As Karni Sena issues a threat against the release of Ayushmann Khurrana's Article 15 for allegedly defaming Brahmins, director Anubhav Sinha urges CBFC and Home Ministry to take a stand
Sonia Lulla (MID-DAY; June 24, 2019)

In the weeks since the trailer of Article 15 — showcasing Ayushmann Khurrana as a cop investigating a murder case that has its roots in caste divide — was launched, director Anubhav Sinha has found himself courting controversy. After the fringe outfit Parshuram Sena alleged that the film shows Brahmins in poor light, there have been reports of Sinha's effigies being burnt outside theatres in a bid to dissuade them from releasing the movie. In the latest development, Karni Sena too has threatened to stall the drama's release.

"Why would I make an anti-Brahmin film? People are smart enough to know that there were enough and more Brahmins associated with the making of the film to know [that it doesn't showcase them in bad light]," says the director, whose last release Mulk (2018) bravely shone a spotlight on the discrimination against Muslims in the country.

Sinha is appalled that the Karni Sena — that had challenged the release of Padmaavat last year — and the like have complete disregard for the Central Board of Film Certification's (CBFC) decisions. "The CBFC is an autonomous government body, which has cleared the film with a U/A certificate. It's time people respected such institutions."

The Board, he suggests, can play a vital role in ensuring smooth release of films. "The CBFC should report this to the Home Ministry to curb such protests. [People] can disagree, but such overt threats must stop, once and for all. Filmmakers can't be constantly bullied."

Despite the threats, Sinha doesn't intend to seek police intervention immediately. "The threats are in public domain. Whenever the police thinks it should intervene, it will."

Renuka Vyavahare (BOMBAY TIMES; May 9, 2019)

A police van is stationed outside Javed Akhtar’s Mumbai home when we meet him on Monday afternoon. Even we are closely monitored as we enter the building. As soon as we meet him, the senior lyricist and poet lauds Mumbai Police and clarifies that they have deployed security at his home on their own, after the Karni Sena’s threat to him on Sunday, over his comment on banning the ghoonghat and burqa. The fringe outfit demanded an apology from the writer within three days, threatening him with “dire consequences”. Concerned by the unsettling language of fringe elements, Javed sahab settles down and explains that he is scheduled to meet the police commissioner later in the day to talk about the issue. He reiterates that his statement was meant for women empowerment, and that he has been striving to achieve gender equality for the longest time and receiving threats isn’t new for him, especially from Muslim fundamentalists. Excerpts:

In the wake of your comment on banning the burqa and ghoonghat together, the president of the Maharashtra wing of the Karni Sena told TOI, ‘The burqa is associated with terrorism and (is a question of) national security. We have asked Akhtar to render an apology about ghoonghat within three days or face the consequences’. What’s your reaction to this?
People who are asking me to apologise perhaps don’t know that my friends and I have been relentlessly fighting the burqa, naqab and purdah practice for 20 years. We have spoken against triple talaq years ago, when it wasn’t in the news. My credentials in these matters are impeccable. I have always stood against the regressive mindset of the minority community, because to bring about a change, you should first look at the community that you were born in. That’s your first duty. I have mentioned ghoonghat once and you want me to apologise? Are you trying to destroy my credibility in my fight against the mullahs? You want me to lose face in front of the people I’ve been fighting against for years? Is this what you want to achieve? Everybody knows that ghoonghat is not a religious belief, but a tradition. I have received messages where people have told me that the ghoonghat tradition is withering away and it’s only left in villages. If it’s not that prevalent anyway, why react this way?

They also said, ‘We will gouge out your eyes and pull out your tongue if you don’t apologise. We will enter your house and beat you’...
Haan, consequences ki detail bhi di hai. People can oppose. We can mutually disagree. Their idea of morality and culture is different and what I say can be outrageous to them. If you are upset, then you can even go to court and sue me, but this is not the way to function in a civilised society, where you are being forced to apologise. You can’t say that intolerance has increased or freedom of speech has been curtailed, because if you do, then you will be labelled as anti-national or pseudo secular, etc. This is not the India that I have grown up in. We are known for our ability to co-exist. It saddens me a little as I am proud of our democratic constitution that grants you the freedom of expression. We can say things here that are not possible in our neighbouring countries. Different points of view should be heard.

