UK Oscar entry 'Santosh' in stalemate with Indian censors, release uncertain
New Delhi, Mar 27 (PTI): Globally acclaimed Hindi film "Santosh", Britain's official entry at the Oscars and one of the most talked about titles last year, may not make it to Indian theatres following hurdles in its censor certification.
Though there was no official comment from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), a member termed it "a classic case of gross disagreement" between the producers and the board.
"They are unrelenting. They want zero modifications, and CBFC wants the modifications. They went to the revising committee for the second time, made more modifications, and lost their January release date... there has to be a middle ground," the member told PTI on condition of anonymity.
"Santosh", directed by British Indian filmmaker Sandhya Suri, known for documentaries such as "I For India" and "Around India with a Movie Camera",
is a police procedural thriller set in north India. The film, starring Shahana Goswami and Sunita Rajwar, was initially set for an India release on January 10.
A co-production between United Kingdom, Germany and France, it revolves around a widow who gets her late husband's job of a police constable. She and her senior inspector are soon sucked into a high profile investigation into the rape and murder of a Dalit teenager.
"Santosh" premiered in the Un Certain Regard category at the Cannes Film Festival in May last year. In India, it was showcased at the Mumbai MAMI film festival and the Dharamshala International Film Festival.
It was named UK's official Oscar entry last year but failed to make it to the final five. The film's distribution in India is being handled by PVR Inox Pictures.
In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, Suri said the censor board in India demanded radical cuts so lengthy and wide-ranging that they would be impossible to implement. She said the list of cuts included several pages and including concerns about themes relating to police conduct.
“It was very important to me that the film is released in India so I did try to figure out if there was a way to make it work,” said Suri.
“But in the end it was just too difficult to make those cuts and have a film that still made sense, let alone stayed true to its vision,” she told the newspaper.
Goswami, who plays the lead role in the movie, said she never thought it would run into a problem.
"It is disheartening... The changes are not something that we feel comfortable to make because it would alter the film. I think that's just a decision that's got made by elimination... it's nobody's desire to not have the film come out here. But at this point, that's kind of where it stands. I do feel sad about it," Goswami told PTI.
"Santosh", she said, does not target any particular person or a group but presents the reality of society.
"There's no reason why this film should create any difficulty," she said.
CBFC member, filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri, has come out in support of the movie.
"I don’t know about the cut list. I’m against banning any kind of creative work. My films have been cancelled," the director, known for controversial movies such "The Tashkent Files" and "The Kashmir Files", told PTI.
He said "Santosh" is a highly-acclaimed film and he is looking forward to watching it.
"It is a British entry to Oscar. I’ve no idea why it has been censored. It should be released in India. I’m not aware of the technicalities (of this film). We should be welcoming these films. CBFC has no mandate to ban anything; they are not a law-making authority, but they can make suggestions," Agnihotri added.
In an earlier interview with PTI, Suri had said the film's release in India is of "supreme importance" to her.
"It just ended up that I made a film on the Indian police. Actually, it is a very accessible film and the actors are so great. I had an amazing run in the cinemas in France. I did not make this film for viewers only outside of India... There are things which an Indian audience will definitely pick up that others might not," she said in October last year.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
UT with dual power structure 'worst form of govt', says Omar Abdullah
Srinagar (PTI): Terming the current administrative structure in Jammu and Kashmir the “worst form of government”, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has called for an urgent shift toward full statehood while acknowledging that significant progress has been made in narrowing differences with the Centre over the transaction of business rules.
The chief minister also hit out at vested interests making efforts to create a political wedge between Jammu and Srinagar, saying “they have failed and they will continue to fail”, and highlighted the restoration of the traditional biannual shift of the capital known as ‘Darbar Move’ as a vital bridge in narrowing the emotional divide between the two regions.
Speaking with PTI, Abdullah argued that the logic behind treating a territory with 90 elected legislators on par with smaller regions like Puducherry, which has only 30, remains incomprehensible, and reiterated his earlier stand that a dual power system where two power structures exist is a "recipe for disaster”.
