As a filmmaker, I would not like my film to be touched-Ananth Narayan Mahadevan

Mihir Bhanage (BOMBAY TIMES; April 19, 2025)

Anurag Kashyap’s post about the CBFC’s alleged approach to films about the caste system in India added fuel to the already raging fire around the release of Phule, a film based on the life of Mahatma Jyotiba Phule and Savitribai Phule. While the CBFC granted Phule a ‘U’ certificate on April 7, it had asked for certain edits, including the removal of references like ‘Mahar’, ‘Mang’, ‘Peshwai’, and a modification of the phrase “3,000 saal purani ghulami” to “kai saal purani ghulami.” But did CBFC suggest any cuts in the film?

“No, just these tweaks,” filmmaker Ananth Mahadevan tells us, adding that the suggestions were implemented. In a chat with us, the filmmaker addresses the controversy and speaks about the role of censorship in filmmaking.

Phule was certified with a ‘U’ rating but after the trailer was released, controversy erupted. You said the CBFC suggested changes. Were there any cuts suggested as well?

Fortunately, there were no cuts suggested by the CBFC. The so-called amendments, or tweaks as I call them, were inconsequential. Even if those weren’t implemented, it wouldn’t have made a difference. I guess we’re all becoming a little over-sensitive and want to soften things. But the audience is knowledgeable. Even if you remove certain words or modify phrases, they’ll understand it. I think some people watched the trailer and jumped the gun. They concluded that the film is against a particular community. It’s not. Yes, there are conflicts, but the beauty of Jyotiba and Savitribai Phule’s life is the harmony and interaction they had with all communities.

Would you call these suggested tweaks fair?

I am quite amused at these things, because it was not something so major to be labelled fair or unfair. As a filmmaker, I would not like my film to be touched, and that too with such insignificant and innocuous changes. I don’t understand why we are so nervous about how people will react, or how sensitive they are. I think we should respect the sensibilities and the sensitivities of the audience. This film does not exaggerate or fictionalize history. It does not even interpret history. All it does is represent history. When you’re so honest about a particular subject or with the people while making the film, you should also respect the intelligence of the audience.

Have these changes hampered the flow of the film, or dissemination of history in any way, considering your stand that the film is based on facts and history?

Fortunately, all this hasn’t reduced the impact of the film. It still conveys everything it has to without hiding or making anything subdued. That said, the original word always is stronger than a synonym or alternative for it. And I would always prefer the stronger words to convey what I want to.

There’s been a lot of support for the film from cinephiles as well as filmmakers, including Anurag Kashyap who highlighted the CBFC’s alleged bias in a post on social media. Your thoughts about this.

Yes, there’s been a lot of support, even from political parties, saying the film should be shown in its entirety. I think that’s encouraging and positive. There will always be disgruntled voices but that has been virtually eclipsed by this unanimous support.

You deferred the release of the film by a couple of weeks for ‘things to settle down’. How did that affect you and the team?

The only thing that I felt a little upset about was that we wanted to release it on April 11, which was Jyotiba’s birth anniversary. That would have gone down in history for posterity. But we had to sacrifice that for the betterment of the film and to help it reach the maximum number of people. It was necessary to address these concerns of those who had an objection. So, we took that little time for things to calm down.

Do you think there’s a solution to this issue of people jumping the gun without looking at the full picture?

I don’t think so. Not even in the future, because we are an immature society. This comes forth either through some unnecessary prejudices or provocations or whatever, but we do not seem to have progressed. In fact, we seem to have regressed in many ways, despite many things that Jyotiba and Savitribai fought for, like women’s education and independence, being achieved. But caste discrimination and gender discrimination continue to plague our society. These issues are not going to be solved so easily. So, the revolution continues. We are still so self-centered and materialistic. Technological advancements do not cover up your social regressions. What about conscience? What about social relevance?

Given the current state of cinema in the country, do you think it is difficult to make a film that highlights reality or history?

See, if you’re an honest filmmaker, if you’re a socially relevant filmmaker, and if you are a responsible filmmaker, you will not harbour any fears of how society is going to react or what impact it’s going to have on minds. For me, it is very important to not let these things bother me. I delve into a subject, treat it the way it deserves to be treated – with honesty and with the passion that I always had, and then leave the rest to the audience. My duty is to make that film the way it should be made.

The CBFC is often referred to as the censor board, but it’s the Central Board of Film Certification. There’s a difference between censorship and certification that many aren’t aware of.

Yes, certification happens abroad where films are certified as per their content – universal, with parental guidance, restricted viewing and strictly for adults etc. In India, we did try to amend the process, but the problem is that with the certification, we retained the censorship too. I agree that there should be self-censorship while making a film and there is a cinematic language that one must use for that. I do it too. But by suggesting cuts in a film, you are just defeating the very purpose of certification. Then you might as well call yourself a censor board and not a board of film certification.