Posts Tagged ‘Pawan Kumar’

Fox Star to remake ‘Lucia’ in Hindi. Here’s why it’s a landmark film

Posted: November 26, 2013 by moifightclub in film, Indie, Kannada, movie reviews, News, reviews, Simbly South
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
5

Fox Star Studios India has recently acquired the Hindi-language remake rights of Pawan Kumar’s Kannada film “Lucia”.  He is going to direct the Hindi version too. Vijay Shankar Murthy tells us why you should watch it and how it has become a landmark film down South.

Lucia

An inspired voice-over quotes legendary poet-musician Kanakadasa:

Nee Mayeyolago, Ninallu Maayavo

Nee Dehadolago, Ninallu Dehavo

Are you a creation of illusion or is  illusion a creation of you?

Are you inside a body or is the body inside of you?

A riveting sequence of opening credits later Pawan Kumar’s terrific psychological thriller “Lucia” opens its cards.

We learn there’s an investigation into a suspected murder attempt on Nikki aka Nikhil who is now on life support. A detective from Mumbai, Sanjay, is inserted into the investigation team much to the chagrin of the local cop. The cops and Sanjay dig deeper into Nikki’s life, stumbling upon a tale of substance abuse–involving a drug named “Lucia”.

Satish Neenasam as Nikki plays an unremarkable country bumpkin from small town Karnataka residing in a teeming metropolis that is Bangalore. He makes a modest living working as an usher (Torch Shiner) in his uncle’s old-style single screen theatre “tyaakies”. Nikki suffers from insomnia and on one fateful night comes into contact with a drug peddler who offers him a solution to his sleeping problems–the tablet “Lucia”. The peddler tells him not only will this tablet enable him to sleep well but also help him be whoever he wishes to be in his dreams.

Taking the plunge into Lucia, Nikki now ascends into his “dream” life. In this alternate reality Nikki is a hugely successful film superstar. Girls swoon over him. Directors and producers queue up to work with him. His manager is Uncle Shankaranna (same as the theater owner Uncle). Nikki’s demeanor suggests that despite the hordes around him, he is still a lonely man in search of something.  Enter model turned actress Shwetha (Sruthi Hariharan), who appears to be the cure-all. Still even in his dream he is plagued with problems and receives extortion threats.

In reality, mean time, Uncle Shankaranna is pressured by a local gangster to part with the Theatre  towards repaying his debt. Nikki realizes that one of the gangsters resembles a guy who shot him with rubber bullets in his dream. Nikki also meets Shwetha from his dreams in reality and begins a quest to win her heart.

Meanwhile in present day, we see the investigation appears to be gathering momentum as Private Detective Sanjay is convinced there is a connection between the attempt to murder Nikki and the drug “Lucia”.  Is it a drug-habit gone bad? Did Nikki stumble upon some secret plans of the drug peddler gang? Did he get lynched by the gang that threatened his uncle?

Writer-Director Pawan Kumar shifts between reality, alternate reality or dream life,  and the present day seamlessly with the lines blurring between what is real and not. The dream sequence is presented in black and white to differentiate itself. The love story between Nikki and Shwetha often acts as the theme that straddles reality and dream around which other events revolve. Kumar also peppers the narrative with other sub-plots intertwined with the goings-on.

An under-current of black humour through the film laments the state of the Kannada film industry. Superstar Nikki’s film is directed by a guy who speaks Tamil (likely that he is a Tamil industry reject) and a Rowdy-like Telugu speaking producer (Possibly not rich enough to produce Telugu movies and hence produces lower budget Kannada movies). An oily distributor tries to convince Uncle Shankaranna to screen Tamil and Telugu or even porn movies in his “Tyaakies” in order to make “Frofit” (Profit) as there are hardly any takers for Kannada movies.

