Latest news with #Lajja
Time of India
15-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Manisha Koirala receives an Honorary Doctorate from the University of Bradford
Bollywood actress Manisha Koirala has added another feather to her cap as she received an Honorary Doctorate from the University of Bradford. The 'Dil See..' actress claimed that she is someone who has not learned through the traditional education system but as a student of life. Dropping a video from the graduation ceremony on her Instagram handle, Koirala penned, "Today, I received an Honorary Doctorate from the University of Bradford." "I stand here not as someone who came through the traditional path of education, but as someone who learned through life - through hard work, failure, resilience, and service," she added. Shah Rukh Khan to be conferred with second doctorate Showing her gratitude to the University of Bradford for seeing her value, she penned, "This honor means more than I can put into words. It's proof that no matter where you start, your journey matters. Thank you to the University of Bradford for seeing value in my story. Keep growing. Keep shining....". On Sunday, Koirala used Instagram to pay a heartfelt tribute to her late grandmother Sushila Koirala. The 'Lajja' actress remembered her grandmother's influence during her formative years. Calling her grandmother her first teacher, she wrote, "Offering tribute Deepest tribute to mother Susila, who raised me, taught me the values of life and founded me the foundation of who I am today. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo My sweetest childhood memories are attached to her - whether learning life lessons, learning Bharatanatyam or Manipuri dance, or reading a book. That time filled with His love will always live in my heart. May the soul rest in peace. " Koirala's post also included two photographs of her late grandmother. Sushila Koirala was a Nepalese classical dancer and theater director who breathed her last on 13 July 2007 in Kathmandu, Nepal. Talking about her work, Koirala was last seen in Sanjay Leela Bhansali 's acclaimed web series "Heeramandi: The Diamond Bazaar," where she was seen delivering a powerful performance as Mallikajaan.
Indian Express
11-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Janaki v/s State of Kerala: Janaki is everywhere. But only CBFC sees a problem
Nearly a quarter of a century ago, Rajkumar Santoshi made a film called Lajja that, were it to come before the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) today, would likely have the members of that body calling for smelling salts. Starring Manisha Koirala, Madhuri Dixit, Rekha and Mahima Chaudhry, Lajja (2001) took on the hypocrisy of a society that venerates goddesses but mistreats and exploits flesh-and-blood women. It was a well-intentioned if melodramatic film that couldn't resist — like so many other 'women-centric' films of the time — tempering its feminist sympathies with a hefty dose of male saviourism. It was, in other words, typically Bollywood: A little bold, a little sanctimonious, and designed to be entertaining. Could such a film, so thoroughly mainstream in 2001, be made today? One might well ask this question, considering the meltdown that the CBFC appears to have had over a Malayalam film called Janaki v/s State of Kerala, beginning with the name of the protagonist, who is a rape survivor. How, the CBFC demanded to know, could a sexual assault survivor be named after the goddess Sita? Its refusal to certify the film unless the title and character name were changed — along with several more cuts — led to the producers seeking relief in the High Court. And as if its objections had not been absurd enough, the CBFC stated in a counter-affidavit, '(the protagonist) is aided by a man belonging to a particular religious community and is cross-examined and asked harrowing questions by a person belonging to another religious community. This religious dichotomy in the treatment of the character bearing Goddess Sita's sacred name has the potential to inflame communal tensions and create divisive narratives between religious groups.' And here we come back to Lajja, in which not one, but four characters were named after Sita — Vaidehi, Maithili, Janki and Ram Dulaari. The very choice of these names was meant to drive home the film's message about the horrors that women have to endure in a deeply patriarchal society. The same year, a film named Ravanaprabhu was made in Kerala, in which a woman named Janaki falls in love with the title character — it went on to become one of the top-grossing Malayalam films of that year. If these films could be made and released without hurting sentiments or disrupting public order in 2001, one can only despair over how far Indian society has regressed in the 24 years since — at least in the CBFC's imagination. Because that, too, is among the many troubling aspects of this whole controversy: The wounds that the CBFC is seeking to salve by holding up the release of a film that was already cleared by its regional office in Thiruvananthapuram are entirely imaginary. As the Court itself noted, not one protest has erupted in the state. Not only is the CBFC going beyond its remit to decide what filmgoers in India can and cannot watch, it is hypothesising about how they might feel about a film and acting on it before the film has even been released. The CBFC has a long history of attempting to circumscribe artistic space and infantilising the audience, but in Kerala the case of Janaki v/s state of Kerala has an especially disturbing resonance given the controversy in March over L2: Empuraan, which suggests that the ground may indeed have shifted. In Empuraan's case, it was not the CBFC that posed the problem, but some social media users and members of the Sangh Parivar who took offence to its depiction of the 2002 Gujarat riots. That the producers of the film and its star, Mohanlal, apologised and agreed to 'voluntary modifications' to dialogues or scenes that may have 'pained' anyone betrayed a sense of being under siege, not by the scissors of official censorship, but by 'sentiments' of the easily offended. Some in the Malayalam film industry have sought to trace the current controversy back to the capitulation seen during the L2:Empuraan episode, arguing that ceding space to the hurt sentiments brigade at that time has normalised such reactions. That may not be entirely fair; we've been seeing similar controversies and capitulations in the Hindi film industry for a while, after all. Malayalam cinema has, so far, been protected by the unselfconscious sense of religious harmony that has long characterised it and which has mostly kept artistic freedom and creativity from being hijacked by manufactured outrage. Could the furore over Janaki v/s… — whose producers have agreed to add the initial 'V' before 'Janaki' in the title, besides two more cuts — herald a narrowing of this space?
