How can ANDAZ APNA APNA be a flop with THAT MUCH business ?

Page

Next Last

1128633

Suspended

Posted: 8 years ago

I just came across the daily archive of boxoffice india, and have seen everyone's loved movie AAA been declared flop.

I checked the business and found these details:

BUDGET: 2 crore 90 lakhs

GROSS : 8 crore 18 lakhs

NET: 5 crore 29 lakhs

ADJUSTED BUDGET: 29 CRORE

ADJUSTED NET BUSINESS : 53 CRORE

(adjusted gross: 81 crore)

As far as my understanding, a movie is a SEMI HIT/ABOVE AVERAGE at boxoffice if it does half of the NET business of its budget after recovering the whole budget first and a CLEAN HIT if it does DOUBLE business of its total budget.

In this case AAA's NET business is ALMOST DOUBLE of its budget.

I have seen many movies at BOI been declared HIT or atleast semi hits with that much business.

Then WHY AAA been declared flop?

I remember the CLOSED/shutdown website of boxoofice www.ibosnetwork.com where they gave average verdict to AAA.

Why you think NOT JUST BOI but AAA been considered FLOP at BO in general.

BUT WHY?

How come it can be a FLOP with doing almost DOUBLE NET BUSINESS then its total BUDGET ?

Link:

https://www.boxofficeindia.com/movie.php?movieid=3035

*************************************************************

Edited by sharmeeli.titli - 8 years ago

Quote

Frequent Posters

Lukha Khiladi

@Sultan.Mirza

Achiever

+ 5

Sarcastic Chatterbox

Posted: 8 years ago

It doesn't recover well in main cinema halls back then which would have given good return to distributors, return which came had lower percentage for distributors. Also, it was sold pretty HIGH at that time considering Salman-Aamir combo coming for 1st time.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

1128633

Suspended

Posted: 8 years ago

Originally posted by: .Omkara.
It doesn't recover well in main cinema halls back then which would have given good return to distributors, return which came had lower percentage for distributors. Also, it was sold pretty HIGH at that time considering Salman-Aamir combo coming for 1st time.

dont know my friend about such complicated details...

but as a layman I can see a movie that did DOUBLE NET business OVERALL should not be considered a flop. I mean the overall business from all cinemas is considered in deciding a movie's boxoffice fate/result , isn't it?

this cult classic's boxoffice status always confuses me.

I guess its the ONLY film that been declared flop with double NET business and almost TRIPLE gross business. I checked many other movies from 90's and with that much business, almost every other film been declared HIT, but AAA a straight flop, not even above average or least even an average grosser 😕😕😕

Quote

Lukha Khiladi

@Sultan.Mirza

Achiever

+ 5

Sarcastic Chatterbox

Posted: 8 years ago

Originally posted by: sharmeeli.titli

dont know my friend about such complicated details...
but as a layman I can see a movie that did DOUBLE NET business OVERALL should not be considered a flop. I mean the overall business from all cinemas is considered in deciding a movie's boxoffice fate/result , isn't it?

this cult classic's boxoffice status always confuses me.
I guess its the ONLY film that been declared flop with double NET business and almost TRIPLE gross business. I checked many other movies from 90's and with that much business, almost every other film been declared HIT, but AAA a straight flop, not even above average or least even an average grosser 😕😕😕

Film was failure back then, which even cast & makers won't deny simply because it couldn't get enough to sail through Success Zone.

Film being a CULT CLASSIC is perfect example that sometimes even audience isn't sure how good film is. Another example is AGNEEPATH (BIG B) which is now Cult Classic.

Quote

1128633

Suspended

Posted: 8 years ago

Originally posted by: .Omkara.

Film was failure back then, which even cast & makers won't deny simply because it couldn't get enough to sail through Success Zone.

Film being a CULT CLASSIC is perfect example that sometimes even audience isn't sure how good film is. Another example is AGNEEPATH (BIG B) which is now Cult Classic.

How it can be a failure EVEN BACK THEN in 1994 after doing 5 crore 29 lakh NET business , and total budget was just 2 croe 90 lakh???????????