“Can you not see the difference between a tiny one with 30 MLAs and one with 90 MLAs? And you still believe that this current system is beneficial to Jammu and Kashmir after everything that happened last year?” the chief minister asked while referring to the Pahalgham tragedy, pointing out that keeping elected representatives out of the law and order situation was doing no good.
He specifically noted that the size and scale of Jammu and Kashmir demand a governance model where the elected representatives are fully responsible for administration.
“I continue to maintain that view. I continue to believe that a system of Union territory with an assembly is by far the worst form of government that you can come up with,” Abdullah told PTI here recently.
The chief minister highlighted that several key institutions, including universities, the Sher-e-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, and the Power Development Corporation, should have automatically come under the domain of the elected government.
“I am not even arguing on the central services, law and order, and police. As a Union territory, those are automatically within the domain of the unelected government. But these were institutions that were previously the responsibility of the elected government. And they should be,” Abdullah said.
Despite these friction points, Abdullah expressed optimism, stating that his government and the Government of India are close to reaching an agreement on the rules of business and that a formal proposal for the appointment of a new advocate general has finally been dispatched to the appropriate authorities.
“Again, as I said, we have made significant progress on these issues,” he said.
On the long-standing issue of summary dismissals of government employees without judicial inquiry, Abdullah described the process as arbitrary, opaque and unlikely to withstand judicial scrutiny.
This practice did not originate with the current lieutenant governor's administration but was initiated during the previous BJP-PDP coalition government, he said.
“Look, everyone has the right to prove their innocence. For some reason, these employees were not given that opportunity. And I have no doubt that going ahead, many of these people will return to government service on the back of relief from the court.
“We will not be able to defend the dismissal of these employees in the courts. It will happen, you mark my words, because the process is arbitrary. The process is opaque. There is no clarity and transparency in the process. Ultimately, we will not be able to bear up to judicial scrutiny," he said.
Referring to the promises made by his party, the National Conference, Abdullah detailed the operationalisation of his poll promises, including 200 units of free electricity and six free cooking gas cylinders for the poorest households, underlining that power subsidy is being provided to the poorest of the poor.
He argued that anyone above the poverty line should pay market rates for electricity to ensure that state resources are prioritised for the most vulnerable.
“Rich people shouldn't even be getting subsidised electricity. If I could, though obviously I can't do it in a single stroke, I would like to remove subsidised electricity from all these rich people.
“Anybody above BPL (Below Poverty Line) should not be paying subsidised rates for electricity. They should pay the market rate,” he said.
Beyond direct welfare, Abdullah highlighted the restoration of the ‘Darbar Move’ and the introduction of free education and bus travel for women as key milestones in his 20-month-old administration.
Speaking on the composite culture of J-K, Abdullah said the traditional biannual shift of the capital has allowed a new generation of employees from Jammu, who had never worked in the Valley before, to bond with their Kashmiri counterparts.
“The distance between Jammu and Kashmir has reduced to a great extent,” Abdullah said, adding that the two regions historically come together during times of adversity, whether after natural disasters or security crises.
Replying to a query on Kashmiri Pandits who migrated to various camps in Jammu, Abdullah said the question needs to be asked of the BJP as to why they are still in camps.
“Please ask the BJP how many more elections do they want to exploit their (Kashmiri Pandits’) votes before actually doing something to bring them back,” Abdullah said.
Terming the migration “deeply unfortunate”, Abdullah said, “We want those who left in the late 80s, early 90s, to come back. I have always maintained that they left because their sense of security was snatched away. They will come back only when that sense of security is restored. And we have not been able to do that so far.”
Crediting former prime minister Manmohan Singh for building the Jagti township in Jammu for migrants and creating a job quota for them, Abdullah said that nothing more has been done for the community since then.
To a question on dynastic politics following the recent defeat of M K Stalin in Tamil Nadu, Abdullah dismissed the idea that the defeat of established leaders is a verdict on their lineage, and argued that belonging to a political family only "opens a door" but does not guarantee a seat at the table.
“What keeps it open is your own performance,” Abdullah said, pointing out that even non-dynastic leaders like Mamata Banerjee faced electoral setbacks.
He also dismissed rumours of an imminent Cabinet reshuffle in J-K as “absolute lies”.
