Decision to impact recently-released Baaghi 3, and Angrezi Medium, which opens today
Himesh Mankad (MUMBAI MIRROR; March 13, 2020)

On Thursday, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal announced that all cinema halls, along with schools and colleges where exams are not being held, will remain shut across the capital until March 31. The move comes after the number of confirmed Coronavirus cases in the Capital city rose to six.

The move to shut theatres will impact the Tiger Shroff-starrer Baaghi 3, which was going great guns, and Irrfan Khan’s comeback film, Angrezi Medium, which opens today. The Delhi market usually contributes 15 per cent to the total business. However, 28 per cent of the collections of the earlier film from the franchise, Hindi Medium, amounting to approximately Rs 18 crore, came from Delhi alone, a big market for Hindi films. “Angrezi Medium could have earned Rs 20 crore plus from Delhi alone, so it’s a big loss. Even Baaghi 3 was faring well in Delhi,” points out exhibitor Raj Bansal, adding that a few other states could also take a similar decision soon.

Meanwhile, the makers of Sooryavanshi have already pushed the release of the cop-drama indefinitely. It was set to open on Tuesday, March 24, in a unique release strategy to cash in on the Gudi Padwa festivities. This move could upset the calendar of Bollywood’s summer releases, including Kabir Khan’s sports film ’83, Janhvi Kapoor’s Gunjan Saxena: The Kargil Girl, Varun Dhawan and Sara Ali Khan’s comedy Coolie No 1 and Amitabh Bachchan’s Jhund and Gulabo Sitabo. Salman Khan’s Radhe is sticking to its Eid date for the moment, but will reassess the situation towards April-end. Akshay Kumar would want a gap of a few weeks between his two releases, Sooryavanshi and Laxmmi Bomb, so the latter could also move.

At the time of going to press, the makers of Angrezi Medium, Dinesh Vijan and his studio partner Jio, emerged from a closed-door meeting in which they debated the release in the current scenario. The film opens today, as per original schedule.


Clockwise from above: Coolie No 1; ’83; Gunjan Saxena: The Kargil Girl; Gulabo Sitabo; Radhe; Laxmmi Bomb

Jitendra Kumar, actor’s love interest in a social comedy, on his first lead role in a Hindi film and how his co-star made it easier
Avinash Lohana (MUMBAI MIRROR; January 31, 2020)

Joining the ever-growing tribe of engineering students-turned-Hindi film actors after Sushant Singh Rajput, Kartik Aaryan, Kriti Sanon and Vicky Kaushal, is Ayushmann Khurrana’s newest love interest.

After making his feature length debut with the Shweta Tripathi-starrer Gone Kesh, former civil engineering student Jitendra Kumar plays a leading man for the first time in Hitesh Kewalya’s Shubh Mangal Zyada Saavdhan. The IIT Kharagpur alumnus rose in showbiz ranks after playing characters like Gittu (Permanent Roommates), Jeetu Bhaiya (Kota Factory), and Arjun Kejriwal, a spoof on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal.

The 30-year-old actor and Bollywood fan has been mimicking Shah Rukh Khan, Amitabh Bachchan, Nana Patekar, Akshay Kumar and Hrithik Roshan since his days as an IIT aspirant in Kota, the national hub of entrance exam prep. “But parodying the Delhi chief minister didn’t come easy. One day, I just happened to get the voice right and shot the video immediately. Even Kejriwal sir praised my acting skills,” smiles Jitendra, adding that he is happy to have moved on to explore other acting opportunities.

He was in Bhopal for a digital show when he was approached for Shubh Mangal Zyada Saavdhan, which revolves around a same-sex couple. Jitendra says that he wasn’t apprehensive about the subject but wanted to know if the film was written responsibly. “I met Hitesh two months after the offer came along. When I heard the narration, I realised how simply things were explained to the families in the narrative. I instantly knew I wanted to be a part of the film,” the actor shares, adding, “I discovered later that even Ayushmann had been lobbying to get me on board.”

Jitendra had first met his National Award-winning co-star in 2009, when the latter visited the IIT campus as an MTV VJ to cover a cultural festival. The duo would reunite a few years later to work on two sketches during the promotions of Ayushmann’s earlier films, Nautanki Saala! and Hawaizaada. “We are both music lovers and I figured we would bond over that. But almost a week into the shoot, I realised I knew nothing about music; Ayushmann is the biggest music lover I know. He knows everything about a song, right from the lyricist to singer and the composer. But he was impressed when I introduced him to the soundtrack of this Malayalam film called Kumbalangi Nights. We had a lot of time on hand that day as the shoot was halted due to unexpected rains in Varanasi,” reminisces Jitendra.

