Movie censorship Vs Freedom of Expression

Movie censorship Vs Freedom of Expression

Author :- Ritusri M

There has been a long-running debate between movie censorship and freedom of expression in cinema. One side of the argument advocating for freedom of expression argues that it is a fundamental right and should not be curtailed. The other side, advocates for strict censorship, say that protecting people from viewing harmful content is necessary. A responsible film industry must find a balance between the two sides. 

The importance of movie censorship

The supporters of strict movie censorship argue that the vulnerable audience, especially children, should be protected from viewing harmful content. Censorship, they assert, helps prevent the circulation of explicit violence, explicit sexual content, hate speech, and other forms of objectionable material that can harm society. Movie censorship often aims to protect the public from social unrest, which can be caused by offensive content. In summary, movie censorship is essential for ensuring filmmakers exercise their creative freedom properly and constructively influence societal culture.

The case of Shehar Kapur's film 'Bandi Queen'

The movie "Bandit Queen," directed by Shekhar Kapur and released in 1994, sparked a significant censorship controversy in India. The film based on the life of Phoolan Devi faces massive opposition because of its explicit content, mainly sexual violence. The censor board was ready to ban or largely censor the film because they thought it would provoke violence and be offensive to some parts of society. The heavy criticism of this film sparked a debate on the freedom to portray harsh realities in cinema. The film was finally released with many cuts, but it raised many discussions between the balance of artistic freedom and movie censorship. 

Freedom of expression in movies 

In the Film industry, freedom of expression is more important than anything because it is an essential feature of democracy. Films allow creators to explore new stories and portray new viewpoints. It encourages creativity, enriches culture, and gives people the confidence to express their unique stories. With this freedom, artistic development stalls, and society can interact with significant, often tricky, but thought-provoking topics. By defending the right to question, criticize, and be inspired, we strengthen the ties that bind a democratic society based on free speech and diverse opinions.

The controversy of the film 'War and Peace.'

The debate surrounding Anand Patwardhan's documentary "War and Peace" demonstrates the fine line that must be drawn between movie censorship and freedom of speech. The makers of this film were demanded to make 21 cuts before the film was released as it included scenes that depicted nuclear testing and the November 11, 2001 attacks. In addition to the requested cuts being absurd, according to Patwardhan, this seriously threatened freedom of expression in India. This discussion covered the general issue of how much authority censorship organisations should have over creative works. 

The court's involvement in this case was essential in maintaining the ideals of free speech. The court upheld the director's artistic vision while underlining the need to balance censorship and freedom of expression when it ruled that the sought edits were unconstitutional.

In Conclusion

The conflict between movie censorship and freedom of speech continues to be a complex and important conversation in the constantly changing world of cinema. The fundamental rights of artists and audiences must be respected while censorship serves to safeguard society. Clear guidelines, public involvement, and legal protections are necessary to strike the correct balance. The "War and Peace" case serves as a reminder of how crucial the judiciary is to protecting artistic expression. We must continue to tread carefully in this continuing conflict, understanding that the power of cinema lies in both its creative freedom and its social responsibility.