Dhoom 2 and a kissing controversy

Yeah, I was dragged begging and screaming to watch Dhoom 2. This weekend, I went to a get-together for ASHA marathoners and happened to take W along. And when I introduced Amit and his wife, they all seemed to hit it off. I knew it was a mistake right away. Why? You'll see soon. After a few drinks and dinner, Amit and wife mentioned to W that they were going to a 11:10PM show of Dhoom 2 in a theater. Till then, I had somehow managed to keep W subdued about this movie citing bad reviews and basically waiting for it to go away from the silver screen. My world came shattering down when W turned around and asked me with those big excited eyes "Can we go?". Ofcourse, I didn't have the heart to say no. Traitor SpiceTooth quietly dropped us off at the theater, and before we could say "machan", he was gone like the wind. Bastard!

Anyways, this blog is not meant to be a review of this movie. However, there was one scene in the movie were Hrithik and Aishwarya profess their love for each other. They're both near tears as they lovingly kiss each other, on the lips as it so happens. This is probably the only scene in the movie that I thought was well-made. And lo behold, what happens in India? A lawyer files a case against the actors, citing the kissing season as an indecent act.

So that got me thinking on what could have been the motivations behind such a blatantly hypocritical lawsuit?

1. Maybe he's a bit shocked and thinks that these kind of things have no place in sacred India. Then it goes without saying that he has never seen other Hindi movies where there's a whole lot going on other than kissing. In a country threatening to be the leader in HIV and AIDs cases, kissing is probably the last thing we need to worry about.

2. Maybe he's okay with the kissing as long as it does not involve Indian actors. He'll watch Hollywood movies in Indian theatres, and obviously will not file lawsuits against any kissing scenes there. However, the bollywood fantasy world is no place for such indecent activities.

3. Maybe he's pissed off that Aishwarya Rai, who's seen as one of India's biggest names abroad, is sullying Mother India's reputation?

Whatever be the reason, shouldn't he be filing petitions or lawsuits against the Indian Censoar board for giving this movie a universal rating? Why would he try to blame the actors for doing what they are told to do and get paid good money for? The only possible explanation is that he's trying to inconvenience and embarrass such actors so others are wary of repeating this in the future.

At first, my thought was that this guy just needs attention. But apparently, that is not the case. He actually avoids the media, but is genuinely concerned about such onscreen incidents. Here are a few excerpts from his interview:

Dhoom 2, he says in his petition, lowered the dignity of Indian women and gave an obscene message to India's youth.

"They are portraying vulgarity in our Indian culture," says Dwivedi. "Dhoom 2 cannot be watched by Indian families because it is a vulgar film."

What precisely is objectionable, I ask. Pressed on the point, the advocate says "I felt the kissing scene was objectionable. I went to see the film with my child and it was quite embarrassing. The least they could have done was certify this as an adult film. No one is bothered about this, not even the censors. This is not right according to our Indian culture."

So how does he define Indian culture, where and how does he draw the line? "I don't want to get into that controversy," he says, side-stepping the question.

---

"My conscience made me file this case," says Dwivedi, a tall man with a receding hairline.

He is clear in his mind, though, that the Aishwarya-Hrithik lip-lock in the film is a clear case of obscenity.

Dhoom 2, he says in his petition, lowered the dignity of Indian women and gave an obscene message to India's youth.

---

This incidentally is not his first tilt at tinseltown. He had earlier filed a case against Dharmendra and Hema Malini, when Dharmendra said he had not converted to Islam and married Hema Malini as his second wife.

He also filed a case against director J P Dutta's LoC Kargil after the Indian flag was shown wrongly draped and placed on the coffins of Indian martyred soldiers.

The most high profile of his cases was the one he filed against painter M F Husain, when he drew Hindu goddesses in the nude.

"Husain had no business to paint Mother India and other goddesses naked. It was very insulting for every Indian," Dwivedi says, his anger evident in his tone.

But what, then, of artistic license, of the freedom of expression that is the bedrock of a democracy?

"Why don't you paint your own mother nude?" Dwivedi demands. "When you can show Durga and other goddess naked, then why not Husain's mother's naked portrait too? Let him do that first. I think it is an insult to our nation to do such acts."

---

But why Aishwarya? After all, Mallika Sherawat became famous for 17 kissing scenes in a single film? "I never see Hindi films," Dwivedi says. "I didn't see any of Mallika Sherawat's films, therefore I am not aware of these things. I happened to see Dhoom 2 and I found the scene objectionable. It is a film that one cannot see with one's family, and therefore I filed a case. Whenever I feel something is wrong, then I do these things on an individual basis."

Then again, not a single case he has filed thus far on such issues has met with success -- so what then is the point? "I hope to get justice one day," he says, simply.

"I am not disappointed; I only want that such acts should not be repeated. other filmmakers must learn from past experiences, by not including such obscene scenes in the future. If that happens, then that is my victory."