In another sub-plot Shwetha tries to “refine” some of the bumpkinesque traits of Nikki, particularly his inability to speak English. She is particularly unimpressed by his pronunciation of “Theatre” (“Thetru”). This seems a reference to the divide between the English speaking “Cantonment”  Bangalore and the Kannada Speaking “old” Bangalore. The cooling glasses Superstar Nikki sports symbolize “coolth” which torch shining Nikki is not seen with.  It also seems a tool to hide the pain and the loneliness behind the glass veil .

When you look at the central theme of Lucia one can assume it is that of relationships, of love, of loss and the pain of losing love.  Looking at it from another perspective we can also proffer that it is the story of one man – Nikki. A third way of looking at it is that of a typical crime-thriller with a whodunit element.  What is particularly astonishing about Lucia is how seamlessly and organically it straddles these genres, stories and even copious quantities of philosophy but yet remains wonderfully accessible. It’s here where Lucia differentiates itself in a genre that is typically tricky. Above all, as Kumar announces at the beginning of the film—it’s a tribute to cinema—one that’s born out of love for the celluloid world.

All of the high-points of the film would have been rendered useless if it was not for the right people to have worked on this production. The actors playing the three central characters in the film—Nikki, Shwetha and Uncle Shankaranna are perfectly cast.  Satish Neenasam as Nikki does a sensational turn as the lead character. When the narrative juxtaposes reality and dream it chiefly aims to contrast the two Nikkis. In one scene Nikki is a blabbering country bumpkin while in the next he is a suave confident superstar who speaks little. Neenasam rightly plays the complex Nikki almost as if it were two different people. Whether it is getting the Mandya-dialect of Kannada right or the demeanor required of a reigning superstar, Neenasam is incredibly brilliant.  Special mention of how Neenasam’s looks are designed through the film.  It is as important as the performance itself.  This is the time of the Anti-Hero. With the emergence of the likes of Nawazuddin Siqqiqui, Vijay Setupathi etc Neenasam is a welcome addition to the club. It also proves what talent can do when provided the creative canvas. Sruthi Hariharan as Shwetha the model- filmstar/pizza-delivery girl is pitch perfect as well.  Though she doesn’t get the best of the lines she emotes superbly whether it is conveying the aura of the superstar or the pain of losing her love. Achyutha Kumar is effective and eminently likeable as Uncle Shankaranna.

Siddhartha Nuni’s cinematography wonderfully captures the director’s vision. Despite the number of scenes shot up close to the characters, the camera never feels intrusive or gimmicky. It aids us into the lives of its characters. The ecosystem of a typical Single Screen Theatre is captured  in vivid colors and with clinical precision by Nuni’s wavering lens. Poornachandra Tejaswi’s songs don’t always shine although in places it is memorable. The dry humour of the lyrics though is effective. Notice the “item” song that Nikki refuses to dance to but eventually does when the item girl, he realizes, is Shwetha. The background score sufficiently enhances the film.

Kannada movie moguls once upon a time in the distant past produced gems such as Minchina Ota, Manasa Sarovara, Bedara Kanappa, Ondanondu Kaaladalli etc. That was a golden period for Kannada cinema. It is however, highly unlikely that you will find a Kannada film in the recent past that succeeds like Lucia. The tacky 1989 thriller Idhu Saadhya (Meaning: This is possible) starring Anant Nag and Shankar Nag is perhaps a distant genre-cousin of Lucia in Kannada cinema. Additionally one cannot overlook some obvious similarities/references to Cameron Crowe’s Vanilla Sky, but the co-incidences end with the theme and maybe a doffed hat here and there.

In an industry that more often than not receives hand-me-downs of the Telugu and Tamil films and where banalities are magnified further in the remakes, Lucia comes as a true breath of fresh air. The 90s had Sunil Kumar Desai who often attempted to move away from convention with movies such as Beladingala Baale (Lady in the Moonlight) but did not completely succeed in creating a distinct voice. Also inspirational and unheard of in the South Indian film industry is the concept of crowd-funding. Investments here still remain in the purview of the parochial minded where commerce, ego, hero etc usually trump over most things creative. It is not surprising that despite the backing of senior folks like Yograj Bhat, Lucia did not find takers in the Kannada movie industry. How could they if it wasn’t a remake of a “successful” Telugu/Tamil movie? Also incredible is that this movie was made on a budget of Rs.70 Lakhs. Kumar deserves unadulterated credit for standing his ground, for having conviction in his story, but most importantly— ultimately succeeding in delivering what he promised.

