L2: Empuraan controversy ripples: Is self-censorship a rule of the game now?

Mohanlal and Prithviraj Sukumaran in L2: Empuraan, the first Malayalam film to cross Rs 300 crore at the box office. The film releases on JioHotstar on April 24. (Image via X/@EmpuraanMovie)

In the age of theatre re-releases, the Malayalam film L2: Empuraan (L2E) may have pulled the fastest turnaround time yet. Directed by Prithviraj Sukumaran, L2E released in theatres on March 27. Days later, the filmmakers decided to pull the original version from cinemas and (re)release another one – with 24 voluntary cuts.

The film had, of course, been certified okay by the Central Board for Film Certification before release. What prompted the re-look by the filmmakers then? If Indian cinema was in the throes of a cultural shift before the L2E controversy, the re-release of the film with more cuts than the Censor Board had recommended has galvanised the conversation around artistic freedom and self-censorship.

“It gives a clear signal to all filmmakers and artists around,” says film critic and documentary filmmaker CS Venkiteswaran. “When a superstar like Mohanlal and the powerful team behind the film resort to it (self-censorship), it sends out a strong message across the industry that if you cross certain limits, you know what’s in store for you. The damage could be big.”

Led by superstar Mohanlal, the mega-sequel to political thriller ‘Lucifer’ (2019) found exceptional fanfare before its release and opened with a bang. It raptured audiences across India and beyond but also caught some flak from a section of them for its alleged anti-Hindu stance. Scenes referring to the 2002 Gujarat Riots and the Naroda Patiya killings, were isolated and widely discussed. For some, the boldness in the storytelling was laudable, but others saw it as a divisive ‘anti-Bharat’ narrative.

Empuraan grew in stature throughout for all the right, wrong and random reasons on the heels of the incident. Despite the controversy, or maybe because of it, L2E went on to gross over Rs 300 crore at the box office. It is now the highest-grossing Malayalam film of all time, and set to release on OTT on April 24, on JioHotstar.

But the somewhat premature announcement to re-edit the film cannot be ignored. Mohanlal issued a public apology on Facebook, the controversy came to be discussed in Parliament, and the filmmakers announced voluntary cuts regardless of the CBFC's greenlight. It could be ‘risk assessment’ or ‘shock marketing’ on the producers’ part, depending on who you ask, but the largely unforced altering of the film could set a new precedent: it also exposes a new trend in direct censorship (on the lines of direct economics and direct democracy).

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Mani Karthik (@manikarthik)

Self-censorship paradox

CS Venkiteswaran suggests that censorship exists across four different categories today: censorship by the state, censorship arising from a community’s ‘hurt-sentiments’ claims, censorship due to a streaming platform’s internal decisions, and finally the self/voluntary censorship.

Many, including CS Venkiteswaran, highlight that the makers of Empuraan had the wherewithal and the clout to deal with the scenario differently. In that, they were perhaps different from most content creators. Advocate and filmmaker Vasanth Adithya points out, “a majority of Indian filmmakers do not get to operate of their own accord, and almost all censorship is forced upon them.”

Anant Mahadevan’s Phule, a biopic on the 19th-century social reformers Jyotiba and Savitribai Phule (starring Pratik Gandhi and Patralekhaa), was originally scheduled to release in theatres on April 11. However, the film found itself in the thick of a debate when the Hindu Mahasangh, led by its president Anand Dave, asserted that it showed the Brahmin community in a negative light, and the release of Phule had to be postponed till April 25. The reaction, based on the trailer alone, came after the CBFC had already awarded the film a ‘U’ certificate and suggested only a few changes.

“Such instances render the CBFC irrelevant and stir a dangerous trend,” says Bindu Menon, a professor of film studies at the Azim Premji University. “You allow for a direct negotiation of the public with the film, and the Censor Board, meant to be an intermediary body carrying a consensus interest of its members, isn’t allowed to participate in these matters”.

Skirt, but never approach

Trishant Srivastava, who has written popular web series such as Jamtara: Sabka Number Ayega and IC 814 - The Kandahar Hijack, says that self-censorship is ingrained in writers of this generation, albeit in a benign state at the moment. “Themes like religion or nationalism aren’t technically off-limits for writers but given the environment we live in today, many of us restrain ourselves right from the inception stage of a project. The task is to find novel ways of approaching a sensitive topic instead of flirting with its fragility. If you know that anybody, quite literally, today can file a court case to create an issue, then it is best to censor or confine yourself right at the beginning,” he shares.