There has been a lot of buzz around their kiss in the film. What was it like shooting for it? “I am a reserved person, but Ayushmann made me comfortable. He is easy to work with and is quite friendly,” Jitendra gushes.

Ask him about his expectations from the upcoming big screen turn, and the actor says, “I am playing lead parts in web shows as well, but the finances and economics there and in films are different. I hope Shubh… will result in more lead roles and good stories on the big screen. I know there will be struggle, but I am game,” he asserts.

Soumya Vajpayee Tiwari (MID-DAY; May 9, 2018)

To make cinema accessible for people in smaller towns and rural parts of the country, filmmaker Satish Kaushik has launched a make-shift theatre that will travel to villages on a truck. The Mobile Digital Movie Theatre (MDMT) will be launched in Delhi today by chief minister Arvind Kejriwal.

Ten theatre units will hit the roads in a couple of months, each of which is named after a famous Bollywood movie, or character. Select names allotted to the trucks include Mr India, Baahubali, Shehanshah and Don. Kaushik tells mid-day that he intends to price the tickets between Rs 35 to Rs 75, based on how recent the film that is being screened is. While tickets will be available for purchase on the MDMT mobile application and the counter, on the spot, the unit is "also planning to collaborate with ticketing websites like Bookmyshow," says Kaushik.

The central government is enabling the actor to take his portable theatre to different villages across India. They have yet to decide the places that the screenings will be held at. "Though the government is not funding the initiative, it is supporting us by ensuring that we can seamlessly procure permissions, including for the use of land and deployment of fire and police officials. In fact, we are giving preferred ad space to them so that they can connect with the citizens," says Kaushik.

A theatre of this nature, Kaushik feels, is an easy way to provide entertainment in a country where real-estate prices are always soaring high. "Having a portable theatre that's real-estate independent and low on regulatory compliances [would be] apt," says Kaushik, who has also got private funding partners on board the initiative. Talking about the features of the mini cinema hall, he says, "Each MDMT will have a 22-foot screen with Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound. It will be air-conditioned and will seat around 200 people. The hall will only have one category of tickets as we want to offer affordable cinema."

Anand Gandhi (MID-DAY; August 25, 2017)

Culture is the sieve of the civilization in which we put data, wisdom and epiphanies of the past, and the present, to distill solutions for the future. We can't solve our problems as a society if we censor speech and discourage open sharing of truths. In a community that's increasingly polarised between those who want to learn, and those who want to avoid witnessing the truth, odds are stacked against the lonely truth seeker, the documentary filmmaker. That is exactly what makes the achievement of filmmakers Khushboo Ranka and Vinay Shukla, directors of the political documentary, An Insignificant Man, inspiring.

Khushboo and Vinay wanted to make a documentary about the democratic process because they wanted to know how our democracy works, and record the tryst between idealism and pragmatism, intention and hypocrisy, and integrity and compromise. They wanted to render the veils around political parties permeable, so that we could witness what is going on inside.

Of the three political parties they requested access to, only one agreed to let them in with cameras. That was the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). For a year, the cameras rarely missed a beat, rolling through meetings, campaign planning sessions, rallies, strategy discussions, back offices, arguments, fallouts, in their homes, and even while they travelled. Always a fly on the wall, observant, yet distant.

The material they collected was overwhelming. This made the community that supported the producing of the documentary in a highly successful crowdfunding campaign, a bit restless. But, their trust in the filmmakers never faltered. Khushboo and Vinay found support from a truth seeking audience, from both sides of the political spectrum — left and right.

One day, I was invited to a screening of An Insignificant Man (AIM). What I saw, left me enthralled. I cannot think of another film that shows us real politicians, doing politics. It doesn't patronise the viewer with a pedantic voiceover, but instead, allows him to witness an incredible moment in Indian politics.

I have seen Khushboo and Vinay struggle as first-time filmmakers in India. The contrast of their journey in India and internationally, could not be more stark. The film won fund awards from Sundance, Busan, IDFA and BritDoc. Toronto International Film Festival invited AIM for its world premiere. Festivals, awards, accolades, standing ovations and nuanced critiques unraveled. We started gearing up to show the film to the part of the world, we call home.

