Guess who's watching U/A movies?
Vandana Vasudevan -
Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:14 PM
A couple of weeks ago
I went to watch New York. At the interval, while I was contemplating
whether John Abraham was really a terrorist and marvelling at how the
director could make even Neil Nitin Mukesh act, I heard a noise
which struck me as being odd in that setting. It was a bunch
of kids about 8-10 years old, running down the aisle and pestering their
parents for popcorn. It was an incongruous sound because it was a midnight
show of a U/A movie. I pondered over the fact that these kids would
have by then seen in close up a man narrate his humiliating experiences
in an FBI detention centre, John Abraham crouching in fear, stripped
of clothes and dignity while in prison, and a brief lovemaking scene.
What is the meaning of
a U/A certificate? According to the Censor Board of Film Certification
U/A means unrestricted public exhibition, but with parental
guidance for children below 12 years. This rating is given to a movie
which contains mild violence, language and sensuality. The movie may contain some material that is unsuitable for children under 12.
Practically, what does
it mean? That if a parent accompanies a child, the material suddenly
becomes suitable for the under-12 kid? Or is the parent expected to
cover the child’s eyes whenever something undesirable comes on screen?
Obviously not. Therefore, it is a warning to parents to say that some
parts of the movie may be unsuitable but if you still insist on making
your kids see it, go right ahead.
It is up to parents to
follow the rule in its spirit rather than in letter. Turns out lots
of them are following it in spirit, their own spirit, and happily carting
their under-12s to U/A movies.
I can understand babies
and toddlers who'll probably fall asleep or wail through it all, but kids
in Classes 3 and 4 and 5 are old enough to register the scenes and yet
not fully comprehend them. That's the most dangerous and irresponsible
thing a parent can do: expose the kid to stuff that he's too young
to process and too old to ignore. It just ignites curiosity (which will
remain unaddressed in a typical Indian home) and the kid will end up
with some half-baked idea about whatever it is he saw, whether it is
sex, violence or betrayal. (Read a related article I wrote in Lounge
a couple of years ago here.)
Last year the same thing
happened during a night show of Race. A lady next to me was swaying
to the title tracck: "Race chahat ki, Race shourat ki... my heart is
beating on,” she hummed loudly, while her young son sat on his mom's lap, his heart probably beating on as well as he tried to make sense
of Bipasha and Kareena's overt sexiness and why the women were
being swapped between the two brothers and why bhaiyyas should keep
trying to harm each other.
I guess there are two
reasons why parents bring young kids to movies inappropriate to them.
Firstly, maybe because
they think there is no harm in it and the kid won't get the point anyway.
Nothing could be more naive. A movie in the theatre with its 70mm screen
and Dolby sound is such an intense experience for a child, that
he will never forget it. Every scene will be etched in his memory for
a long time to come. All of us remember the movies we've been to in
our childhood with our parents because the magic of cinema was well,
unforgettable. Obviously it matters. Why else would we have something
called U/A certification? It’s not only in conservative India.
This rating is similar to 12A of BBFC and PG-13 of the MPAA. The Supreme Court agrees
with me. Here is what a ruling has to say:
“Film censorship
becomes necessary because a film motivates thought and action and assures
a high degree of attention and retention as compared to the printed
word. The combination of act and speech, sight and sound in semi darkness
of the theatre with elimination of all distracting ideas will have a
strong impact on the minds of the viewers and can affect emotions. Therefore,
it has as much potential for evil as it has for good and has an equal
potential to instill or cultivate violent or good behaviour. It cannot
be equated with other modes of communication.”
The second reason could
be that the parents desperately want to see the movie and are unable
to leave the kid back home. This is clearly an irresponsible act because
watching the movie is not imperative and it can't override the kid's
best interests. Movies are telecast on TV pretty soon after they are
released and there's always DVD, so this is a myopic reason and in fact
less excusable than the first reason.
So large segments of
under-12s in urban multiplexes are watching U/A movies cozily sitting
next to their parents. Whether it was a good idea or not, we will know
with time.