Content deleted Content added
No edit summary Tags: Reverted Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
→Controversies: Changed the word chair, a wrong word in this context, to chairperson. Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| (40 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) | |||
Line 11:
| leader_name = [[Prasoon Joshi]]
| leader_title2 = Chief Executive Officer
| leader_name2 =
| name = Central Board of Film Certification
| region_served = [[India]]
Line 18:
| image_size = 300px
| formerly = Central Board of Film Censors (1952–1983)
| type = Film Certification Statutory body
}}
The '''Central Board of Film Certification''' ('''CBFC''') or '''Censor Board of Film Certification''' is a statutory [[Motion picture content rating system|film-certification]] body in the [[Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India)|Ministry of Information and Broadcasting]] of the [[Government of India]]. It is tasked with "regulating the public exhibition of films under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act 1952."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cbfcindia.gov.in/main/|title=Welcome to CBFC|website=cbfcindia.gov.in|access-date=17 February 2020|archive-date=17 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190117035117/https://www.cbfcindia.gov.in/main/|url-status=dead}}</ref> The Cinematograph Act 1952 outlines a strict certification process for commercial films shown in public venues. Films screened in cinemas and on television may only be publicly exhibited in India after certification by the board and edited.
{{TOC limit|2}}
== Certificates and guidelines ==
[[File:Film certificate types in India.png|thumb|alt=Four yellow boxes with black letters: U, UA, A and S|Film-certificate categories]]
The board currently issues four certificates. Originally, there were two: U (unrestricted public exhibition with [[family-friendly]] movies) and A (restricted to adult audiences but any kind of [[nudity]] not allowed). Two more were added in June
=== U certificate ===
Films with the U certification are fit for unrestricted public exhibition and are [[family-friendly]]. These films can contain universal themes like [[education]], family, [[drama]], romance, sci-fi, action etc. These films can also contain some mild violence, but it cannot be prolonged. It may also contain very mild sexual scenes ('''without any traces of nudity or sexual detail''').
=== U/A certificate ===
Films with the U/A certification can contain moderate adult themes that are not strong in nature and are not considered appropriate to be watched by a child
* '''UA 7+''' – Unrestricted public exhibition, but with parental guidance for children below the age of 7 years.
* '''UA 13+''' – Unrestricted public exhibition, but with parental guidance for children below the age of 13 years.
* '''UA 16+''' – Unrestricted public exhibition, but with parental guidance for children below the age of 16 years.
=== A certificate ===
Films with the A certification are available for public exhibition, but with restriction to [[18 rating|adults (aged 18+)]]. These films can contain strong violence, explicit and strong sexual scenes, abusive language, but words which insult or degrade [[women]] or any [[social group]] (despite being very common in many films) and [[nudity]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/cbfc-it-again-malayalam-film-asked-cut-out-nudity-and-mute-kazhuveriyude-mone-45164?amp|title=CBFC at it again: Malayalam film asked to cut out nudity and mute Kazhuveriyude Mone|website=thenewsminute|date=20 June 2016 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.livemint.com/Consumer/1jhytL84dGCvm8G1vAtPFL/Nudity-the-final-frontier-for-films-in-India.html|title=Nudity, the final frontier for films in India|website=livemint|date=28 January 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://amp.theguardian.com/film/2015/mar/05/fifty-shades-of-grey-banned-in-india-despite-removal-of-nudity|title=Fifty Shades of Grey banned in India despite removal of nudity|website=theguadian.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/censor-board-bans-unfreedom-says-film-will-ignite-unnatural-passions-20933?amp|title= censor board bans Unfreedom says film will ignite unnatural passions|website=The News Minute|date= 31 March 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dnaindia.com/bollywood/report-cbfc-bans-computer-generated-nudity-2549889/amp|title=CBFC bans computer-generated nudity|website= Dna India}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/cbfc-reportedly-bans-film-titled-x-zone-due-to-graphic-love-making-scenes-nudity-4027513.html|title= CBFC reported bans film title x zone due to graphic love making scenes, nudity|website=Firstspot|date= 10 September 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.india.com/viral/sanskari-cbfc-bans-nudity-on-robots-blurs-alcohol-bottles-from-blade-runner-2049-but-allows-swear-words-2512585/amp/|title=Sanskari CBFC Bans Nudity on Robots & Blurs Alcohol Bottles From Blade Runner 2049 But Allows Swear Words|website=India.com|date=3 October 2017 }}</ref> are not allowed. Some [[controversial]] and adult themes are considered unsuitable for young viewers. Such films are often re-certified with V/U and V/UA for [[Television|TV]]
=== S certificate ===
Line 41 ⟶ 45:
== History ==
The Indian Cinematograph Act came into effect in 1920, seven years after the production of India's first film: [[Dadasaheb Phalke]]'s ''[[Raja Harishchandra]]''. Censorship boards were originally independent bodies under the police chiefs of the cities of Madras (now [[Chennai]]), Bombay (now [[Mumbai]]), Calcutta (now [[Kolkata]]), [[Lahore]] (now in [[Pakistan]]), and Rangoon (now [[Yangon]] in [[Myanmar]])
it was amended again on 1 August 2023 with the introduction of cinematography amendment bill.