Eleanor Roosevelt once said “The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams”. It neatly sums up the film and the filmmaker’s journey.

All those who have loved Kannada movies of the 70s and 80s, watch Lucia RIGHT NOW. You will be proud of Kannada cinema again.  And yes, those who love cinema in general – two reasons for you to watch a Kannada movie a) It’s brilliantly subtitled (smart move by Kumar to broaden the audience base) and b) It’s a terrific movie.

(About the author – To pay his bills, Vijay Shankar Murthy works with what John Perkins calls “Evil Big Business”. In an alternate world, he would like that his bills are paid for, and all day he could watch Gangster flicks over and over again. In the middle of all this, he also aspires to be a writer some day.)

 

Kannada film “Lucia” gets multi-city release

Posted: September 6, 2013 by moifightclub in film, Indie, News, Regional, Story / Plot / Synopsis, Trailer
Tags: , , , , , ,
10

Since crowd-funding is in vogue these days, it’s good to see the trend going beyond Hindi indies. If our friends are to believed, Lucia is the first Kannada film to be crowd funded. We don’t have much clue about this one but it surely looks interesting. It’s written and directed by Pawan Kumar and will release with English subtitles. The film is released by PVR Directors Rare.

Lucia

Official Synopsis

From the director of smash hit Lifeu Ishtene, comes Lucia, heralding a new direction for Kannada cinema, being the industry’s first crowd funded film. An usher at a decrepit cinema suffers from insomnia. His life changes when he starts getting weird and wonderful dreams but with a caveat. Set in the teeming young metropolis that is Bangalore, the film is a turbulent ride where the lines between dreams and reality are blurred to delirious effect. Please don’t reveal the ending after you’ve watched the film. Prepare to be surprised, very surprised.

Trailer

Show Timings

Lucia2

– To know more about the film, click here.

– To read the filmmaker’s blog, click here.

Consider This…..the story of “Shahid”

Posted: October 31, 2012 by moifightclub in bollywood, cinema, film, film review, Indie, Movie Recco, movie reviews, reviews
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
5

Ad film maker and FTII alumni Ravi Deshpande writes on Hansal Mehta’s Shahid and its journey so far. (Disclaimer – Hansal says he has been a guide and friend.)

“From reluctant jihadist to crusading lawyer, the life of Shahid Azmi was a remarkable one. Gunned down while defending accused Mumbai bomber Fahim Ansari, Azmi was transformed into an unlikely martyr. But Hansal Mehta’s new film is much more than a biopic; Shahid captures the zeitgeist of a generation.

Shahid’s story began in the slums of Govandi in eastern Mumbai amid violent riots between Hindus and Muslims. A young witness to injustice, Shahid fled his home to a jihadist camp deep in the mountains but, never a dedicated soldier, he deserted as a teenager and returned home — only to be imprisoned on terrorist charges. Tutored by older political prisoners, he resolves to fight injustice upon his release. Finding work in a law office, Shahid struggles against a system steeped in contradictions and hypocrisies, defending clients labelled “anti-nationalist,” “radicals” or “terrorists.”

Hansal Mehta’s Shahid is as much a testament to a remarkable life cut tragically short as it is a cathartic journey through a city filled it seems with equal measure grave injustice and great idealism.”

– Cameron Bailey, Artistic Director, Toronto International Film Festival.

Consider this : By the time he was gunned down, Shahid Azmi had at least 17 acquittals to his credit, a great benchmark for the small span of time he was an advocate.