Did you fear that your statement might trigger such an uproar?
I don’t know why they have made this into such a big issue. I have always opposed the burqa. Most of the time, these Muslim fundamentalists think that I only oppose them. Likewise, Hindu fundamentalists think that they are always the target. My point is, any form of covering the face, whether it’s a ghoonghat, naqab or burqa, any tradition whether religious or social, which expects a woman to cover her face, is a hindrance to her empowerment. That should be banned. Maybe, in Sri Lanka it’s done for security. In our country it should be done for women empowerment. It may or may not be a threat to security, but it is a threat to a woman’s progress.

Why did you feel the need to equate the burqa and the ghoonghat? A burqa covers a woman from head to toe, while a ghoonghat partially covers the face. Why the need for ‘if you are banning the burqa, then ban the ghoonghat’?
There is no ‘if ’. It’s not tit for tat. I am not trying to balance things out. Why would you cover a human being’s face? Anything that restricts freedom and progress should be stopped, period! I didn’t speak from the security point of view. I spoke about women empowerment. It’s not about equating. Whether you are covering a woman’s face for religion, tradition or values or culture... you are still covering her face. There is no difference. Why restrict women?

Several countries have banned full-face veils...
France has stepped ahead of others and I appreciate that. You can’t wear your religion on your sleeve in public offices. That way France is even-handed. You can’t show your religious identity so overtly. Country comes first. I like that.

However, in October 2018, the United Nations Human Rights Committee said that the ban imposed by France on face-covering veils is a violation of human rights...
I totally disagree with this. To say that it’s a choice of a woman? No. You have banned sati, haven’t you? Did you say it should be a choice of a woman? You said it’s wrong, so stop it. Should it be a choice of a minor or her parents or the man marrying a child whether to indulge in child marriage or not? There are certain practices that are wrong and you don’t have to wait for your communities to decide that for you. Some things need to be imposed. I have always opposed triple talaq as well. These things can’t be a matter of choice. If it’s wrong, it needs to be abolished. Uncle Tom was a happy man, but Abraham Lincoln still chose to abolish slavery.

Why shouldn’t a burqa or ghoonghat be a matter of choice?
I feel that because most women can’t decide that out of free will. There will be peer pressure. They are brainwashed since childhood and conditioned to believe that that’s the way forward. Some women may feel that if I wear the burqa, I will win some brownie points from my community, the men folk in the family will be happy and that will give me more elbow room. There are many reasons... First give them that freedom for 100 years and then ask them if they want to wear a burqa. Let a few generations live without the naqab first and then give them a choice to decide if they want it back.

Recently, a woman’s video went viral where she criticised young girls for wearing short dresses and ‘inviting rape’.
So all the women who wear long dresses, saris, salwar kameez and lehengas, which cover them from head to toe are never raped? Within women, a lot of women are brainwashed into believing the wrong things.

Shahid Afridi revealed in his book that he won’t allow his daughters to play cricket. He wrote, ‘Cricket? No, not for my girls. They have permission to play all the indoor games they want, but my daughters are not going to be competing in public sporting activities. It’s for social and religious reasons that I’ve made this decision and their mother agrees with me.’
I didn’t have an idea that for women, cricket is haram in Islam. But what else do you expect from this Pakistani intellectual giant like Shahid Afridi?

What’s your take on religious identity?
Be it kebab and biryani or my love for poetry... I have cultural commonalities with my community — North Indian Urdu-speaking Muslims. But I am not religious at all. I don’t share my community’s beliefs as far as religion is concerned. I am an atheist.

