“Filmmakers keep making films for the big screen. Long live independent film.”
Sean Baker’s impassioned, post-Oscar win speech for “Anora” was a rallying cry to make the theater-going experience for independent films as accessible as it is for studio blockbusters such as “Oppenheimer” or “Avengers”. His plea, however, has no takers in India — even after a historic win.
Now that “Anora” has won Best Picture, cinephiles in India would naturally expect the movie to (finally) hit theatres, leveraging the post-Oscars surge. However, an eager audience will have to settle for watching the film on a streaming platform (JioHotstar) on March 17 instead. “Anora” was originally scheduled for a theatrical release in India on November 8, 2024, but it quietly disappeared from ticket booking websites and promotional tweets were deleted without explanation. Post Oscar-win, pvrcinemas_official (the largest film exhibitor in India) posted Sean Baker’s speech on Instagram with the caption “The best way to watch movies is in a theatre!” — a declaration that felt undeniably ironic, given that “Anora” was absent from their own theaters.
For Indian filmmakers, the fear of censorship far surpasses the fear of an empty theater. According to industry sources, filmmakers of “Anora” chose not to release the film in Indian theaters due to concerns over massive cuts that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) would mandate before its theatrical release. Going by its notorious reputation, CBFC would have deemed “Anora’s” many sex scenes and profane language “controversial” for its Indian audience, which is why the filmmakers did not submit the film for a CBFC certification altogether. On review, the striking absence of “Anora” among CBFC’s extensive certification database, is proof enough.
For those unfamiliar, it is a statutory government body in India that certifies films before they can be shown in cinemas. Unlike MPAA in the USA, that categorizes films based on age suitability without alterations to content, CBFC has authority to demand cuts, delete certain dialogues, and pixelate images. What is considered as “appropriate” for one of the largest movie-going audiences in the world, rests in the hands of a group whose decisions are often subjective or politically driven, the latter being more probable.
Another indie film that bore the wrath of CBFC recently was Halina Reijn’s erotic drama “Babygirl”. As per the CBFC’s certificate accessed by IndieWire, there were around eight major cuts totaling 3 minutes and 36 seconds. Among those cuts was a 1 minute and 34 second sex scene described in the certificate, as “jerking action and frontal nudity.”
Indie film director Alankrita Shrivastava is no stranger to CBFC. Her 2016 feminist drama, “Lipstick Under My Burkha” was refused a certification and the theatrical release was withheld for several months as a result. The board in its official communication described the film (that chronicles the lives of four suppressed women seeking freedom) as “too lady oriented”, a comment that sparked national outrage. However, Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) overruled CBFC’s decision and allowed the film to release with minimal cuts (sadly, the tribunal was later dissolved).
“Indie films challenge the status-quo and hold a mirror to society,” said Indian producer and indie film distributor Ranjan Singh (Cannes 2023 “Kennedy” and Berlinale 2024 “Tiger’s Pond”). “Such films can sometimes cause much discomfort and challenge certain norms, due to which the impact of censorship can be more on indie films. Most filmmakers, whether subconsciously or otherwise, exercise self-censorship during their filmmaking/screenwriting process early because they are aware of the ground reality of the system within which they make and exhibit films.”
He added that it is almost a travesty that “Anora” won’t be released in Indian markets. “For an indie film, a lack of theatrical release means significant revenue losses as it is the only way to recover costs incurred during production (that needs to be paid off). Skipping cinema halls can dampen the prospects to garner OTT or satellite rights that usually follow a theatrical run,” said Singh.
The fate of “Anora” is not a case in isolation. Sandhya Suri’s “Santosh” that was UK’s official submission for the “Best International Feature Film” at the Academy Awards this year missed its January 10 release in India due to its holdup at CBFC. Critics have argued that movies with themes of sex, political dissent (pertaining to the existing ruling party), and religion have faced maximum resistance.
Speaking out of experience, Singh shared that theatrical distribution is already a key hurdle for indie filmmakers in India who are competing with the studio system’s massive promotional budgets. “An additional CBFC hurdle may compel them to opt out entirely of a theatrical release and leverage the reach of censorship-free streaming platforms instead. Discerning movie watchers too begin to stay away from theaters and prefer to enjoy the undiluted artistic version of their favorite indie filmmakers digitally. This trend however is detrimental to box-office success.”
Devang Pathak, a Mumbai based screenwriter who started Revival Cinema Project, an offline space to discuss the state of the art form, is one such discerning viewer who has almost stopped watching Hollywood movies in the theaters altogether. He said, “None of the film critics are calling out the abrupt butchering that the audience is subjected to. With the CBFC wielding influence over what moviegoers can watch and cannot watch, how will the indie filmmakers survive?”
Many industry professionals like Shrivastava feel that India, like Hollywood, must embrace a ratings-based system, where the audience decides what they want to watch (and not committees). She added, “If audiences can watch movies on OTT platforms without censorship, why not give them the same experience in theaters as well?”
Pan Nalin, whose indie film “Chhello Show” made the shortlist in the Best International Feature Film category at the 95th Academy Awards recalls his “terrible” run-in with CBFC. Nalin had to incorporate as many as 91 cuts in his 2015 film “Angry Indian Goddesses”. “I was desperate to release the film in India because there were contractors counting on me. However, the international version was uncensored.”
Nalin highlights the indie culture of France and China, “French indie producers receive government subsidies and movie tickets can cost as less as 1 euro. In India, there are no such protective measures. China too has government-backed initiatives for indie filmmakers.”
Today, indie filmmakers face a tough choice: either comply with demands of CBFC, thus risking their creativity for a theatrical release, or abandon the idea entirely in favor of OTT platforms. “Just because people would now have access to uncensored content on streaming does not mean that CBFC’s control would eventually wear off,” said Nalin. It is therefore evident that CBFC’s influence extends far beyond only certification.
Though OTT-exclusive movies on streaming are not censored in India, Pathak warns that, there have been rare instances of films and shows on OTT platforms that had to be altered due to public backlash or a political controversy. Today, there is no framework for censorship of content on OTT in India, but one cannot fully assure that the content is not getting scrutinized. Does this mean that OTT platforms may not necessarily be the saviors for filmmakers and cinephiles as we had hoped?
In India, the “C” in CBFC might as well stand for Censorship. And that is not what Indian cinephiles are paying for. “Anora” deserved better.