So why am I writing about this film? Or rather, why am I compelled to write about the experience of this film? Because the film is as close to a real tale as I have seen. The real story of the film concluded with Shahid’s death but just 2 years ago. His strife is still fresh in our minds. It is a Mumbai tale that Mumbaites know. Difficult to satisfy a critical Mumbaite filmmaker’s mind with a Mumbai story.

In the film, the protagonist is a young lad from the FTII stable of actors, Rajkumar Yadav. Leave aside the fact that the bloke does not age through the 2 decades that the narrative unfolds. This fact does not bother me and has not bothered others while watching his stunning underplayed performance. All the other characters (Casting Director Mukesh Chabra) move through the fabric of the film story with finesse (Prableen Sandhu, Mohd Zeeshan Ayyub, Baljinder Kaur, Tigmanshu Dhulia, Kay Kay Menon, Vipin Sharma, Shalini Vatsa, Vinod Rawat, Suvinder Pal, Pawan Kumar, Vivek Ghamande, Paritosh Sand, Prabal Panjabi, Yusuf Husain)

Their mannerisms and expressions are palpable, the interactions are humanly common stance, and the scenes make me angry, make me cry, make my blood rush through my temples, and sometimes make me smile, even squirm with discomfort.

Hansal’s approach to acting as well as most things in the film has been organic in nature, and bereft of conventional method. Many scenes, even dialogues have often been reworked on location. It is a dangerous terrain for a Director to operate because an actor can easily bend a scene in a fashion that could alter the earlier intent. Hansal chose a difficult route to extract from artists what they felt was the most honest delivery. So in the court scene, when the judge too becomes argumentative with the advocates and the accused, the theatre split into laughter, or when the naked Shahid is tortured in the Lodhi Police Station Cell, the viewer in the next seat clenched his fists.

There are other reasons too why this impact is astounding. The Cell is lit by a single tube, and does not light up the protagonist in agony.

 

Consider this: The DOP (Anuj Dhawan) saw the location (A friend’s godown in Andheri) and said, “Perfect! Lets shoot!” And Hansal as a Director had the balls to do exactly that. Hence the spaces become volumes that the viewer can relate to and inhabit.

Consider this: Shahid’s house in the film is Shahid’s own house, and Shahid’s office in the film where he was shot dead, is in actuality Shahid’s office. A year after his murder, when they were shooting in her house, Shahid’s real mother asked to meet the actor. She just wanted to see him…for her, Shahid was still a part of her ‘present continuous’. Her other son, Khalid Azmi (Played by Vaibhav) has gone on record to say that the film is 95% close to the real story.

So Hansal’s choices, or democratically speaking the crew’s and the cast’s choices were nakedly honest. Hansal was able to guide them through to keep the story of Shahid alive and true. It is one thing to say, fine, I do not care that the actor’s face is not lit up in a scene, and yet another to accept that different digital cameras will land on the shoot on a regular basis.

Consider this: They get a RED MX camera one day, a Red One on another and the next day an Alexa. On some days all they had was a Canon 5D. Hansal and his DOP (Anuj Dhawan) have the guts and gumption to mount it and shoot, to make the most of the time available with the given location and the cast on roll call. What a nightmare for the DI artist and the post-production technical crew.

It looks like a film about the Muslims, for the Muslims, by the Muslims. However, there is not a single crewmember except the artist Arif and the Professor (Played by Mohd. Zeeshan Ayyub and Yusuf Husain respectively) who are muslims. Not the protagonist, neither the director, nor any of the artists, nor even the writers. And the film is about the plight of the Muslims in India. Or perhaps anywhere and everywhere in the world. Simple folk who are pious, righteous, and who wean through the hard struggle of life. Muslims who are wronged for the only reason – that they are Muslims.

And yet, the story could be of any community, as one never becomes conscious of the ‘religion’ in the story but is sensitized only to the situation and the events. Go see any other film about the Muslim community made with adequate or handsome funds and compare – which is the more engaging, which is more honest, which is the tougher film to make, which is bringing a truer story for the audience’s appetite in today’s time of the RTI, which has more layers, which sets you thinking, which churns your bowels, which makes you feel guilty, helpless, angry, which is the one not biased, which is the one that makes you more aware, more empowered, which is the one non-exploitative?

