By Surendra Bhatia
The first casualty of protests is cinemas, even if the protest march has nothing to do with films or film content. The people of the North-East, inundated by infiltration from Bangladesh since decades, are up in arms with the Modi government’s proposition to grant legal status and citizenship to what are illegal immigrants. This would, apparently, change the demographics of Assam and the neighbouring states. What does this have to do with cinema? Nothing, but when mobs get out into the streets, and towns and cities close down, cinemas are the first casualty. And when protestors have to vandalise and burn down public property to drive home their point, cinemas make an easy target even though they are private property.
So, cinemas in Assam and across much of North-East India are, more or less, in a state of closure. Bengal is fast joining the lockdown North-Eastern states, so those particular markets, too, will soon be written off for a few days or weeks. This might not be a huge blow to Bollywood film collections but the thriving Bengali and Assamese film industries will surely be affected substantially.
This might seem inevitable and not out of the ordinary as India is such a vast and diverse country — with so many states, communities, languages — that protests have become a form of daily news in one region or the other, for one reason or the other. But Bollywood, too, ignites motivated protests in many places, for usually totally unwarranted reasons. Ashutosh Gowariker’s Panipat has had little impact at the box-office, which means, not too many people have bothered to see it. But the few who have (or maybe haven’t) among the Jat community across Rajasthan are protesting against a historical fact depicted in the film. Ashutosh has shown Maharaja Surajmal refusing to help the Maratha army of Sadashiv Rao Bhau during the third battle of Panipat, fought between the Marathas and Afghan king Ahmad Shah Abdali in 1761. Apparently, the Jats would have preferred that Ashutosh had shown the Maharaja helping the Marathas against the invaders, even though historically, it was not the case. In fact, if the Maharaja had actually pitched in to aid the Marathas, it is possible that the invaders would have been driven away and history would have been written differently.
So, to ensure that people believe that the Maharaja was a nationalist and had helped in fighting the invaders, his community is protesting against Panipat, forcing cinemas in Rajasthan to pull the film off their screens. So much for history, though the price is being paid by a film for truthful portrayal of history that most Indians are unaware of…
And then Mardaani 2, another innocent film, a victim of motivated protests! The film, about a serial rapist, is based in the Rajasthan city, Kota. Now, the Kota residents are out in the street, claiming that Mardaani 2 has defamed the fair name of Kota, and the filmmakers should immediately delete the name of the city from the film. Further, it is argued that since the rapist story is fictional, the name of the city, too, should be fictional, or, at least not Kota. These illogical arguments can’t be countered with reason. Rapes happen in every city on the earth, as also murders and thefts. Should a city not ever be named? Maybe the residents need to have a look at the rape count in the police records of their fair city. But would that solve the issue? Of course not! Logic is not an argument anymore. And so Mardaani 2 will be raped at the Kota cinemas because the Kota residents think most highly about their fair-minded city.
Cinemas are vandalised for the flimsiest of reasons, most times even unrelated to films. It might be a good idea if state governments allow cinemas to charge a rupee extra as damage compensation tax on each admission ticket. If patrons are going to vandalise, they might as well be made to pay for it. Right?
