Who gained from Satluj's 48-hour release? 5 big questions about Diljit film
A film that took years to make and defend disappeared in just 48 hours. But, those two days on streaming platform ZEE5 might have ensured
A film that took years to make and defend disappeared in just 48 hours. But, those two days on streaming platform ZEE5 might have ensured that Satluj reached more people than it otherwise would have. The Diljit Dosanjh-starrer, based on the life of human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra and the militancy-hit days of Punjab, appeared quietly on ZEE5 India on July 3 before vanishing from the platform within two days. Read Full Story The film's release on ZEE5 while the platform gained the broadcasting rights for the Football World Cup, its superfast withdrawal, Dosanjh's remarks on its "downloads" being available with people, and the debate over freedom of expression, have fuelled controversies. People have raised important questions, some moral, some legal, and yet some other on intentions. What prompted the makers of the movie to opt for an OTT premiere under a new title? Did the OTT platform know that the Censor Board had recommended 127 cuts? Didn't it know what it was getting into? Did Dosanjh, even unintentionally, not promote piracy? Did the entire controversy benefit Satluj not financially but in terms of publicity and reach? And the biggest question — was there a motive behind the brief platforming of the uncut movie? Here we will discuss the five biggest questions regarding Diljit Dosanjh's Satluj and the controversy it has triggered. 1. WHY DID MAKERS RELEASE SATLUJ DESPITE BEING AWARE OF LEGAL HURDLES? The decision to release and withdraw Satluj appears to be anything but impulsive. It was sent to the CBFC as Panjab '95. In fact, Satluj's original title wasn't even Panjab '95. It was originally titled Ghallughara, a term that means massacre or genocide in Punjabi. Panjab '95 had been stuck for years after the CBFC reportedly demanded at least 127 cuts, along with changes to dialogues, visuals and even the film's title. The producers challenged the certification process before the Bombay High Court. However, according to a BBC report, the petition against the suggested cuts was withdrawn later. It would be safe to infer that the theatrical release, in all likelihood, became impossible without accepting the extensive modifications. Then, the makers renamed the film Satluj, and opted for a direct OTT release. The move banked on an important distinction in India's legal regulatory framework. While theatrical films require CBFC certification before exhibition, streaming platforms are governed by the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. These rules rely on self-classification by platforms and a three-tier grievance mechanism rather than mandatory pre-certification by the CBFC. Actor-writer Ghazal Thakur on X alleged that the makers "used a loophole" by changing Panjab '95 to Satluj, skipping a theatrical release and opting for an OTT premiere. She further claimed the film was released "without any whiff to anyone" while the government was allegedly "kept under the impression that discussions regarding a movie named Panjab '95 are still on".
The BriefWire