Why filmmakers are against Cinematograph Bill 2021?

By AKP

BCJ

Before looking about why filmmakers are against the Cinematograph bill we have to look the history of cinema used in war and politics. Let’s go to German first

How film helped Germany deal with World War II

German cinema from 1927 to 1945 was affected drastically by the political environment that grew within the nation. After Germany suffered drastically at the hands of the Versailles treaty and its reparations clause, Adolph Hitler, the Fuhrer of Nazi Germany, and the Nazi Party ascended to power, preaching unity and the rise of a new order. Their guidance of the economy away from extreme inflation and starvation won the people over to their side. With them, they brought forth an iron fist of control and regulation that affected every aspect of German culture, including the cinema. With the Ministry of Propaganda led by Joseph Goebbels, developing as the controlling force of German cinema, propaganda became a major thematic element of the films produced in this period, always favouring and advocating the Nazi party. Hitler, an early fan of the cinema, saw its true power and the scope of influence it had.

Metropolis (Fritz Lang, 1927) and Triumph des Willens (Leni Riefenstahl, 1934), two important German films separated by almost a decade, reflect very different feelings of nationalism and revolution as a result of different historical and cultural pressures. One is reflection of society’s desire to break class ranks and seek equality within a fascist state. Seven years later, the other is a representation of the same society in the previous film, bound by the same constraints and attempting to hide this fact behind a false propaganda front of volatile nationalism.

“Hitler was a movie fan; he cultivated friendships with actors and filmmakers and often screened films as after-dinner entertainment. Even more fascinated with the cinema was his powerful Minister of Propaganda, Dr. Josef Goebbels, who controlled the arts during the Nazi Era. Goebbels watched films every day and socialized with filmmakers”

Anti-Russian sentiment in Hollywood

Hollywood movies, where Russians consistently play the chief antagonist. From James Bond defeating Russian baddies beginning as early as 1963’s From Russia with Love, to Rocky defeating the evil Ivan Drago in 1985’s Rocky IV, and evil Russian spies in FX’s hit series The Americans, I get the picture: I represent the quintessential villain that everybody loves to hate.

The portrayal of Muslims in Hollywood

In the wake of the 9/11 attacks there was growing concern among Arab-Americans that they were being typecast as terrorists. Although some films did appear with more rounded portrayals of ordinary Arabs, Dr Jack G Shaheen, author of Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People, maintains there hasn’t been enough change. “Unfortunately, Arab and Muslim villains still appear regularly in film and TV shows,” he states.

The Chinese portrayal in Hollywood

MGM released The Mask of Fu Manchu 1932 the Chinese embassy in the US delivered a formal complaint because the title character was depicted with such hostility. But nowadays there’s hardly a trace of a Chinese character with evil intent in any Hollywood film because China has become a vitally important market for the studios. This became clear with the remake of the 2012 US war film Red Dawn. It was filmed with Chinese villains, but because of concerns that might jeopardise its entry to the Chinese movie market the villains were transformed into North Koreans in post-production – at considerable expense. Given that there’s no distribution of Hollywood movies in North Korea the producers knew there could be no loss of box office revenue by alienating that country.

Indian elections: cinema as an instrument of propaganda

Today, Indian cinema is no longer afraid of taking sides. Besides the film on Modi, a string of political biopics such as Thackeray and The Accidental Prime Minister have been released in different languages. While Thackeray lionised Bal Thackeray, the founder of Shiv Sena, BJP’s alliance partner in Maharashtra, The Accidental Prime Minister mocked and vilified Manmohan Singh, the Gandhis and other members of the Congress party. The trailer of The Accidental Prime Minister was shared by the BJP’s twitter handle as “riveting”.

The War

When Aditya Dhar’s Uri: The Surgical Strike released in January 2019, the defence minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, tweeted a series of videos from a cinema hall in Bengaluru, where she watched the film with war veterans. One video showed a crowd brandishing national flags and shouting slogans such as “Indian army zindabad!” Another showed Sitharaman gleefully leading the chorus of the film’s tagline. “How’s the josh?” she called. “High, sir!” the viewers responded. She went on to tag the producer, director and actors of the film, commending the latter for their “brilliant performances.”

The film failed to highlight the downside of the surgical strike, as “Uri glorifies a government that has milked dry the idea of patriotism and the sacrifices of soldiers for political leverage.” The article also mentions how the film makes no mention of the fact that “the breach that led to the deadly attacks was also an intelligence failure. “It is also worth noting the film was released only months prior to India’s general elections when the political climate was already tense, and communal harmony was disrupted.

The Modi effect in Bollywood

Today, the mainstream Hindi film industry, colloquially known as “Bollywood,” is increasingly being politicized with films churning out content catering mainly to the ruling party (the Bharatiya Janata Party, also known as the BJP) and its alliances to propagate their agendas and extreme right-wing ideologies. The intertwining of politics and cinema has a history of persuading the general public to either validate or reinforce their existing political opinions. According to an article by Alimpan Banerjee, this phenomenon of “using movies as a tool to deliver a political message (employed by the concerned political party) is what psychologists term as ‘Group Think’.” It is due to this phenomenon that politically motivated movies probe the masses to confront their own political ideologies, which can either lead them to conform or deviate from the group norm.

A downside of this collective brainwashing of the masses through films in India is that although most politically motivated movies based on true events have the relevant information available in the public domain, the depiction of the concerned incidents is often skewed and whitewashed to portray the dominant or ruling party as more powerful than their opposition. This depiction often creates a messy situation for both the parties and their respective supporters who are on the extreme ends of the social paradigm. This fuels the fire of communal imbalance between the religious majority (the Hindus) and the minorities (the Muslims). Since mainstream Bollywood production companies produce these films, the stakes to deliver the propagandistic message are much higher. Rope in a desirable actor, add gloss to the story, and voila! You have the perfect film ready to reel in the most ill-informed and often naive masses.

Now let’s look why Film makers are against the Cinematograph Bill 2021?

The letter says the proposed amendments would render filmmakers "powerless at the hands of the state as more vulnerable to threats, vandalism, and intimidation of mob censors.""As another blow to the film fraternity, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has proposed new amendments to the Cinematograph Act under which the Central Government would have the power to revoke or recall certification of films which have already been cleared by the Censor Board,” the letter reads."Undermining the sovereignty of the Censor Board and the Supreme Court, this provision will effectively give the Central Government supreme power over cinema exhibition in the country, potentially endangering freedom of expression and democratic dissent," it adds.

The letter also lists suggestions for the I&B ministry. It says the Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill 2021 must clearly define the role of the CBFC as a body which certifies film content for public exhibition, and not as a censoring body. "We recommend that the amendments giving powers to the Central government to revoke a film certificate must be dropped. We agree with the spirit of the Supreme Court decision which held that this would violate the separation of powers in our democracy," the letter states.