After the 1947 [[independence of India]], autonomous regional censors were absorbed into the '''Bombay Board of Film Censors'''. The Cinematograph Act of 1952 reorganised the Bombay board into the '''Central Board of Film Censors'''.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and Rules {{!}} Ministry of Information and Broadcasting {{!}} Government of India|url=https://www.mib.gov.in/acts/cinematograph-act-1952-and-rules|access-date=19 January 2021|website=www.mib.gov.in}}</ref> With the 1983 revision of [[cinematography]] rules, the body was renamed the Central Board of Film Certification.<ref name="CBFC">{{cite web |url=http://cbfcindia.gov.in/html/uniquepage.aspx?unique_page_id=6 |title=Background |work=CBFC Website |publisher=Central Board of Film Certification |access-date=9 January 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100826234425/http://cbfcindia.gov.in/html/uniquepage.aspx?unique_page_id=6 |archive-date=26 August 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Line 54 ⟶ 58:
The board's guidelines are:
* Anti-social activities (such as violence) may not be glorified.
* Criminal acts may not be depicted.
* The following is prohibited:
**a) Involvement of children in violent acts or abuse.
**b) Abuse or ridicule of the physically or mentally handicapped.
**c) Unnecessary depictions of cruelty to animals.
* Gratuitous violence, cruelty, or horror.
* No scenes encouraging alcohol consumption, drug addiction or smoking.
* No vulgarity, obscenity, depravity
* * No denigration by race, religion or other social group.
* No promotion of sectarian, obscurantist, anti-scientific and anti-national attitudes.
* Relations with foreign countries should not be affected.
* No national symbols or emblems, except in accordance with the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 (12 of 1950)
== Enforcement ==
Line 72 ⟶ 77:
== Composition and leadership ==
The board consists of a chairperson and 23 members, all of whom are appointed by the central government. [[Prasoon Joshi]] chairs the board; Joshi became its 28th chairperson on 11 August 2017, after [[Pahlaj Nihalani]] was fired.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/pahlaj-nihalani-sacked-as-cbfc-chief-to-be-succeeded-by-prasoon-joshi/articleshow/60022954.cms|title=Pahlaj Nihalani sacked as CBFC chief, to be succeeded by Prasoon Joshi|date=11 August 2017|work=The Times of India|access-date=11 October 2017}}</ref> Nihalani had succeeded [[Leela Samson]] after Samson quit<ref name="REUTERS 16 Jan 2015">{{cite news |title=Censor board chief Leela Samson quits over Dera Sacha Sauda leader's Bollywood dreams|author=Ashreena, Tanya|url=http://in.reuters.com/article/censor-board-leela-samson-msg-idINKBN0KP0SR20150116 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151214063043/http://in.reuters.com/article/censor-board-leela-samson-msg-idINKBN0KP0SR20150116 |url-status=dead |archive-date=14 December 2015 |date=16 January 2015 |access-date=22 January 2015}}</ref> in protest of an appellate tribunal's overturning of a board decision to refuse certification for ''[[MSG: The Messenger]]''. Samson had succeeded [[Sharmila Tagore]].<ref name="TOI 29 March 2011">{{cite news |title=Danseuse Leela Samson is new Censor Board chief |author=Dhwan, Himanshi|url=
The board, headquartered in Mumbai, has nine regional offices:
Line 84 ⟶ 89:
* [[Mumbai]]
* [[New Delhi]]
* [[
{{Div col end}}
Line 133 ⟶ 138:
|21||[[Asha Parekh]]||25 June 1998||25 September 2001
|-
|22||[[Vijay Anand (Hindi film maker)|Vijay Anand]]<ref name="TOI 22 July 2002">{{cite news|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2002July22/news-interviews/27308006_1_vijay-anand-cbfc-chairman-films|title=Vijay Anand Quits Censor Board|date=22 July 2002|author=IndiaTimes Movies staff|newspaper=[[The Times of India]]|access-date=9 January 2012}}{{dead link|date=
|-
|23||[[Arvind Trivedi]]||20 July 2002||16 October 2003
Line 149 ⟶ 154:
== Controversies ==
The board has been associated with a number of scandals. Film producers reportedly bribe the CBFC to obtain a
In 2002, ''[[War and Peace (2002 film)|War and Peace]]'' (a [[documentary film]] by [[Anand Patwardhan]] which depicted [[nuclear weapons testing]] and the [[September 11 attacks]]) had to be edited 21 times before the film was approved for release. According to Patwardhan, "The cuts that [the Board] asked for are so ridiculous that they won't hold up in court. But if these cuts do make it, it will be the end of freedom of expression in the Indian media."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/2202379.stm|title=India cuts 'anti-war' film|website=BBC News|date=19 August 2002|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref> A court ruled that the cut requirement was unconstitutional, and the film was shown uncensored.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://brightlightsfilm.com/censorship-indian-cinema-case-anand-patwardhans-war-peace/|title=Censorship and Indian Cinema: The Case of Anand Patwardhan's War and Peace – Bright Lights Film Journal|date=1 November 2002|work=Bright Lights Film Journal|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-US}}</ref>
