FilmIndia (Feb-Dec 1949)

ecember. 1949 FILM INDIA : Mr. S. A. Aiyar, the Board started on a doubtful ireer of almost vindictive deletions in picture after dure presented by the producers for censoring. While the Censor Board showed studied indifferice to a lot of well-deserved criticism appearing in the ress. its members continued a merry career of cutting f quite a few harmless things from pictures without ring any intelligent reasons. _\o amount of reasong or appeal to their good sense moved the members ' the Board who seemed to stand with their backs to ie wall ready for all eventualities. But film producers, to whom human psychology is matter of their daily meals, knew that some members the Censor Board keenly appreciated the allowance ' Rs. 10/ per picture paid to them for censoring and ked to work on the Board if for nothing else at" least ir the allowance drawn at the end of every month. The [m producers also knew that Home Minister .Morarji esai, in his official capacity as the grand-uncle of the rovince. was directly responsible for the appointment ' the Board members. Putting two and two together in their usual praccal way. some film producers evidently armed at the mclusion that if the doubtful pictures could be preously shown directly to the Home Minister prior to itsentinir them before the censors, the pictures would ass muster automatically with the Censor Board. Thought was action with our film producers who )On invited our genial Home Minister to many a picire prior to the censor examination. Now when the rand-uncle of the province like Minister Morarji Desai *s a picture out of sheer courtesy, the fact cannot ?main a family secret. And the producers see to it that doesn "t. Even the grand children of the censors come i know about it. with the result that when the iiicture i put up for censoring it passes without any trouble by irtue of the mere knowledge that the Home Minister as himself seen it. It is obvious thai the ever-busy Home Minister oes not see su.h pictures for the purpose of censoring hat is strictly the function of his Censor Board which as, according to his own public confession, more eduited and cultured people than those found in the fiVn ldustry. But the very courtesy of his seeing a picture rior to its censorship lends a strange protection to the icture from the censors who would not like to differ om their chief in the oft mistaken belief that the Home Imister has liked a picture merely because he found me to see it. (A glaring example of this technique of censoring "Apna Desh" produced by Rajkamal Kalamandir". . Shantaram. the producer of this picture, is known J be a persona grata with the Home Minister who had imself graciously found time to go through the script • "Apna Desh'' before production. It was but natural lat the Home Minister, who had taken a personal in(rest in the story, should have been invited to see the peture. It an act Gf C0lirtesv which cannot be denied • our popular minister. But V. Shantaram invited the »p man of the province, who is incidental Iv the chief :nsor of all pictures and public morals, before the Wtine censorship by the Censor Board. And before [■lister Morarji could reach home after seeing the picture, the producer's studio boys, without even consulting \ . Shantaram, started telling rosy stories of the way Minister Morarji liked the picture and even described the spots he admired the most. Now no one can stop people from talking and in such a favourable manner at that seeing that every one who works on a picture is enthusiastic about it. But the censors being human beings have ears like other human beings and they also hear what others hear. And when they hear glowing reports of Minister Morarji's approval of a picture, even though the Minister might have said nothing at all about the picture, they do feel a bit delicate whilst examining the picture for censorship. If they didn't they would be super-human and Minister Morarji has not yet claimed his censors to be superhuman. Is it any wonder then that *'Apna Desh" was passed by the censors without a single cut? And is it any wonder that a filthy, objectionable picture like "Dillagi" carrying its load of slander against the Hindus also passed muster? Whether the film censors are qualified or not for their job. is it not essential that their minds at least should not be obsessed by the thought that their chief has seen a certain picture prior to its presentation before the censors? Let us hope that Minister Morarji refuses to see a picture before it is censored by his official censors and Murinawar SvIUtnn ifl pluming : I emotional roles these days. Here she is, once again, in "Sabak", a social story produced by Sadiq Productions. II