Madhureeta Mukherjee (BOMBAY TIMES; January 24, 2019)

She’s the rebellious Rani of Bollywood, riding high on guts and glory, all armed with heavy-duty talent (yes, potentially explosive, too). She has been on multiple battlefields, and now, the actress, known for her fearless choice of roles and fierce spirit, is galloping towards the warpath, on the silver screen. Playing the titular role in Manikarnika – The Queen Of Jhansi, Kangana Ranaut also makes her directorial debut (she shares the direction credit with South filmmaker Radha Krishna Jagarlamudi aka Krish) with this ambitious period drama. And as the war cry fills up the air, the actress sharpens her sword to give it her best fight. Excerpts from a conversation...

Manikarnika has gone through its share of turmoil. Every time the project hit a roadblock, did it push you to go all guns blazing with more passion and conviction to make it happen?
I think adversity has a certain quality to it, though we think that it’s not a good thing. When things reach an extreme point, there is a different force working inside you that wants to make it happen. During such times, you become far more alive and alert. It’s like being in a heightened state of mind. That is what happened during the making of Manikarnika.

I would forget to eat and sleep, which is unlike me. Making this film sometimes felt like I was going into a war zone, whatever could go wrong with it, did. And then suddenly, for the first screening of your directorial debut, you land up in Rashtrapati Bhavan to show it to the President of the country, Ram Nath Kovind. It was not even something I had aspired for, it just happened. The President and Mr L K Advani really liked the film and they encouraged its spirit. After all, it is about governance and leaders, so I think it resonated with them.

In the past, you have spoken about how you’ve had to struggle for everything that you’ve achieved. In your words, “I’ve never done anything in my life without obstacles.” Do you thrive in adverse situations?
Well yes, you can say that. For a 15-year-old, to try to survive on her own, without resources or her parents’ guidance, was a huge struggle. Now, I know how to deal with all this; initially, I was just trying to cope. I think there is a lot of grace in all this too, in this entire struggle. Last year was particularly difficult with my accident on the set of Manikarnika and my films not working; it could have been my end, right? No matter how talented or amazing you are, we all need second chances.

After Simran, you had said that there was a setback in your life and you were unsure about when your stint as director would take off. Back then, did you fathom that your directorial debut would be an epic drama?
After Queen (2014), I started to feel absolutely underutilised, and I had already decided that I wanted to direct. I even directed a short film. I thought Queen was just like a hobby film for everyone involved, as we all had a chilled out attitude. At that point, I had started thinking that acting is not something for me, and I must pursue direction, though I knew that I had to start from scratch. After Simran, I thought that I would get an opportunity, but that didn’t happen. When the Manikarnika challenge came upon me, I was so ready to direct that I could take it head-on. As a director, there is a certain skill set that you need to develop; you are not born with it. So, when we reached the point where I took on the reins of Manikarnika as a director, I was raring to go.

It is rare to see an epic war film directed by a woman. In fact, it is quite a challenge to shoulder a film of this scale on your own even as an actor...
People have this sense of disbelief that a woman is driving a project like this. I am tired of explaining that a woman director can make an epic film of this kind. I guess, when the audience watches it, they will decide for themselves. The general belief is that actors aren’t smart, isn’t it? They are supposed to be dim-witted; or at least, that’s the perception. In the writers and directors’ circle, they often roll their eyes when an actor gives a suggestion. On top of that, if it’s a female actor, it’s even more. Interestingly, when Kamal Jain (producer) approached me, he felt that this subject needed a woman director. They offered me this film to direct. At that time, I thought that if I were to do this, I would need one year to prep, one year to shoot and one year for post-production. They obviously didn’t buy my three-year plan (laughs!), and they said that Krish will write it in one year. I said I don’t know how that is possible. Even when I shot for the film as the director, I prepped for three-four months to shoot a 45-day schedule. I prefer to prep thoroughly, as I can’t function in chaos. I think so far, this is the biggest budget movie that’s been made with a female lead in our country. Movies with women leading the show are being made, but they are mostly small-scale films. So if it works, it’s fine, else it doesn’t hurt the producer’s pocket to a large extent. If it wasn’t for the commercial appeal of the films that I have done in the past, people wouldn’t be investing in me. So, everything fell into place for this to happen.