Enter, Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). In his astute wisdom, the former CBFC chief (Pahlaj Nihalani) decided, quite arbitrarily, that a piece of journalistic document needs "permission" from its political subjects. Also, in a dire misreading of his position, he thought it prudent to defend the Congress and the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) from their names being taken in the film. He would rather a documentary invent fictitious names like Mogambo and Dogaraj for politicians, perhaps.

After having waited for months outside the chief's office, and then being thrown out, Khushboo and Vinay chose to approach the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT). The FCAT judgment is out, and sanity has finally prevailed. The judgment says that a demand for a No Objection Certificate is "wholly unsustainable and not permissible at law."

It's dangerous that the Censor Board can act in an illegal way. Consequences are only meant for filmmakers, who are testing the small mercies of freedom. With the recent reconstitution of the Board, things look hopeful. As long as dialogue is not threatened by violence, and discourse is not silenced by censorship, there is always hope for a better future.

MUMBAI MIRROR (May 27, 2017)

Filmmakers Khushboo Ranka and Vinay Shukla had informed Mirror on Friday that chairperson of the Central Board of Film Certification, Pahlaj Nihalani, had asked them to get NoCs from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Delhi CM Sheila Dixit, among others, before clearing their political documentary, An Insignificant Man. They added that after the Examining Committee had referred them to the Revising Committee without offering any reason, they had approached Nihalani for an explanation and he “threw them out of his office”.

Objecting to this allegation, Nihalani said, “I met them at the theatre during the Revising Committee screening and after it, I suggested some mute cuts (beeps) with reference to certain political parties. I also told them that since they had used footage of certain real politicians, they would need to get NoCs from them. They told me they had already taken NoCs during the shooting, and said I would clear the film subject to the NoC. Their allegation that I threw them out is completely untrue.”

Shaheen Parkar (MID-DAY; October 15, 2016)

Anna Hazare’s disillusionment with his one-time protégé, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, continues. The makers of the social activist’s biopic allege that when they approached Kejriwal for a preview and a tax-free status, the Delhi CM gave them the royal snub.

In 2011, Kejriwal was part of Team Anna anchoring a series of nationwide agitation against corruption. When Anna went on an indefinite fast for the passing of the Jan Lokpal bill, it was on Kejriwal’s insistence that he had called it off.

The film’s producer Maninder Jain says, “We approached Kejriwal to see the film. We also requested him to make it tax-free. But there was no response from him.”

He adds, “We later sent an e-mail to him and he replied, saying he has forwarded the request to Manish Sisodia, one of his minsters.”

When Anna was informed about it, he apparently said that he did not expect anything from his former blue-eyed boy.

The makers say Anna does not want to say anything on the matter and unnecessarily get involved in a controversy. “The state government is considering making it tax-free, but Kejriwal has no time for us.”

Written and directed by Shashank Udapurkar, who essays the role of Anna, the film’s cast includes Tanishaa Mukerji, Govind Namdeo and Sharat Saxena.

Ship of Theseus director Anand Gandhi returns to the Toronto Film Festival with a drama which traces Arvind Kejriwal's political journey
Avinash Lohana (MUMBAI MIRROR; August 10, 2016)

Tanvi Trivedi (BOMBAY TIMES; July 19, 2016)

Gives a spin to promotions by interviewing Lalu, hopes to also seek an audience with Modi, Kejriwal, Rahul Gandhi
Roshmila Bhattacharya (MUMBAI MIRROR; July 18, 2016)

Himanshi Dhawan & Avijit Ghosh (THE TIMES OF INDIA; June 8, 2016)

Udta Punjab, a dark drama on drug menace among the young and the desperate in the northern state, rode into the centre of a raging debate on censorship with distinct political overtones after reportedly being subjected to 89 cuts, including dropping the reference to Punjab throughout.

