| After
politicians, it is animals troubling
the producers!! |
|
|
|
A
couple of movies such as Imsai Arasan Irubatthi
Moonraam Pulikesi and G V Films' Kai Vandha
Kalai have been held back from release because
the Animal Welfare Board has refused to
give them certification. It was only with
great difficulty that G V Films managed
to release their Kai Vandha Kalai, after
bowing to the Animal Welfare Board and removing
all the scenes that has asked to remove. |
|
|
Animal Welfare Board is a body that
takes up causes for cruelty against
animals. It alleges that animals have
been ill-treated by the movie industry
while shooting for a film. Remember
a scene where Kamal makes a parody
of this in his Pammal K. Sambandam?
However, this Board is a powerful
body and wields considerable influence.
The Censor Board of India has made
it mandatory on producers to get a
no objection certificate from this
organization if a Censor Board Certificate
is to be obtained.
|
|
|
The
Animal Board had refused to issue this no
objection certificate to both Imsai Arasan
and Kai Vandha Kalai. Slated to release
on May 19th and then postponed to June 9th,
the movie is still in a no man's land, pending
a case filed by Director Shankar in the
court of law. |
|
It is true that in some film shootings injuries,
sometimes serious ones, are caused to animals
while shooting, especially in scenes where
battles are portrayed. Horses are made to
trip violently, elephants are made to clash
and snakes are made to fight with mongoose.
Why, even cockfighting too belongs to this
category. Such cases can be considered and
debated. But what about scenes where a king
rides a horse? Or what about the director
making a cat cross the hero's path to show
a bad omen? |
|
|
|
What about torturing animals in real
life? Slaughtering cows for producing
beef, riding ponies on the seaside,
cruel disposing of rabid dogs by the
municipal corporations, or bashing
pets for misbehaviour?
"It's ridiculous!" says
a lawyer who has taken up the case
of cinema producers. He argues that
if you can't portray animals, we will
not have entertainers at all. How
can we produce period films?
|
|
|
There
is some element of reason in the lawyer's
line of argument. The Animal Welfare
Board has to come out with clear instructions
as to what is cruelty to animals and
what is not. With no clear instructions,
producers run into trouble. The ambiguity
can be misused for political and personal
gains.
The producer
of Imsai Arasan, who is none other
than Director Shankar, has taken his
case to court. The ball, now, is literally
in the court. Let us wait and see
to whom it is served. |
|
|
|
