The FALLING?

Paagla Dashu · Sep 2nd, 2005, 05:19

Is it ‘The Falling’?

Kshama Rao (HT City)

New Delhi, August 30, 2005

Do the math

Cost
35Cr The production budget
7Cr Marketing and publicity
4Cr Money spent on prints
46Cr

Recovery
18Cr All-India box office
collections
7Cr Music rights from Sony
1Cr Video and DVD rights
7Cr Overseas takings
33Cr

We are into the third week of Mangal Pandey — The Rising and the verdict is more or less clear: one of the most-hyped films in recent times will be a commission earner, but not a hit by any account.

.............................. .............................. ....................
The source adds that though the film got off to a flying start in India and overseas, takings dropped quickly. “Brilliant marketing and promotion couldn’t salvage the film, which some believe was not just average but very bad.” (Read More)

Mangal Pandey: Just cleavage and cliché

Raja Sen | August 26, 2005 17:29 IST

With the release of Mangal Pandey: The Rising, Ketan Mehta's historical epic exploring India's First War of Independence in 1857, it's rewind time for Bollywood.

So, we decided to look back at more Hindi cinema set in that crucial period of Indian history. This is the final in a three-part feature. After exploring Satyajit Ray's masterful Shatranj Ke Khilari, and Shyam Benegal's unforgettable Junoon, we come to the Aamir Khan starrer, Mangal Pandey: The Rising.

(Read more)

crvlvr · Sep 2nd, 2005, 05:33

Cost
$8M The production budget
$1.6M Marketing and publicity
$9M Money spent on prints
$10M Total Cost

Recovery
$4M All-India box office collections
$1.6 Music rights from Sony
$2.2M Video and DVD rights
$16M Overseas takings
$7.5M Gross Receipts

If they have sold their DVD rights, then the prospects of a recovery seem slim. Hoewever, producers rarely absorb the entire loss. Advances may have been collected from distributors.

Paagla Dashu · Sep 3rd, 2005, 08:57

You are right - with the HYPE that was created by the clever Amir Khan marketing machine, the producers would have sold the distribution rights at a profit.

The commercial success(or failure) of a film however is determined by the net surplus/shortfall generated in the "producer > distributor > exhibitor" value chain as a whole. And the less people see a film (and note specially most of the runaway successes depend on "repeat viewing" - that is people going back to see the film again and again for 2nd/3rd/nth time) the less money flows back tothe distributor and they run the riskl of making a loss.

How does the producer / actor suffer then? Well, the distributirs become wary when buying the rights of the next film by the same actor and/or the same producer. The advances paid by distributors go a long way to finance the cost of producing a film and oh, paying the large fees charged by actors.

Making himself exclusive and pseudo-intellectual and appealing to the popular sentiments by choosing patriotic (better still anti-Pakistan or anti-Colonial) scripts work up to a certain point as a marketing ploy. After that real variety of roles and REAL acting capacity give an actor the edge thats needed to carry a film.

byronic · Sep 3rd, 2005, 10:00

"Mangal Pandey: Just cleavage and cliché"

But you must say that is was

VERY NICE CLEAVAGE

and very good Cliche

I think the movie will make its money back for everyone involved and a pretty profit for a few? I have been studying Indian films for over five years and I still have trouble understanding the whole distubution/territory rights buisness. The way films are distributed in India is much different than the way it is done in the USA. I guess in India films are sold to territories, for example UP. The producer gets a set price from the highest bidder for say 15 prints to be shown in UP. Say that set price is 2cr, well anything over 2cr that the distrubutor makes in showing the film (which he in turn rents prints to theaters) is his profit. The original producer attempts to make his profit in the original selling. I am pretty sure this is how it works in Bollywood?

In the USA the producer sells to theaters and movie house chains at a set price and takes a cut of the profits.

So in Bollywood a producer can make his profit back before the film is even shown. It is the territory rights buyers who are really gambling. They can either make out big, or loose big too.