Indian Express
11-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Janaki is everywhere. But only CBFC sees a problem
Nearly a quarter of a century ago, Rajkumar Santoshi made a film called Lajja that, were it to come before the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) today, would likely have the members of that body calling for smelling salts. Starring Manisha Koirala, Madhuri Dixit, Rekha and Mahima Chaudhry, Lajja (2001) took on the hypocrisy of a society that venerates goddesses but mistreats and exploits flesh-and-blood women. It was a well-intentioned if melodramatic film that couldn't resist — like so many other 'women-centric' films of the time — tempering its feminist sympathies with a hefty dose of male saviourism. It was, in other words, typically Bollywood: A little bold, a little sanctimonious, and designed to be entertaining. Could such a film, so thoroughly mainstream in 2001, be made today? One might well ask this question, considering the meltdown that the CBFC appears to have had over a Malayalam film called Janaki v/s State of Kerala, beginning with the name of the protagonist, who is a rape survivor. How, the CBFC demanded to know, could a sexual assault survivor be named after the goddess Sita? Its refusal to certify the film unless the title and character name were changed — along with several more cuts — led to the producers seeking relief in the High Court. And as if its objections had not been absurd enough, the CBFC stated in a counter-affidavit, '(the protagonist) is aided by a man belonging to a particular religious community and is cross-examined and asked harrowing questions by a person belonging to another religious community. This religious dichotomy in the treatment of the character bearing Goddess Sita's sacred name has the potential to inflame communal tensions and create divisive narratives between religious groups.' And here we come back to Lajja, in which not one, but four characters were named after Sita — Vaidehi, Maithili, Janki and Ram Dulaari. The very choice of these names was meant to drive home the film's message about the horrors that women have to endure in a deeply patriarchal society. The same year, a film named Ravanaprabhu was made in Kerala, in which a woman named Janaki falls in love with the title character — it went on to become one of the top-grossing Malayalam films of that year. If these films could be made and released without hurting sentiments or disrupting public order in 2001, one can only despair over how far Indian society has regressed in the 24 years since — at least in the CBFC's imagination. Because that, too, is among the many troubling aspects of this whole controversy: The wounds that the CBFC is seeking to salve by holding up the release of a film that was already cleared by its regional office in Thiruvananthapuram are entirely imaginary. As the Court itself noted, not one protest has erupted in the state. Not only is the CBFC going beyond its remit to decide what filmgoers in India can and cannot watch, it is hypothesising about how they might feel about a film and acting on it before the film has even been released. The CBFC has a long history of attempting to circumscribe artistic space and infantilising the audience, but in Kerala the case of Janaki v/s state of Kerala has an especially disturbing resonance given the controversy in March over L2: Empuraan, which suggests that the ground may indeed have shifted. In Empuraan's case, it was not the CBFC that posed the problem, but some social media users and members of the Sangh Parivar who took offence to its depiction of the 2002 Gujarat riots. That the producers of the film and its star, Mohanlal, apologised and agreed to 'voluntary modifications' to dialogues or scenes that may have 'pained' anyone betrayed a sense of being under siege, not by the scissors of official censorship, but by 'sentiments' of the easily offended. Some in the Malayalam film industry have sought to trace the current controversy back to the capitulation seen during the L2:Empuraan episode, arguing that ceding space to the hurt sentiments brigade at that time has normalised such reactions. That may not be entirely fair; we've been seeing similar controversies and capitulations in the Hindi film industry for a while, after all. Malayalam cinema has, so far, been protected by the unselfconscious sense of religious harmony that has long characterised it and which has mostly kept artistic freedom and creativity from being hijacked by manufactured outrage. Could the furore over Janaki v/s… — whose producers have agreed to add the initial 'V' before 'Janaki' in the title, besides two more cuts — herald a narrowing of this space?
India Today
24-06-2025
- Entertainment
- India Today
Fight like Sita but don't use her name: Why Janaki makes censor board uncomfortable?