So there is no definite genre that the story can be pinned by. It is neither a courtroom dram, although the crucial scenes are set in courts, neither is it a romantic tragedy, although Shahid’s supportive wife leaves him and then he dies, nor is it a martyr heroic film, although Shahid ends his life as a martyr for a cause. In fact, it is all this and more, because Hansal does not steer it to a dramatic fictional tale but insists steadfastly to narrate the story of an individual with all the truisms intact.

Consider this: Shahid was supposed to be a well-funded film by a corporate production house with a star in place. Hansal and Sunil Bohra (Producer) chose the other route lest the shenanigans of the star system or the numbers game shackle them. And they embraced the hardship with a tougher stance of honesty to make a moving, compassionate film.

For any Director to touch and mould his material with a humanitarian approach is one of the most difficult directing tasks. Hansal has not just immersed himself with the material but internalized it, forgotten his leanings, left aside the grammar of filmmaking that he learnt through his earlier seven feature films, as well as rid himself of easy shooting or post production solutions.

Consider this: The editor Apurva Asrani also co-wrote the film. The earlier decision was to make a non-linear narrative as the world over, the traditional linear narrative is considered to be passé and not smart enough for today’s times. Apu is also known for drastic usage of NGs (No-good takes), jump cutting, and edgy editing styles. With the material in front of them, they both opted to be dumb but true to the material and formed a linear narrative! Apu’s edit does not leap out of the screen at you but lets you immerse yourself in the development of the story unhindered.

Consider this: A veteran artist has reservations because her role seems to be just 3 pages in the courtroom. So she decides nearly 8 hours before the shoot to decline. She has doubted the director because he has said that we will improvise the scene and the dialogues as we shoot. But that is the organic way that Hansal wanted to make the film by involving everyone concerned with the scenes.

Consider this: When the village in the hills threw up extras that were Hindus, the lead actor Raj Kumar Yadav had to train them stepwise (12 steps) on how to do Namaaz. The Director read numbers in order to get shots with movements in cohesion from the group. The sound recordist had but just one assistant for the schedule. That is brave for a film with live sound (Sound Recordist: Mandar Kulkarni).

Although the temptation to turn voyeuristic is huge, Hansal’s camera does not try to barge close to the man who is in flames in the riot filled streets of 1993 Mumbai to sensationalize it, nor does it travel from sunset silhouettes to a frontal of the twosome’s faces up North in POK as they share a happy repartee moment, nor does it underline the most significant moment of Shahid’s assassination in the office with a close up or a long shot. Hansal and the DOP refrain from the usual temptations of over dramatizing the situation. The screenplay (Sameer Gautam Singh and Apurva Asrani), the Mise en scène, the acting, and the editing too blends the subtle manner of telling, aided by a music track that does not interfere with the realism. During the depiction of the love story, the dialogues are as matter of fact as can be, and so are the situations.

Hansal’s ingenious shot division helps us see to events in a seamless fashion. This Spartan style of filmmaking lends way to a new language that is close to real life, and not the crafted, arranged carefully kind of a story, spoon fed by loud, crass everything-to-be-said-through-dialogue and underlined by music. The proximity to the material increases manifold and the viewer relates to the unfolding of the story in a much more integral, much more organic manner. No wonder that audiences in Canada (At the Toronto Film Festival) and at the MAMI waited in long ques due to ‘word of mouth’ to see the film. And no wonder that Hansal has had standing ovations at both places.

Consider this: While Music was being discussed for the film, the sound Engineer was asked what ought to be the music. “Sparse, minimal, hardly there types”, he said. His diktat was followed. (Music: Karan Kulkarni)

Hansal’s directorial abilities were never questioned, and infact lauded several times (Dil Pe Mat le Yaar, Chhal, Jayate, etc.) Nor were his sensibilities (it was his own decision to stay away in ‘Wanvas’ at Lonawala for so many years). He meandered just about everywhere in the Mumbai Bollywood terrain of storytelling. This film has cemented his road. Hansal has to start walking on this path which will lead him to greater heights and us as viewers to greater experiences that he will invoke as a refined old-wine director.