Line 157 ⟶ 162:
The board refused to certify ''[[The Pink Mirror|Gulabi Aaina]]'' (a film about Indian [[transsexual]]s produced and directed by [[Sridhar Rangayan]]) in 2003; Rangayan unsuccessfully appealed the decision twice. Although the film is [[List of banned films|banned]] in India, it has been screened internationally.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3689509.stm|title=UK premiere for Indian drag film|website=BBC News|date=6 May 2004|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.yidff.jp/docbox/22/box22-2-e.html|title=Making the Cuts—On Film Censorship in India]| first=Shradha | last=Sukumaran| website=Yamagata International Documentary Film Festival (YIDFF)|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref>
''[[Final Solution (2004 film)|Final Solution]]'', a 2004 documentary examining religious riots between [[Hindus]] and [[Muslims]] in [[Gujarat]] which killed over 1,000 people, was also banned. According to the board, the film was "highly provocative and may trigger off unrest and communal violence".<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3542340.stm|title=India bans religious riot movie|website=BBC News|date=6 August 2004|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.countercurrents.org/arts-sharma060804.htm|title=Censor Board Bans 'Final Solution'|date=6 August 2004|access-date=20 March 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040914032835/http://www.countercurrents.org/arts-sharma060804.htm|archive-date=14 September 2004}}</ref> After a sustained campaign, the ban was lifted in October of that year.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.rakeshfilm.com/finalsolution.htm|title=RAKESH SHARMA – Final Solution|website=rakeshfilm.com|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref>
The CBFC demanded five cuts from the 2011 American film, ''[[The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011 film)|The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo]]'', because of [[Nudity in film|nudity]] and rape scenes. The producers and the director, [[David Fincher]], eventually decided not to release the film in India.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/jan/30/girl-dragon-tattoo-cancelled-india|title=The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo cancelled in India|last=Child|first=Ben|date=30 January 2012|work=The Guardian|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-GB|issn=0261-3077}}</ref>
CEO Rakesh Kumar was arrested in August 2014 for accepting bribes to expedite the issuance of certificates.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Censor-board-CEO-held-for-accepting-bribes-to-clear-films-quickly/articleshow/40384783.cms|title=Censor board CEO held for accepting bribes to clear films quickly|date=19 August 2014|work=[[The Times of India]]}}</ref> The board demanded four cuts (three visual and one audio) from the 2015 [[Malayalam cinema|Malayalam film]], ''[[The Painted House|Chaayam Poosiya Veedu]]'') (directed by brothers Santosh Babusenan and Satish Babusenan), because of nude scenes. The directors refused to make the changes, and the film was not certified.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-kerala/directors-out-against-cbfc-directives/article7598642.ece|title=Directors out against CBFC directives|work=The Hindu|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31811&articlexml=Film-denied-certificate-for-depicting-nudity-25082015004061|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151006162408/http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31811&articlexml=Film-denied-certificate-for-depicting-nudity-25082015004061|url-status=dead|archive-date=6 October 2015|title=The Times Group|website=The Times of India|language=en|access-date=21 July 2017
CBFC
