Why film clashes won't make single screen owners suffer anymore

Everybody's equal now

Why film clashes won't make single screen owners suffer anymore

Trade analyst Atul Mohan says, "It's best to take up films on merit. That way, if one film is weak, the theatre owner can be compensated through the other film's collections. That's the lesson learnt after the Rustom vs Mohenjo Daro clash. It's known that the maximum BO revenue and returns still come from single-screens and so, studios adopt arm-twisting tactics to get single-screen owners to sign restrictive agreements, but they can't do this with multiplex owners. Single-screens are standalones and do not have a national presence like multiplex chains do."

There won't be any bargaining or arm-twisting for the Diwali clash between ADHM vs Shivaay. Exhibitor Santosh Bhatia says, "Decision ho gaya Monday ko that the shows will be equally divided across the single screens and the agreement hs been signed. Now, Shivaay and ADHM will have equal number of shows."

The executive director of Gaiety, Galaxy and Maratha Mandir, Manoj Desai agrees, "Having deals with corporate and studios create problems, but now we won't have to face that. Unfortunately, we don't have unity among us single screen theatres or we could have had better deals for us."

Balakrishnan Shroff, who is distributing ADHM for Fox Star, says, "Distributing films on merit doesn't make sense as the content is known only after films are released. For Diwali, we have taken a conscious decision not to trouble the single theatre owners and share the shows with Shivaay. Of course, it depends from film to film. Taking more screens doesn't add anything to the collections, but could create negative publicity instead. We should apply our brains rather than worry about numbers."