Krish had a different vision for this film, right?
Yes, he had a different vision for the film, which was that of an action-revenge drama. Now, it is more of a patriotic film, which is what I wanted it to be. When I came on board as director, I felt that this film could have a bigger meaning. It isn’t about a piece of land or claiming the throne, there is a larger picture. Along with the writers, we collectively tried to look for the bigger picture. We tried to bring about that spirit of patriotism in the story of the throne.

Last year, in an interview with BT, you had said, “I have no problem with the mass entertainers that we are making, but that cannot be the only kind of cinema that we want to make”. Interestingly, 2018 was exemplary in that sense, movies which offered only good content with great performances triumphed at the BO, along with some potboilers, too...
The fact that we have to make an entertaining movie is a given, but apart from that, the point is, what are you offering the audience? As an industry, we have such huge opportunities, so how are we utilising it? Even mobile phones engage people, so if engagement is the purpose of cinema, then I must say that the power of such a medium is being reduced. It is like you are using an aeroplane like a bus; you can do it, but is it the smartest thing to do? This medium is extraordinary; it should be used to expand the horizon of people’s thoughts and perspective. If we can’t do that, it’s sad.

When you are reading the script of a film that you could potentially sign up for, do you mull over whether it will appeal to the masses or the multiplex audience? Do you think of making a movie for a certain kind of audience?
A film has several layers, but there are three primary layers. One is the internal core, which is the idea and theme of the film. The other is the body of the film, and the third is the persona of the film. When you think about the core of the film, you can’t look at it as mass or class. Like Queen was a small film, but the idea was not small. When you think of the body of the film, that’s when the business aspect of the movie comes into consideration. The problem with Hindi films largely is that, the films are big, but the ideas are small. The core of the film has to work for me. Manikarnika is a large-scale film, but it’s not half the budget as some of the bigger films that released in recent times.

The fringe group, Karni Sena, has threatened protests if you don’t show them the film. They allege that the film shows Rani Lakshmibai's relationship with a British officer. They also say that the queen dancing to a special number is against tradition. You in turn, warned them saying that you will “destroy each one of them” if they continue to harass you. It takes a lot of guts to retaliate the way you have...
They were threatening me, so I felt that if they were thinking of physically attacking me, I’d rather have a headline that says, ‘Kangana’s brawl with Karni Sena’ than one that says, ‘Kangana got beaten up’ (laughs!). I should at least hit back, right? So, I thought that if they slap me, I will slap them back. We have reported the matter to the cops.

You have said that in real life, you feel like a warrior, but in this industry, do you see yourself as a lone warrior fighting various wars on different territories?
I can say this is true, but the fact is, everyone is a lone warrior in this industry. The other day, I was having a discussion with a very dear friend, who is a veteran in the industry, and he said that the industry will love you, they will be pally and nice to you if you let them exploit you. If you allow that, you will become everyone’s favourite person. If I incorporate these two things in my personality right now, one, I go to anyone and say that I will not charge for a particular film or take a pay cut, and two, I let men take me for a ride and tell them I have no objection, then, I will become a darling of this industry. This is the harsh reality, and everyone is a lone warrior here. It’s a jungle hierarchy, so one needs to be smart. To become everyone’s favourite, you should not lose yourself. The core of my existence is that I do not care about being everyone’s favourite.

Rani Lakshmibai was a rebel and a fearless fighter. You have the fighter spirit in you, too. Some of it is inherent, but along the way, the industry has also toughened you and pushed you to resolve your own battles and stand firmly on your feet. Do you agree?
My life has definitely turned out to be overly dramatic. Yet, I feel that there is grace in all those struggles and battles, and that’s because I could always find a silver lining. I see so many people who fail to see that silver lining, or the silver lining fails to see them. I am living on the edge all the time, I enjoy it and it is exhilarating. If I am in a comfort zone, I feel dead. Only when you push your limits, you will realise how far you can go.