How was the CBFC so liberal in passing scenes of gruesome violence, swear words and sexual dialogues in Animal?
– The raw violence, four-letter words and sex-laden dialogues were the need of the film’s drama and that is why the CBFC cleared them by giving the film an ‘A’ certificate.
How much must the business have been impacted because of the ‘A’ certificate to Animal? In other words, how much extra business would Animal have done had it been granted a ‘UA’ certificate?
– Its net collections with a ‘UA’ certificate would’ve been around Rs. 50 crore more than they would be now, with an ‘A’ certificate. But please understand one thing: the film’s content is what is driving the business. Had the film been granted a ‘UA’ certificate, the film would have had far less violence, sexual dialogues and foul language. That would’ve reduced the business a great deal. While a section of the ladies and family audience have given the film a thumbs down because of excessive violence, four-letter words and sex-laden dialogues, there is an army of youngsters and masses, which is loving the film because of the content. The benefit (in terms of business) accruing to the film is far more than the disadvantage because of the rejection by a section of the audience. So, the business of the film would’ve been far less without the same content.
What kind of opening do you envisage for Dunki and Salaar (dubbed) on 22nd December?
– Bumper for both the films!