I just hope that the film sees the light of the day and does not but just roam the festivals of discerning viewers across the globe. And hoping against hope that the authorities and political parties do not intervene with their typical horse blinds on release or before.

 

Consider this: Hansal and Sunil Bohra (Producer) have refrained from censoring the film and releasing it because they want audiences to see the film in this form; the more the better – wonder what will transpire at the censor board.

It is a significant film of our times about our times. There, I have said it.

(It was first posted on Ravi Deshpande’s blog here)

Open letter to Mr. Nagaraj, Regional Head, CBFC (Karnataka)

Posted: September 5, 2011 by moifightclub in film, News, Regional
Tags: , , , , , , ,
7

Sir,

I am Pawan Kumar, the director of the Kannada film Lifeu Ishtene. On the 30th of August, you watched my film and you passed your views about it, and gave us a U/A certificate with a forced ‘voluntary’ cut. I’d like to bring it to your notice that if I had the luxury to fight for my right I’d not have accepted to cut what you insisted.

I am a first time director in a industry which is struggling to survive. Fighting for the cut meant you forwarding our film for further reviewing and that would take couple of weeks more, that would put a lot people involved in making of this movie in a very difficult position. Hence for their sake I simply shut up and bowed to your very tyrant behaviour. This letter is simply me putting out my thoughts, I am not challenging your decision through this. I want the people to know the truth, so that they can decide who was right and who was wrong. Am hoping that you will read this till the end and be convinced that you erred, that’s all I want, I don’t want you to change the decision or apologize, the damage you wanted to do is already done. The letter might seem long but I made it as entertaining as my film was, you will have a good laugh by the end of it.

This being an open letter, I guess the public should know what I am talking about. Here is a picture of the document that Mr. Nagaraj wrote down after seeing the film. He has listed his thoughts point wise, but before I dwell into those, I’d like to mention that I respect the man and his position. He is an IAS officer and I am sure it is pretty tough to be on the chair where he sits, I cant get there for my IQ levels. I like the man for the way he appears, he comes across as a through gentleman and has an aura of being smart, composed and intelligent. I was really hurt and shocked when he listed out his objections for my film. Something that I really didn’t foresee, especially by this person, whom I had met during the censoring of Manasaare and Pancharangi. I did and I still have high regards for him.

Mr. Nagaraj in the above document states “Remove the word sucker from the tag line of the movie, wherever visible in, Move on Sucker”. For those who don’t know, ‘Move on Sucker’ is the tagline of my movie title. Mr. Nagaraj had a problem with the word sucker. He simply said that I must remove that word. I tried arguing with him that it is not a bad word, that it is simply a slang term for someone considered gullible enough to fall for a very obvious prank or con and go about unaware of it. We all know what the word sucker is, we all have used it in phrases like ‘I am sucker for Chinese food’ or ‘I suck in maths’ or ‘the movie sucks’ etc etc. But he just didn’t want to listen to me. He said that he is not interested in the parliamentary meaning of a word, he is interested in how the word could be perceived by the masses and therefore I should cut it out from the film. There was no point arguing further because he was a man sitting there controlling the future of my film and I could see it in his eyes that he just didn’t want to understand even if I tried to explain. I said “ok I will remove it”. The word comes 3 times on the screen in the film, to remove that the producer has shelled out 45k till now. 45k is not a small amount, with that money I could have put an Ad in the papers and promoted the film more, get more people to watch the film and try to save our sinking industry, or I could have simply paid it to someone in the team who has been working day and night to offer something new to the people, but instead we had to waste it on a stubborn man with a lot of power. Look at the visual below, tell me how is removing of that word changed anything?