''[[Udta Punjab]]'' (2016), a crime drama about drug issues in the state of [[Punjab, India|Punjab]], produced by [[Anurag Kashyap]], [[Ekta Kapoor]], et al., inspired a list of 94 cuts and 13 pointers (including an order to remove Punjabi city names). The [[Bombay High Court]] allowed the film's release with one cut and disclaimers.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/udta-punjab-not-made-to-malign-state-bombay-high-court-2844372/|title=Udta Punjab not made to malign state: Bombay HC|date=10 June 2016|work=The Indian Express|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-US}}</ref> A copy of the film was [[Internet leak|leaked online]], with evidence suggesting CBFC involvement.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/report-udta-punjab-leak-cbfc-claims-innocence-as-all-fingers-point-at-them-2224252|title='Udta Punjab' leak: CBFC claims innocence as all fingers point at them {{!}} Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis|date=16 June 2016|work=dna|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-US}}</ref> Kashyap posted on Facebook that although he did not object to free downloads, he hoped that viewers would pay for the film.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/udta-punjab-leaked-anurag-kashyap-asks-downloaders-to-wait-till-saturday-2856467/|title=Udta Punjab leaked: Kashyap asks downloads to wait till Saturday|date=16 June 2016|work=The Indian Express|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-US}}</ref> The film eventually grossed over {{INRConvert|97|c}},<ref>{{Cite web |title=Udta Punjab Box Office | website=Bollywood Hungama | date=17 June 2016 | url=https://www.bollywoodhungama.com/movie/udta-punjab/box-office/|access-date=20 March 2024}}</ref> a commercial success. In August 2017, days after his removal as CBFC chair, Nihalani said in an interview that he had received instructions from the [[Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India)|Ministry of Information and Broadcasting]] to block the release of this film and at least one other.<ref name="ndtvinterview">{{cite news|title='Sacked As I Didn't Clear Indu Sarkar Without Cuts': Pahlaj Nihalani |url=http://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/clearing-indu-sarkar-without-cuts-main-reason-behind-my-sacking-says-pahlaj-nihalani-1739488 |access-date=20 August 2017 |publisher=[[NDTV]] |date=19 August 2017}}</ref>
''[[Lipstick Under My Burkha]]'' (2017) by [[Alankrita Shrivastava]], produced by [[Prakash Jha]], was initially denied certification, with the CBFC claiming that "The story is lady oriented, their fantasy above life. There are contanious [sic] sexual scenes, abusive words, audio pornography and a bit sensitive touch about one particular section of society".<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/cbfc-refuses-to-certify-prakash-jhas-film-lipstick-under-my-burkha/articleshow/57302257.cms|title=CBFC refuses to certify Prakash Jha's film Lipstick Under My Burkha – Mumbai Mirror -|work=Mumbai Mirror|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref> The black comedy, which had been screened at international film festivals, was eligible for the [[Golden Globe Awards|Golden Globes]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.wmfindia.com/blogs/golden-globe-lipstick-under-my-burkha-alankrita/|title=The Cultural Cow That Refuses To Certify A Golden Globe Eligible Film|work=WMF|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-US|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170624033655/http://www.wmfindia.com/blogs/golden-globe-lipstick-under-my-burkha-alankrita/|archive-date=24 June 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> The filmmakers appealed to the board's Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT), which authorised its release.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.zoomtv.com/bollywood-news/latest/article/ekta-kapoor-lipstick-under-my-burkha-cbfc-poster-middle-finger-controversy/34655|title="The middle finger is NOT for the CBFC but for the patriarchal society" : Ekta Kapoor|website=zoomtv.com|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref> The FCAT requested some cuts (primarily to sex scenes), and the film was released with an "A" certificate. Shrivastava said she would have preferred no cuts, but felt the film's narrative and essence were left intact, and commended the FCAT's handling of the issue.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/apr/26/indian-film-board-clears-lipstick-under-my-burkha-release|title=Indian film board clears Lipstick Under My Burkha for release|last=correspondent|first=Michael Safi South Asia|date=26 April 2017|work=The Guardian|access-date=21 July 2017|language=en-GB|issn=0261-3077}}</ref>
In 2018, [[Ashvin Kumar]]'s film ''[[No Fathers in Kashmir]]'' at first received an "A" certificate. In his open letter to the CBFC
== References ==
| |||