QUOTE MARTIAL
MAKING WAVES
SHORT TAKES
ROUGH CUTS
MEMORIES
ARCHIVES
MOVIES CHAT

There's trouble at the end

D Jose in Thiruvananthapuram

Mammootty. Click for bigger pic!

A controversy brewing over the legality of over two climaxes in Harikrishnans, the Fazil-directed Malayalam film, has ended with one of them being withdrawn.

The Central Board of Film Certification had objected to the showing of the film with two endings since only one version had its approval. The uncensored version, exhibited in certain parts of the state, was withdrawn following a clarification sought by the board's regional officer P M Raju.

Producer Suchitra Mohanlal, wife of star Mohanlal, blamed an editing mix-up for the film with two ends being shown in different theatres in the state. In her clarification, she said the uncensored portions had been withdrawn when it was brought to her notice.

Of course, film and media circles take that excuse with a pinch of salt, since reactions to the controversy by the film director and the superstars suggested the producer was trying to satisfy the fans of both Mohanlal and Mammootty in the love triangle.

The film was shown with two endings until the censor board intervened. While one version showed Mamootty marrying the heroine (Juhi Chawla) the other had Mohanlal picking up the heroine. Only the latter had the censor board's approval. The producer had also shot another version showing Shah Rukh Khan picking up the heroine from beneath the local stars' noses.

But when the censor board pointed out that the action amounted to breach of rules punishable with imprisonment up to three years or fine up to Rs 100,000, the producer buckled.

The additional regional officer of the board had pointed out rule 33 of the Cinematograph (certification) Rules. This stipulated that when a film is altered by excision, addition, colouring or otherwise after it was certified under these rules, it should not be exhibited unless the altered portion is reported to the board for endorsement in the certificate.

Mohanlal. Click for bigger pic!

The producer's letter of September 14 to the CBFC stated she had shot three different climax scenes for the film and that one of them had been thought of as more appropriate and this had been sent up to the censors. The film with this climax was censored on September 1.

Subsequently, relying on public opinion, she applied for a change in the climax, adding three feet, again approved and endorsed by the board.

"While editing the final portions for public exhibition, a mix-up appears to have occurred in climax of the 3-ft length in some prints. Some prints sent for exhibition had this climax which was not censored," Suchitra said.

While one controversy is over, the debate over a work of art using different ending rages on. While one school of thought feels there was nothing improper in it, the other say that changing climaxes from time to time is bad practice.

Kerala Chalachitra Academy chairman Shaji N Karun felt it wasn't a positive trend, particularly it was to be submitted to an awards committee. "Which version could he submit?" Shaji asked. Writer Professor S Guptan Nair said the practice was reprehensible. There could be 14 different endings in the 14 districts, he complained.

"If Satyajit Ray had thought only about the masses, we would not have many legends. Similar is the case with Adoor Gopalakrishnan. We are lucky that we have men like them." Professor Nair said the aesthetic value of cinema was decreasing because films were being made primarily to make some easy money.

Another writer, Paul Zacharia, disagreed with the idea, saying modernist literature had already experimented with different endings for a single story. However, he did not think he would opt for different endings for his own stories.

EARLIER FEATURE:
The win-win situation