Malayalam director Mubeen Rauf recently sought a gag order so no reviews were published for at least 7 days after the release of 'Aromalinte Adyathe Pranayam'.
A poster of 'Aromalinte Adyathe Pranayam'; director Mubeen Rauf. (Supplied)
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday, 10 October, asked the State Police Chief to be mindful of professional reviews of films.
Justice Ramachandran urged for devising mechanisms against motivated reviews that are solely aimed at blackmailing the makers or hampering a film’s success. He also stated that there was a difference between a professional review of a product, including a movie, and a personal opinion about the same, the Live Law reported.
“It is one thing to say the movie is bad due to these reasons, and another to say that I did not like a movie due to certain reasons,” the bench orally remarked.
The clarification came following a plea filed by Mubeen Rauf, the director of Aromalinte Adyathe Pranayam, who sought a gag order to ensure that social media influencers and film-reviewing vloggers do not publish any reviews of his venture for at least seven days after its release.
A clarification on this matter came as the Court asked the Police Chief about action taken against individuals publishing “motivated and calculated” reviews against movies to denigrate, extort, and blackmail the makers.
Last week, the court sought inputs from the State Police Chief on the issue.
Justice Devan Ramachandran asked how individuals associated with a movie could file complaints against activities aimed towards denigrating and tarnishing a movie that can help in a proper investigation.
The court also sought to know the consequences flowing therefrom, both under penal law and the laws relating to cyber activities. However, it clarified that there was no order saying that films should be reviewed only seven days after the release. The same was reported in media too.
On Tuesday, government pleader Vidya Kuriakose told the Kerala High Court that they are working out the modalities for controlling motivated reviews. However, it would require a consultation with all the stakeholders from the industry, including producers, directors, financiers, petitioners, etc.
Meanwhile, the Producers’ Association moved a plea before the High Court seeking remedies like those sought by Mubeen Rauf. The Association pointed out that targeted and pernicious reviews against Aromalinte Adyathe Pranayam were controlled to a large extent because of the orders.
Following this, the court asked the producers why they remained silent for so long.
Meanwhile, DSGI S Manu stated that he would seek instructions from relevant authorities about implementing these measures.
The Court also appointed Advocate Syam Padman as Amicus Curiae in the matter and scheduled further consideration in two weeks.
May 12, 2024
May 12, 2024
May 11, 2024
May 11, 2024
May 10, 2024
May 09, 2024