I mean even by the ORIGINAL figures in 1994, it should been declared atleast semi hit...hwo can it be a flop with double NET business even in 1994 with old figures 😕😕😕

Quote

Lukha Khiladi

@Sultan.Mirza

Achiever

+ 5

Sarcastic Chatterbox

Posted: 8 years ago

Originally posted by: sharmeeli.titli

How it can be a failure EVEN BACK THEN in 1994 after doing 5 crore 29 lakh NET business , and total budget was just 2 croe 90 lakh???????????
I mean even by the ORIGINAL figures in 1994, it should been declared atleast semi hit...hwo can it be a flop with double NET business even in 1994 with old figures 😕😕😕

Don't go by BOI Budget figures, always judge a film by Distributor share it returns. Sometimes the return which comes for a film comes from B & C Centres of region, while u require a huge chunk from A Region of box office.

If we go by BUDGET/NETT than many films won't even be Average.

AAA Distributor share is 2.38 Cr while Nett is 5.29 Cr which is not even 50%, it would have been 50% recovery if DS would have been above 2.64 Cr.

Nothing can be done now, discussing it won't make it Semi-Hit or HIT, no website has gonna revise it's verdict.

BOI has habit of entering figures by mistake, who knows budget or nett would have been mistake by them.

They entered Munna Michael's day 1 as 6 lacs 60 thousand by mistake, while it was 6.60 Cr.

Quote

Rangaaa

@Rangaaa

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 8 years ago

The film took 3 years to make...The production team had managed it poorly...The distributors weren't sure about getting the delivery of the film and yet the release date of the film were already announced...Hence no promotion of the film through posters or songs...The posters were out just 3 days prior to it's release...

The film did good business in Mumbai but in other regions it flopped.

Edited by raj80 - 8 years ago

Quote

1128633

Suspended

Posted: 8 years ago

Originally posted by: .Omkara.

Don't go by BOI Budget figures, always judge a film by Distributor share it returns. Sometimes the return which comes for a film comes from B & C Centres of region, while u require a huge chunk from A Region of box office.

If we go by BUDGET/NETT than many films won't even be Average.

AAA Distributor share is 2.38 Cr while Nett is 5.29 Cr which is not even 50%, it would have been 50% recovery if DS would have been above 2.64 Cr.

Nothing can be done now, discussing it won't make it Semi-Hit or HIT, no website has gonna revise it's verdict.

BOI has habit of entering figures by mistake, who knows budget or nett would have been mistake by them.

They entered Munna Michael's day 1 as 6 lacs 60 thousand by mistake, while it was 6.60 Cr.

Thank you Omkara for explaining in detail about distributor's aspect.

Ofcourse its verdict won't be changed , and thats not my intention either 😆

As far as BOI is concerned, I think we should not doubt their figures, atleast for AAA, if not for all movies, as I CLEARLY REMEMBER another official boxoffice website www.ibosnetwork.com (been closed few years ago) where THEY ALSO had almost the SAME original figures for BUDGET and NET business in 1994 for AAA, but that website declared it above average as its final boxoffice' verdict, unlike boi.

Quote

1128633

Suspended

Posted: 8 years ago

Originally posted by: raj80
The film took 3 years to make...The production team had managed it poorly...The distributors weren't sure about getting the delivery of the film and yet the release date of the film were already announced...Hence no promotion of the film through posters or songs...The posters were out just 3 days prior to it's release...

The film did good business in Mumbai but in other regions it flopped.

It actually took FOUR years, I rememeber watching its mahurat on youtube, and first shot clip where the start date of AAA shot was JUNE 1990 and it was released in NOv 1994.

Back then there was no corporate culture, only INDIVIDUAL producers were there mainly due to passion for movie making.

I remember reeading somewhere the producer Mr. sinha started having FINANCIAL ISSUES in the mid of the movie...the film was suppose to be released in 1992, but got delayed for two years.

a major chunk of the RAMAINING film was shot in 1994 (the WHOLE CLIMAX scene at that ADDA, almost 25 minutes of the movie, also all the portions where salman is with short hair was shot in 1994).

Quote

grounder

@grounder

Rocker

Posted: 8 years ago

#10

Maybe that gross is the lifetime business so far including the video cassette sales. It probably has one of the highest video cassette sales. Also, it must have been played a lot on the movie channels and hence, maybe be some channel rights. The movie might have been declared flop after it performed bad at the cinema halls. I guess that is how any film's verdict is decided anyway.