Prasoon Joshi on using his corporate experience to plug the holes in the CBFC
Himesh Mankad (MUMBAI MIRROR; September 2, 2019)

On Saturday, Prasoon Joshi, the Chairperson of the Central Board of Film Certification, unveiled the new logo and certificate design of censorship in Mumbai, and cleared the air on several contentious isssues, from the importance of the present certification and additional cuts for adult films to last-minute title changes. Excerpts:

Since you’ve taken over as chairperson, controversies around film certification have been few and far between. How have you managed to resolve the issues that plagued your predecessor?
I have worked in the corporate world and my idea of running an organisation is very professional. For me, it’s important to have the house in order. So, I had several training programmes with officers and committee members and together we corrected all the glitches and plugged the loopholes. I spent most of my time in correcting things which needed attention. I’m thankful to some of the industry leaders who helped and mentored me during crisis. The change came through dialogue.

Yes, Padmaavat was the last major controversy one recalls…
I believe makers make films with good intentions and that should come through. If there is an issue, we should not drag it but resolve it through dialogue. This was a new job for me because I’m an artiste too and had to learn to see things from the audience’s point of view. I’m happy with what we have achieved during these two years.

Many believe that the 1952 Cinematograph Act is outdated.
There is a lot of discussion happening for a solution.

What’s your take on the current certifications: ‘U’, ‘U/A’ and ‘A’?
The category of certificate is important as it informs the audience what they can expect from a film. Children are our future and we need to expose them to things gradually and not shock them. Sometimes, there is a disagreement on what makers consider adult content and grouse that the committees constituted of people from different walks of life don’t know much about cinema. But they are not supposed to know; their job is to express the point of view of the common person. For instance, a woman member saying that as a mother she feels strongly about a certain content. Maybe the maker has said something with a different intent, but it might be received differently. That’s where dialogue comes in.

But why should films which have already been certified as ‘A’ be subject to further cuts and beeps?
Some things and issues are not meant for public consumption. You won’t print an abusive word in the headline of your newspaper, will you? We follow the same code of conduct. Culture with respect to what to wear on certain occasions and how to present ourselves, has been created by us and now it’s our duty to protect it. Sure, we are evolving with time, but that should happen organically and collectively. One person can’t decide what is right because tehzeeb belongs to everyone.

Titles of films like Cheat India and Mental Hai Kya were changed to Why Cheat India? and Judgementall Hai Kya just prior to their release, while their trailers and other promotional material had been cleared and were in the public domain for weeks.
The two instances you mentioned were felt ideal by the committee. It’s a different thing when a title is used in the film, but the poster as a standalone gives a different message. When sensitive subjects crop up, we need to handle them with dialogue. In these cases, we mutually arrived at a decision.

And what’s happening with Prasoon the writer-lyricist?
My hands were full as I wanted to do justice to my new responsibility, so I couldn’t take up much work. I did Manikarnika last year. A couple of scripts are in the pipeline and you’ll hear of them soon.