any rules. Only that these can’t be arbitrary or in a continuous state of flux and wide open to interpretations of the powers that be. The fact that even censor board members are a divided house proves that there is no exact code. One of the board members feels that only films that fall in the pornographic category should not be certified. Exactly the point Bhatt is making that but for porn all kinds of films must pass muster and the censor board.
Sure he nods there are certain things and a certain language that children shouldn’t be exposed to. World over cinema is censored and he agrees it must be closer home too. But cusswords in an adult movie ought to be no big deal. PG 13 or PG 16 they would gladly welcome more layers of certification and to go beyond universal/adult the standard practice of certifying films as of today. But once the certification has been done… the matter should be put to rest. Will it? Unlikely, while NH 10 has been cleared with nine cuts, some cusswords intact and a rider by Pahlaj Nihalani that he was being "liberal" with the certification for the film deals with an important subject of women empowerment. But who knows which new film will ignite the fire again and rub the screening committees the wrong way? As Bhatt says, “Film industry is everybody’s favourite whipping boy. Anything happens anywhere and it becomes the culprit. So you allow cigarette shops in every nook and corner of the country yet films have to carry ridiculous anti-smoking tickers, animals die in zoos but its films which have to give certification that they were not abused.”
As for abuses, no doubt, these were not coined by cinema. Nor will these be eliminated from our lives if movies stop using the acidic language. In an ideal situation, censor board has to act and react sensibly and makers need to be sensitive. Till that happens… war of words is not likely to end anytime soon.
No guarantee to success
Off late, cussing might have become a fad onscreen but clearly it’s not a sure-fire formula of success. While some films like Delhi Belly have done well, but profanity is never a guarantee for success. Gangs of Wasseypur part one and two which bagged four nominations, including best film and best director, at the 55th Asia-Pacific Film Festival, became commercially viable only for it was made at meagre budget. Ishqiya, though critically acclaimed, was an average performer at the boxoffice. Then films such as Jannat 2 high on expletives bombed.
Hollywood’s bad language
It’s not just Indian cinema but Hollywood, too, has fallen to a rash of bad language. And just because they are a liberal society don’t presume the critics are not asking questions. And the arguments run the same distance… what is the need for gratuitous profanity why use it when altogether superfluous. Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times film critic questions “Is it time to wash out Hollywood’s mouth? Some experts backed by figures of course even claim the more foul language in a movie, the worst it did at the boxoffice.