If sucker is such a bad influence on the society, what about the words ‘BoseDK’, ‘Ass Hole’, ‘Fucker’, ‘BlowJob’, all these words were featured in Delhi Belly. The same CBFC (Central Board Of Film Certification) passed it and the movie made pot loads of money!! I am not someone who encourages those words. I am a very clean guy, I don’t speak or promote bad language, you wont find it in my movie too. Before coming up with the tag ‘Move on sucker’ I did look through the internet to make sure the word Sucker didn’t mean anything wrong. Its only after I gathered enough information that I put it up. We are a small industry and we have very small budgets to make films. We are pitted against movies from Hindi, Tamil, Telugu and English; all these industries have huge budgets to take the audience away from us. If we have to get them to watch our movies we need to sound contemporary, talk to them in a language they understand. A line like ‘move on sucker’ would make the people in their 20’s connect to the movie, and they’d make an effort to watch it. Why is it that when Aamir Khan does it, its alright? He did way too much and it was still alright!!! By asking me to remove the word ‘sucker’ from my movie tagline, the Censor Board has been impartial to me. Mr. Nagaraj is aware of the financial state of the Kannada industry. He very well knows how much we are struggling to make people trust us. And he has seen my movie and he also said ‘your movie is 99% qualified for U certificate but sprinkled with some objectionable matter’. The word sucker was one of them. And the word was not simply a publicity gimmick, after you watch the movie you’d understand how that word makes sense in the movie. The guidelines by the censor board of India states – A film is judged in its entirety from the point of view of its overall impact and is examined in the light of the period depicted in the film and the contemporary standards of the country and the people to whom the film relates, provided that the film does not deprave the morality of the audience. Guidelines are applied to the titles of the films also.

People, please tell me and Mr Nagraj, if the word ‘sucker’ has in anyway depraved the morality of you all. What censor board needs is a sense of humour. It needs to grow up and wake up to the people who live around them and not in their guidelines. Television today has become horrible, it is impossible to see and hear many of the things that is aired on many news and entertainment channels. Something that you can probably watch with your family is Discovery channel and sports channels, not even the sanskar or astha who are using the dangerous weapon against the society, the religion . But the censor board is all quite about it. Television has no censor, it doesn’t come under their jurisdiction.

Mr. Nagaraj, we are all suckers, you are one, I am one too. And the people know that. They know that they are one too. And that’s the funny thing about it. When we accept our flaws and imperfections and laugh about it, we can put our egos behind and try to progress. That’s what my movie on the whole was trying to say. For some reason you didn’t see it beyond the word ‘Sucker’ without even knowing the meaning of it.

Now coming to the other angle to the whole issue, which I hope is not true but is very possible. I think it is the ego. I very strongly feel that it is the ego of Mr. Nagaraj that makes him do what he does. He sitting in his little cabin in the govt building, enjoys seeing us film makers dance to his tunes. I am sure it must be giving him a kick that he can in 2 hours 30 mins control a film makers 10 months of hard work by just using one word. He knows how difficult it is technically to remove those words from a completed film and that’s why he does that. For people who are not aware it might seem very simple, you must be thinking how difficult it is to just delete a word. If I get into the process I can do a 6 hour workshop and probably you’d learn most of the technical aspects of film making. In simple words, it took many people and many days of work in Banaglore and Chennai to erase that word. I hope all this makes Mr. Nagaraj very satisfied and gives him a good night’s sleep. This is the story of how the word Sucker got separated from the film Lifeu Ishtene.

Now, let me introduce you to some more blunders. But I could live with these because frankly I don’t give a damn whether my movie is U or U/A, and thankfully neither people are interested in those ratings anymore. Like I said the Censor board is so stuck up with their guidelines that they don’t see how people are today. My movie got a U/A because of a scene which is got something to do with condom. The government is trying really hard to reach out to people, they even come up with jingles, in kannada there is an ad – maatadidavane mahaashoora. But Mr. Nagaraj feels that it is very uncomfortable for adults to see such content with children. That’s precisely the point sir, that’s what government is trying to say ‘don’t be shy about it, talk openly and spread awareness’. Teenagers should get aware of it, they should be bold enough to talk about a condom and not make a taboo of it. But instead Mr Nagaraj goes to the extent of writing – delete comedy episode surrounding condom for a U certificate. But I didn’t agree with him, I agreed for a U/A instead and the scene is intact. In a week you will see it and you will know that it is not in bad taste and is for sure spreading awareness.