On Tuesday, Anurag Kashyap, the film's co-producer, posted a series of combative tweets comparing the censor board boss Pahlaj Nihalani to “a dictatorial man... operating like an oligarch“ and likened home conditions to those in North Korea. He also snubbed a supportive Arvind Kejriwal and the Congress, asking them to keep away from the controversy even as the Akali Dal-BJP combine joined the verbal battle. As news of the cuts sought by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) broke, Kashyap tweeted, “I always wondered what it felt like to live in North Korea. Ab to plane pakadney ki bhi zaroorat nahin.“ He also said, “There is no film more honest than Udta Punjab. And any person or party opposing it is actually guilty of promoting drugs.'' To this, Kejriwal remarked on Twitter, “I absolutely agree.“ Kashyap now tweeted, “I request Congress, AAP and other political parties to stay out of my battle. It's my Rights vs the Censorship. I speak only on my behalf. It's my fight vs a dictatorial man sitting there operating like an oligarch in his constituency of censor board, that's my North Korea. Rest of you go pick your own fights. I will fight mine. So please don't colour my fight with any political affiliation because there is none.“

Kashyap's movies often take a walk on the wild side of the human heart. Films such as Gulaal, Gangs Of Wasseypur and Ugly are an irresistible smorgasbord of slick storytelling and celebratory violence. But the 43-year-old director has locked horns with the censors in the past as well. The unreleased Paanch (2001), partly inspired by the gruesome Joshi-Abhyankar Pune murders of the 1970s, ran into censorship trouble. Black Friday (2007), based on the 1993 Bombay blasts, saw release only after a lengthy battle with the scissors. Udta Punjab was scheduled to release on June 17 but that seems unlikely at the moment.

On Tuesday, he also found backing from @OfficeOfRG, a verified account of Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi, which posted, “Punjab has a crippling drug problem. Censoring #UdtaPunjab will not fix it. The government must accept the reality and find solutions.“ The Rahul tweet was posted after Kashyap had requested Congress to stay out of the controversy.

Government sources distanced themselves from the debate saying that the producers were free to appeal before the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT). “Our intention is clear. We have nothing to do with approving or censoring a film. It is for this reason itself that we have a three-tier process. The filmmakers can appeal the decision made by one panel to another panel and then approach the FCAT. Both are government appointed bodies, so why is it that the Centre is blamed for the CBFC's decision to introduce cuts but not given credit when the film is approved by the FCAT without any cuts? There is no government role,'' a source said.

CBFC chief Pahlaj Nihalani did not respond to calls but government sources also added that the impression that the film was based on a social cause was a fallacy. “With the state elections just eight months away, the film was designed to take advantage of the political situation. It reeks of politicization of the film. To say that the film is highlighting a social cause doesn't wash. Drugs are a pan-India problem. Why choose to highlight Punjab? And if the reason for making the film was to highlight the problem, then the filmmakers should have no problem with dropping the state's name and replacing it with a fictional one,'' the source said.

While some sections of the SAD sought a ban on the film, Punjab CM Parkash Singh Badal said in Ropar, “How could the state government be held responsible for it when CBFC is exclusively under the control of government of India?“ Punjab BJP chief and Union minister Vijay Sampla welcomed the Board's move and said any attempt to “defame“ Punjab should be dealt with sternly. “Nobody should be allowed to defame Punjab...why did the producers name the movie Udta Punjab? Why not Udta Bollywood...the drug problem is a global issue. Why is one state being singled out?,“ he said.

Sampla asked opposition parties to rise above their “political interests“ and not allow anybody to “defame“ Punjab in any manner. “Be it the ruling party or opposition, every effort should be made to protect the image of the state at any cost,“ he said.

AAP MP Bhagwant Mann said, “The Censor Board has acted against Udta Punjab at the behest of SAD-BJP-led state government. It is an attack on freedom of speech. By indulging in such acts, the state government cannot hide the reality of Punjab by pushing the state into a drug menace during its nine-year rule.'' Director-actor Farhan Akhtar tweeted, “Power is the most dangerous addiction of all & someone in the CBFC seems to be tripping hard on Lassi in the Sky with Diamonds. #UdtaPunjab“ In another tweet, Kashyap compared his ordeal to Joseph K, the protagonist of Czech writer Franz Kafka's novel, The Trial. The character goes through a harrowing trial for an alleged crime he knows nothing of. “Joseph Ka Mukadama was a Hindi play adaptation of which famous Czech novel?? We are back there,“ he tweeted.

Subhash K Jha (DNA; April 16, 2016)

The Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) has upheld the decision of the Examining Committee (EC) of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), to deny certification for Battle Of Banaras.