Srivastava, who spent five years on the Netflix original IC 814 - The Kandahar Hijack, adds that while OTT creators today aren't constantly fearful, many of them don't feel they have complete creative freedom. He says that something like the comedy-skit show Saturday Night Live or SNL, which has balanced humour and critique in its irreverent, absurd ways for over 50 years, is not possible to do in India at the moment. “We always had satire as part of our culture – from literature to old Doordarshan shows. But can you think of even a single satirical film from the last 15-16 years? Can someone pull off a Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro (1983) today?”

"The biggest threat to the establishment today is community-viewing and that's why cinema is always under the arclights," says CS Venkiteswaran. “Whereas they don't mind private viewing, even pornography. You have stand-up comedy and YouTube creators resisting the powers, so filmmakers too must think of alternate ways of producing and releasing their works.”

When L2E released, many were shocked and impressed to see a film of this stature dealing head-on with a subject like the Godhra riots. Murali Gopy, the writer of the film and its prequel, is a former journalist who uses discretion in citing the incident and tactfully masking it under the garb of a mainstream film. The concern, however, seems to arise from the film's heavy-handed treatment of these and the use of violence and gore as its tools to drive the message home; the result is topical urgency meeting tonal chaos, and one is likely to remember the film for the news it made rather than the history it confronted.

For filmmaker-cinematographer Rajeev Ravi, who has made films like Annayum Rasoolam (2013), Kammatti Paadam (2016) and Thuramukham (2023), dealing with complex social or political themes comes with the territory. However, he is also aware of the fact that just because a film is centred around a sensitive subject, doesn’t mean that its heart is always in the right place. “You have several instances in the past wherein top directors have made films on terrorism or Hindu-Muslim conflicts. Taking up sensational topics vapidly results in brownie points and it also churns out money for them,” Ravi says.

Unintended consequences

In the digital age, we know the deleted scenes will continue to exist, as they are shared and re-shared, creating more moments for virality and engagement with viewers. Whether or not ‘shock marketing’ was part of the promotional strategy of the L2E makers, the numbers tell a story of success.

CS Venkiteswaran says the chief role that the digital platform plays in such scenarios is circumventing the archaic and colonial modes of censorship that are still in play. It’s a win-win for the Empuraan team, he points out, in that they get to appease everyone from the State to the Censor Board and the market comprising audiences of varied socio-political inclinations - and emerge a big winner ultimately.

“Even if you have released a new, edited version of the film, the original version is out there to be accessed. And the digital economy, unlike the celluloid, allows the film to then exist as a collection of countless reels, with each reel saying something different. There is a lesson to learn about whether you can actually suppress disputed content or not,” he adds.

The precedence it sets

Things may have worked out well for Team Empuraan, but what impact will their backtracking and folding under pressure have on the rest of the film fraternity, and for how long? Filmmakers and content creators today seem to accept that ‘self-censorship’ has become a thumb rule for them, but the degree to which it impacts an artist depends on the context.

Recently, filmmaker Ali Abbas Zafar (of Sultan and Tandav fame) was quoted by a news site as saying that in future, he will fight for a scene only when he believes that is crucial to his narrative. In other cases, he might be willing to let it go if he feels that he can keep the “core of his storytelling intact”. This level of pragmatism is apparent among many writers and filmmakers today, and this qualifies as a form of self-censorship in its own right.

Of course, a select few can, and have chosen to, withstand the pressures to self-censor today.

With IC 814, co-writer Trishant Srivastava and the team grounded the script in extensive research. Though it's well-documented that the hijackers used code names instead of their original Muslim names, the series still faced controversy over alleged inaccuracies. But that doesn’t deter Srivastava, who feels that his creative judgement couldn’t be compromised by fear or apprehension. “As a writer, I don’t work with the scepticism that outrage could emerge from any corner, but rather take it as a challenge; it’s not new that artists face constraints in India,” says Srivastava.

Rajeev Ravi urges that the only way to combat the hegemony is to continue making films that you believe in, without imposing any kind of 'thought' restrictions on yourself. "Cinema is my form of expression and self-censoring would mean I am voluntarily turning blind. So, you have to stick to your instincts at all times and keep making movies – that's the only way you can provide a base to the future generations. Those who are really serious about what they do, will not restrict themselves," he says.