Dressed in his characteristic black overcoat and red turban, Jyotirao Phule (Pratik Gandhi) rolls up the blinds on a window, with determination written across his face. As he brings light into the darkness, quite literally, his voice thunders over the visual: “Humara desh ek bhavuk desh hai. Yahaan dharm aur jati ke naam par logon ko ladana bada hi saral hai. Ye bhavishya mein bhi hoga. Bas kranti ki is jyot ko jalaye rakhna” (Our country is a sentimental one. It is very easy here to pit one against another on the pretexts of religion and caste. This will also happen in the future. Keep this flame of revolution alive). This scene from the trailer of the upcoming film Phule is prophetic, not just in terms of the social fabric of our country, but also with regards to the fate of the film itself.
Ananth Mahadevan라이브 바카라 Phule was slated to release across theatres on April 11, 2025, coinciding with the 198th birth anniversary of Mahatma Jyotiba Phule, one of India라이브 바카라 pioneering social reformers and anti-caste activists. But shortly after its trailer launch, the film drew the ire of certain Brahmin groups such as the Akhil Bhartiya Brahmin Samaj, Brahmin Federation and Parshuram Aarthik Vikas Mahamandal, which claimed that the film showed their community in a “bad light.” A film made on two of the foremost anti-caste revolutionaries of the country has ironically been accused of “promoting casteism”.
Although the CBFC has agreed to give a ‘U’ certification to the film, it has come at a cost. Among the several changes suggested by the Board is the changing of caste names such as Mang and Mahar, replacing the visual of “man carrying broom” to “boys throwing cow dung balls at Savitribai”, removing a voice over about the caste system, changing the subtitle of “caste” to “varna” and modifying the dialogue of “3,000 saal purani gulami” to “Kai saal puraani hain.”
With its “amendments” in place, Phule is now set to release across theatres on April 25. Even as prominent industry figures like Anurag Kashyap have slammed the outrage from Brahmin groups and the decision to censor a film on such significant anti-caste figures, Mahadevan is rather startled with how the whole controversy is panning out. Having directed other historical biopics like Mee Sindhutai Sapkal (2010) and Doctor Rakhmabai (2016) in the past, he cannot comprehend why a film on the Phules would provoke such hue and cry.
In an interview with Apeksha Priyadarshini, director Ananth Mahadevan spoke about the changes suggested by the CBFC, his views on the outrage by Brahmin groups, the motivation behind making a biopic on Phule and much more. Edited excerpts:
Can you tell us about the changes that were suggested to Phule by the CBFC?
I’m not sure how, but the changes suggested by the CBFC have been leaked and are now in the public domain. However, these suggestions are amendments, not cuts. They are innocuous and do not impact the overall message of the film. I have decided to implement them since I don’t want to go into any entanglements with the law or any other social groups. I don’t want to do anything that reduces the scope of the viewership of this film. This is why I was very particular about the film receiving a ‘U’ certificate; otherwise, the purpose of making it would be defeated. If it received a U/A certificate, then there would be restrictions on children below a certain age to watch the film, and I want Phule to be watched by people across all age groups.
But what do you personally feel about these changes and the reaction to the film라이브 바카라 trailer from Brahmin groups?
I feel that this whole controversy is an unnecessary situation. This whole act of playing safe is a futile exercise. We are not keeping anything from anybody. The entire story in the film has been written by referring to nearly ten to twelve books. You may be making these changes to the film, but are you going to tear the pages of these history books to withhold these facts from the world?
These groups that are outraged by the film—they went on a whole different tangent just by watching a trailer. The response coming from them is oversensitive and reactionary. I would urge them not to jump the gun and just watch the film.
Is there a rising trend of clampdowns by the Censor Board on films that want to talk about the history of marginalised communities in the country, like the recent Malayalam film L2 Empuraan?
I don’t know the Board라이브 바카라 motivation with Empuraan and I’m yet to watch the film, so I can’t really comment on it. But a differentiation has to be made between films that present an opinion and those that deal with facts. Phule is a representation, not an interpretation. It shows things as they were.
I believe that people sitting in the Board should really look at the background of the filmmaker while taking these decisions. Take any of the biopics I have made in the past—be it Mee Sindhutai Sapkal or Doctor Rakhmabai—I have always dealt with facts and remained faithful to the subject.
Do you think that there is differential treatment being meted out to historical films like yours, as opposed to films like Chhaava (2025), which present a skewed narrative?
I feel that it is heavily distorted films like these that throw hundreds of people in the air, which audiences should actually object to for presenting a skewed history. I don’t know what is really causing this uproar—whether it is the time and the social circumstances within which we are making Phule, or because this film is being made in Hindi, due to which its global reach will be greater than regional films. Otherwise, how do you explain the lack of any outrage when films on the same subject were made earlier: be it the Marathi film Mahatma Phule (1954) by Prahlad Keshav Atre or the Episode on Phule in the Bharat Ek Khoj (1988) series directed by none other than the great Shyam Benegal? Even Benegal라이브 바카라 film has the scene where young boys are throwing cow dung at Savitri Bai. Why was there no outrage then?
Can you tell us your motivation behind making Phule? Were there any anti-caste films you drew inspiration from and is it a challenge to make such films today?
I strongly believe that pioneers like the Phules need to be made relevant again today. This film is meant to be a wake-up alarm for youngsters. Here were two superheroes working to eradicate discrimination based on gender and caste. This is history that is coming down to us from the 1840s. But is today라이브 바카라 generation learning from these icons? My attempt with Phule is to recreate and visualise their history. I believe that the film speaks to contemporary issues in the country, as caste atrocities continue unabated.
I don’t think making this film was a social challenge; it was a cinematic one. I felt this sense of urgency as a committed filmmaker to show history as it is. We have a whole history of anti-caste films from which we all can draw inspiration like V Shantaram라이브 바카라 Manoos (1939), K Balachander라이브 바카라 Thaneer Thaneer (1981), John Abraham라이브 바카라 Agraharathil Kazhutai (1977) and Shyam Benegal라이브 바카라 Ankur (1974). This is a difference in society which is timeless and still hasn’t been bridged. It라이브 바카라 been nearly 200 years since Phule라이브 바카라 birth and we still haven’t fulfilled their dreams. Human beings continue being cruel to other humans. It is a movement that started, but has still not ended.
How did you come to choose the cast for this film?
I needed actors and not ‘stars’ for my film, as I wanted the audience to identify with the narrative rather than with the star. Having worked with Pratik in Scam (2020), I thought he is intelligent, aware and well-read. He has the discipline of theatre and also does not conform to the conventional notions of “handsomeness”. That is what I wanted for Phule. Patralekhaa (who plays Savitribai) too, is a great actress. She internalises her part completely. I wanted a face that was familiar but not too common, which is why she was perfect for the role.
Are there any other anti-caste figures whose biopics you want to make in the future?
I’m interested in looking at heroes who have been unsung and are relegated to merely a chapter or footnote in history. What was the reason that this happened? Apart from Jyotiba and Savitribai, this film also speaks of Fatima Sheikh. These were extraordinary characters. Both Savitri Bai and Fatima Sheikh are the pioneering icons of Indian feminism and it라이브 바카라 truly shocking if they are not given the due recognition for their contribution towards women라이브 바카라 upliftment and education in our country.
Apeksha Priyadarshini is Senior Copy Editor, 바카라
This article is part of 바카라라이브 바카라 May 01, 2025 issue 'Username Waqf' which looks at the Waqf Amendment Act of 2025, its implications, and how it is perceived by the Muslim community. It appeared in print in Substrata as 'Are You Going To Tear The Pages Of History Books?'