A Malayalam film has ruffled feathers with the censor board in Mumbai after naming its protagonist 'Janaki'. While the film was certified by the regional board in Kerala, its release has been halted following CBFC's (Central Board for Film Certification) objection to the character's name - citing that it refers to Goddess Sita, who is deeply revered as the ideal wife in the epic incident draws an immediate parallel with the censor board passing the 2001 Bollywood film, which starred the biggest names in the Hindi film industry and featured not one, but four characters named after Goddess Sita. 'Lajja', directed and written by Rajkumar Santoshi, wasn't a box office success but gradually became known for using cinema as a tool to highlight women's rights and the systemic oppression they then, 'Lajja' was certified U/A, despite featuring brutal scenes of violence and sexual assault. Its four leading women - Manisha Koirala, Madhuri Dixit, Mahima Chaudhary and Rekha - were all named after Sita, and told stories of individual trauma at the hands of a society that ironically worships Goddesses like Sita and Durga for their resilience, virtue and power. The film's narrative follows Vaidehi (Koirala), a pregnant domestic violence survivor, who escapes her abusive husband. During her journey to self-discovery, she meets other women - each fighting their own battle in a patriarchal character, Maithili, raises her voice against dowry. Dixit's Janki confronts the society that forced the Goddess herself to undergo the humiliation of Agni Pariksha - to prove her purity, even after enduring captivity and harassment under Ravana. Rekha's character, Ramdulari, is a Dalit woman who is gang-raped and murdered. 'Lajja' was a haunting portrayal of female persecution and a symbolic tribute to the Goddess who herself had to prove her honour to the world in front of her in 'Janaki vs State of Kerala', the film currently denied certification - the protagonist is a woman fighting a legal battle after being assaulted. Malayalam director B Unnikrishnan revealed on June 23 that the board demanded a name change, saying, "The story is about the legal fight carried out by an assaulted woman against the state. It is said (by the board) that Goddess Sita's name cannot be given to the woman character who suffered assault."But, isn't Janaki the most appropriate, even symbolically brilliant, name for a woman who's fighting back? Goddess Sita, too, resisted - mentally, emotionally and spiritually - when abducted. Yes, the scriptures say Ravana never touched her. But did the emotional torment, the psychological captivity, not amount to assault?advertisement As described in Valmiki's Ramayana, she used a blade of grass as a symbolic barrier to rebuke Ravana's advances. She endured duress for years, fending off his pressure, alone in a foreign Sanskrit scholar, Hara Prasad Shastri, in his English translation of the Ramayana, wrote: "With his left hand he (Ravana) grasped the hair of the lotus-eyed Sita, and with his right hand, he grasped her thighs. Then, suddenly, the great chariot belonging to Ravana appeared, and addressing Sita in harsh tones, he lifted her up and, clasping her, ascended the car (sic)."There she was. Forcibly abducted and held against her later, a film shows another Janaki - this one, too, a survivor fighting back. But, a panel of censor board officials - whose role is to certify a film, not to dictate creative choices - decides that a woman who has been assaulted cannot carry the name of a Goddess who herself was subjected to trauma, humiliation and there's a name that suits such a character, it is Sita. And if there's any hypocrisy louder than silence, it is this: worshipping a Goddess for her grace under fire - while denying the same grace to a woman who dares to reclaim her a film merely using that name as a symbol for artistic expression becomes the victim today, maybe the fight for justice and dignity that Goddess Sita stood for... still continues.- Ends
India.com
16-06-2025
- Entertainment
- India.com
Meet actress, who Rekha once slapped on set, cried, unable to recover, left acting, now living a...
She walked into Bollywood with stars in her eyes — and legends all around. Aarti Chabria made her debut in 2001's Lajja, sharing frames with the likes of Rekha, Madhuri Dixit, and Ajay Devgn. But the real drama unfolded off-camera. Rekha, in character, had to repeatedly slap Aarti in an intense sequence — something the young actress wasn't fully prepared for. The camera stopped. Aarti's tears didn't. She cried for hours, shaken and confused. It took a heartfelt conversation with Rekha and director Rajkumar Santoshi to help her regroup. Though she later featured alongside Bollywood heavyweights like Akshay Kumar (Awara Paagal Deewana), Govinda (Raja Bhaiya), and Salman Khan (Partner), her trajectory never quite took flight. Stardom stayed elusive. Slowly, quietly, she stepped away from the spotlight. But the story didn't end there. In 2019, she married Australian chartered accountant Visharad Beedassy in a low-key ceremony. Four years later, at 41, Aarti stepped into a new role — motherhood. Her son, Yuvan, became her world, and with him came a new chapter. Now, without the arc lights, Aarti Chabria has found a different kind of audience — online. As a fashion and lifestyle influencer, she blends personal moments with wellness wisdom and style tips across Instagram and YouTube. No red carpets. No box office buzz. Just a woman rewriting her narrative on her own terms. Sometimes, the real story begins after the credits roll.