The documentary directed by Kamal Swaroop chronicles Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s candidature for the Lok Sabha from the Varanasi constituency where he fought the elections against Arvind Kejriwal. The FCAT’s decision now leaves the docu’s makers with no other recourse but to approach the courts.

In its notification, refusing certification for The Battle Of Banaras, the FCAT states, “After having viewed the film, we are of the opinion that the CBFC was justified in refusing to grant certification for the reasons that the theme of the film was full of hate/inflammatory speeches given by all the political parties. It tries to divide people on caste and communal lines and derogatory remarks have been made against individuals. The release of the film may cause not only cause communal disharmony but also disharmony amongst the members of different castes and communities... The appeal is accordingly dismissed.”

Misses date with MAMI, cannot go to Tribunal because hasn't got an official rejection even after 40 days
Roshmila Bhattacharya (MUMBAI MIRROR; October 7, 2015)



On August 27, Manu Kumaran screened his documentary, The Battle For Banaras, for the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) in the hope of getting a quick clearance so that it could be screened at the 17th MAMI Mumbai Film Festival. Forty-one days later, Kumaran has yet to get a censor certificate. What's even more galling is that the CBFC has yet to officially communicate to the producer its reasons for rejecting the film.

This delay tactic, both unwanted and unprecedented, has cost the film a MAMI screening and pushed its theatrical release in India indefinitely. As director Kamal Swaroop points out, while a "censor certificate is not mandatory", by applying for one, "the equation has changed".

No local festival organiser or exhibitor will run the risk of screening it without a censor certificate after CBFC Chairperson, Pahlaj Nihalani, has run down the documentary in the media saying, "My officers told me that it is a political satire. It speaks against all politicians and is pro-Kejriwal (Arvind) in the way it has been shot. The language in the film is inflammatory."

Refuting this, Swaroop, a two-time National Award winner, for Phalke's Children (Best Historical Reconstruction, 1995) and Rangbhoomi (Best Non- Feature film, 2014), says that The Battle For Banaras was inspired by Nobel laureate Elias Canetti's book, Crowds and Power. "It is an attempt to understand the crowd phenomenon, anthropologically, without getting into voter politics," he argues, pointing out that people are talking not just about Arvind Kejriwal and Narendra Modi in the film but also about 40 other candidates across political parties. "Of course the main face-off is between Modi and Kejriwal with the latter having a slight edge till the polarisation happened. Then, the Muslim votes went to him while Modi swept the Hindu votes, including the Dalits."

The film was shot in 4K over 44 days in Varanasi during the 2014 Lok Sabha general elections which pitted Modi against Kejriwal in a battle royal. Swaroop points out that most of the footage has already been seen on TV but when it is put together as a two-hour film and plays in the theatres, it becomes a document for posterity and that is perhaps what has the censors worried. "I guess their brief is that nothing against Modi or caste wars should be allowed, but sex and violence is not a problem. They think the film is objectionable because Modi is portrayed in bad light. That's not true. The narrative is neutral with no commentary or voice -over. We've only recorded it as a spectacle with the rhetoric coming from the political leaders. But in retrospect, the speeches may appear childish, even abusive. And party members could pull up the censors for allowing this to pass," he says.

Kumaran promises to fight this unjust censor ruling but Swaroop points out that only after they get the objections in writing, can they go to the Tribunal which is immune to political pressure so there's no fear of self censorship there.

The filmmaker who has also completed two other documentaries — one on painter Atul Dodiya and another on the exodus of Kashmiris from Srinagar — along with a 100-minute experimental feature, Tracing Phalke, informs that The Battle for Banaras, will play at the Dubai Film Festival and the Berlin International Film Festival. "You don't need a certificate to screen it at international festivals. However, the film was made for our people and we want to show it to a national audience as well," he asserts.

When Mirror got in touch with Nihalani on why the Board has not officially communicating to the makers its objections to the documentary, he said curtly, "I see so many films, I don't remember this one so I can't comment on this."

Pahlaj Nihalani on the reason why Kamal Swaroop’s docu was rejected
Subhash K Jha (DNA; September 2, 2015)


Censor chief Pahlaj Nihalani accuses Kamal of sensation-mongering, “The Board viewed Swaroop’s documentary on a priority basis. We found it abusive towards a number of politicians while Arvind Kejriwal was praised to the skies. While we’ve nothing against an individual’s opinion on political matters he cannot foist those opinions in a documentary by damaging the reputation of individuals who hold responsible positions in the government.”