The second one is debatable, Mr Nagaraj has pointed out a shot where a woman is smoking. His justification was that it is not right to show women smoking and therefore he writes – also delete the visual of lady smoking. I am not going to defend this much. I don’t smoke and I am for anti smoking. I had even made a short film on the anti smoking subject.

In Lifeu Ishtene, the character which the lady was playing was of the types who would smoke and therefore I hade to make her light up. Deleting this shot would not change the reality though, we see so many women smoking these days, and it is really bad. Smoking is bad for both men and women, and I sincerely hope that smoking comes to an end. And in no way is my film promoting or glamorising smoking. The Censor guideline says – scenes tending to encourage, justify or glamorise consumption of tobacco or smoking are not shown. To show the bad result of a habit, the story needs to build up and then show the effect. That’s what my shot of the lady smoking was doing. No problem here, I will gladly take a U/A for this point.

The third is silly actually. In the third point Mr. Nagaraj says – delete lip to lip kissing in the song. Well not much defending here, for some reason we Indians want to think that showing love on screen is more dangerous than showing violence. On a funny note may be the government has a strategy behind this, Lets not teach people to express love, there by reducing population and lets show more violence so that they could kill each other and again reduce population!!!! Am I the only one laughing at this stupid joke??? Ok Mr. Nagaraj I will accept a U/A for this too. I am sure the 15frames (less than a second) of lip to lip pecking in the mayavi mayavi song would make the adults very uncomfortable to watch it with children under the age of 18 years old. However I have one question for you – How did you pass the song ‘Padmavathi’ from the movie ‘Johny Mera Naam’ with a U certificate? That one really shocks me. Because though I am an adult and my father is an adult too, we both would be uncomfortable watching it together in theatre or on TV. Please ask yourself if the very aesthetically shot 15 frames of a small peck on the lip in my movie was worse than what you can see in a 4 min song. Here is the link to that song if you want watch it again and wonder why you gave it a ‘U’.

Your guidelines clearly states the following – human sensibilities are not offended by vulgarity, obscenity or depravity; scenes degrading or denigrating women in any manner are not presented. Isn’t this song violating all of this?????

People please note that from what I can read of Mr. Nagaraj, he is a very good person, I am not being sarcastic, I might be against his decisions but I don’t hate him. Please don’t think that he was expecting a bribe or anything like that. I can for sure say that he is NOT a corrupt govt servant. He is doing his job but he has to simply get some of the realities in the right perspective. Lets help him know what he is not aware of so that he stays with us as the regional head of Karnataka for CBFC, and make right decisions and help us all save good kannada films. If you believe in this article and you want to support me, then please mail Mr. Nagaraj your views in a few words and a few words only, lets not waste his time. I hope you will not send abuses because I am not in support for that. Mail him on robanglore@cbfcindia.gov.in or nagarajk1@yahoo.com and cc a copy to me on actorinme(at)gmail(dot)com . I guess the subject line of the mail should be with a sense of humor, keep it as – Lets grow up, suckers! 😉

(Note: I still haven’t received the final Censor Certificate from Mr. Nagaraj, he is going to give it to us after he checks the film and finds no ‘sucker’ in it. We have followed his instruction and removed it and showing the corrected film copy on monday. I could have waited till monday to get the certificate and then put this article up. But I didn’t want to be a chicken in expressing my views. I hope Mr. Nagaraj will stand up to his gentleman image and not take this article to his ego and create problems to the release of the film on the scheduled date. He is in a position to completely reject this article but he is not in a position to take this personally to take revenge.)

( PS – This letter was first posted here)