Sep 2nd, 2005, 05:19	#1
Paagla Dashu Unreasonably Unreasonable Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Where They Wear Clogs Posts: 1,223	The FALLING? Is it ‘The Falling’? Kshama Rao (HT City) New Delhi, August 30, 2005 Do the math Cost 35Cr The production budget 7Cr Marketing and publicity 4Cr Money spent on prints 46Cr Recovery 18Cr All-India box office collections 7Cr Music rights from Sony 1Cr Video and DVD rights 7Cr Overseas takings 33Cr We are into the third week of Mangal Pandey — The Rising and the verdict is more or less clear: one of the most-hyped films in recent times will be a commission earner, but not a hit by any account. .............................. .............................. .................... The source adds that though the film got off to a flying start in India and overseas, takings dropped quickly. “Brilliant marketing and promotion couldn’t salvage the film, which some believe was not just average but very bad.” (Read More) Mangal Pandey: Just cleavage and cliché Raja Sen \| August 26, 2005 17:29 IST With the release of Mangal Pandey: The Rising, Ketan Mehta's historical epic exploring India's First War of Independence in 1857, it's rewind time for Bollywood. So, we decided to look back at more Hindi cinema set in that crucial period of Indian history. *This is the final in a three-part feature. After exploring Satyajit Ray's masterful Shatranj Ke Khilari, and Shyam Benegal's unforgettable Junoon, we come to the Aamir Khan starrer, Mangal Pandey: The Rising.* (Read more)

Sep 3rd, 2005, 08:57	#3
Paagla Dashu Unreasonably Unreasonable Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Where They Wear Clogs Posts: 1,223	The Fallen - the hype of pseudo-acting You are right - with the HYPE that was created by the clever Amir Khan marketing machine, the producers would have sold the distribution rights at a profit. The commercial success(or failure) of a film however is determined by the net surplus/shortfall generated in the "producer > distributor > exhibitor" value chain as a whole. And the less people see a film (and note specially most of the runaway successes depend on "repeat viewing" - that is people going back to see the film again and again for 2nd/3rd/nth time) the less money flows back tothe distributor and they run the riskl of making a loss. How does the producer / actor suffer then? Well, the distributirs become wary when buying the rights of the next film by the same actor and/or the same producer. The advances paid by distributors go a long way to finance the cost of producing a film and oh, paying the large fees charged by actors. Making himself exclusive and pseudo-intellectual and appealing to the popular sentiments by choosing patriotic (better still anti-Pakistan or anti-Colonial) scripts work up to a certain point as a marketing ploy. After that real variety of roles and REAL acting capacity give an actor the edge thats needed to carry a film.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Sep 2nd, 2005, 05:33	#2
crvlvr Guru Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Hollywood Posts: 4,391	Cost $8M The production budget $1.6M Marketing and publicity $9M Money spent on prints $10M Total Cost Recovery $4M All-India box office collections $1.6 Music rights from Sony $2.2M Video and DVD rights $16M Overseas takings $7.5M Gross Receipts If they have sold their DVD rights, then the prospects of a recovery seem slim. Hoewever, producers rarely absorb the entire loss. Advances may have been collected from distributors.

Sep 3rd, 2005, 10:00	#4
byronic back in the ussa Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Rang De Basantistan or Santa Cruz, CA Posts: 458	"Mangal Pandey: Just cleavage and cliché" But you must say that is was VERY NICE CLEAVAGE and very good Cliche I think the movie will make its money back for everyone involved and a pretty profit for a few? I have been studying Indian films for over five years and I still have trouble understanding the whole distubution/territory rights buisness. The way films are distributed in India is much different than the way it is done in the USA. I guess in India films are sold to territories, for example UP. The producer gets a set price from the highest bidder for say 15 prints to be shown in UP. Say that set price is 2cr, well anything over 2cr that the distrubutor makes in showing the film (which he in turn rents prints to theaters) is his profit. The original producer attempts to make his profit in the original selling. I am pretty sure this is how it works in Bollywood? In the USA the producer sells to theaters and movie house chains at a set price and takes a cut of the profits. So in Bollywood a producer can make his profit back before the film is even shown. It is the territory rights buyers who are really gambling. They can either make out big, or loose big too.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password