Nepotism or Gondagiri - Page 2

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

Notebook was Salman Khan production. Doesn’t he always get good release sizes ?

Yep. Sultan actually released in cities that don't usually have Indian movie showings.

But Notebook didn't. I think it has more to do with movies he's in versus movies he produces.

Originally posted by: ProfMcGonagall

Yep. Sultan actually released in cities that don't usually have Indian movie showings.

But Notebook didn't. I think it has more to do with movies he's in versus movies he produces.

People talk about nepotism but in 2012 YRF didn’t even release Ishaqzaade in USA/Canada. I had to watch on bootleg dvd 😆

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

People talk about nepotism but in 2012 YRF didn’t even release Ishaqzaade in USA/Canada. I had to watch on bootleg dvd 😆

I think it was because some of the theatres here in Canada had a problem with what they were showing in the movie. It was releasing only a few months after the Shafia murder trial had come to a close so people weren't comfortable. At least as far as I remember. Because YRF's other 2 releases for that year did come out and did stupendously. Ek Tha Tiger and Jab Tak Hai Jaan.

Nepotism will exist. That is not the problem. The problem is the shunning and power play the industry has toward outside talent.

Let’s admit it, there’s a section of power that doesn’t like to see outsiders become successful. It makes these people insecure, and most insecure actors are star kids themselves.

There is also a systemic culture of hand holding and feeding the priveleged until the verge of stardom. When an outsider threatens this, power play becomes aggressive

Originally posted by: ProfMcGonagall

The thing is box office may be objective but it is not fair. Box office and ROI rely on marketing, WOM, and the number of screens a movie is sent to.

In Toronto and surrounding areas there are really only 3 major theatres that show most Indian movies (Bollywood and South industries combined). If the movie is from a big PH or has a big star in it then some local Cineplexes (our major national chain) will have the movie in Indian dominated cities. Now a movie like Notebook would be lucky to get into one of the 3 major theatres, but a movie like Veere Di Wedding is guaranteed prime time and prime spots in Cineplex. At the end of the day, how is Notebook supposed to generate good ROI and make the actors popular if that's how it is shown on screens?

While that is true to an extent, marketing and screen count is also strategized in a way to maximize the film's potential. Notebook isn't given any screens there because distributers and exhibitors are likely not confident that the film will get much of an international audience but it would be given screens in major multiplexes in the metros where more people would come. It's all a cycle that revolves around ROI.

Additionally, screen count or marketing does not correlate to success. Pyaar Ka Punchnama, Band Baaja Baraat, Kai Po Che and many other small budget movies with newcomers were all given way less screen counts (and marketing although that is debatable) than Notebook but they were all successes. Meanwhile, Loveyatri and Hero had great music, marketing, screens, basically everything going for them but they were flops and we can see where those actors are today. This is a success and star-driven system but the power is always with the audience.

Originally posted by: HugeScarcity

While that is true to an extent, marketing and screen count is also strategized in a way to maximize the film's potential. Notebook isn't given any screens there because distributers and exhibitors are likely not confident that the film will get much of an international audience but it would be given screens in major multiplexes in the metros where more people would come. It's all a cycle that revolves around ROI.

Additionally, screen count or marketing does not correlate to success. Pyaar Ka Punchnama, Band Baaja Baraat, Kai Po Che and many other small budget movies with newcomers were all given way less screen counts (and marketing although that is debatable) than Notebook but they were all successes. Meanwhile, Loveyatri and Hero had great music, marketing, screens, basically everything going for them but they were flops and we can see where those actors are today. This is a success and star-driven system but the power is always with the audience.

Yes but if you look at the ratio, such movies are in a very small minority. And even in these movies, most such actors don't make it to the A league. Even you have to agree that Ranveer Singh and Kartik Aryan are doing so well due to making friends with KJo and other such top directors and producers early on. Very early on.

Look at actors like Amit Sadh, SSR, Eijaz Khan, Rajeev Khandelwal, Manish Paul, etc. They all had big hits on small budgets but went nowhere. Ayushmann Khurrana is an anomaly. Look at Rajkummar Rao. He was bankable and after a failure, not so bankable anymore. Look at Manoj Bajpayee, Irrfan Khan, Kay Kay Menon, etc. They are still struggling in their own way.

I don't deny it. Box office is important and bankable actors are going to get more movies than others, but it's still lopsided. That's my main bone of contention. I'm not against nepotism. But this movie mafia is what bothers me.

You know I took a world cinema course in undergrad. Every class we looked at a different part of the world, watched a classic and meaningful movie and discussed its ties to the religion/country. Class 3 was Indian. I don't remember the movie. I don't remember the discussion. What I do remember is the laughter. The mocking. The first 10 minutes when the professor spoke about the movies and put up photo after photo of Switzerland, nepo kids, masala movies, etc. The professor was trying to keep the class in order, but all the class could do was joke and laugh about dancing around trees, physics defying action, etc. There were 5 or 6 Indians in the class. We all reported it, but I will never forget that. It's what got me so against this movie mafia. We have a brilliant "alternative" cinema section. We need to bring it mainstream and maybe some nepo kids can help bring it out. But only if the truly deserving ones get ahead.

Originally posted by: ProfMcGonagall

Look at Manoj Bajpayee, Irrfan Khan, Kay Kay Menon, etc. They are still struggling in their own way.

Again with them it’s really a case of a bit sour grapes. What is their struggle ? It’s not like those actors want to do the big commercial action/romance/comedy films (lots of interviews where they put those movies down)

They thrash Dhoom type movies and want audience to watch their films more than those films but it’s just not happening. (Maybe rethink the strategy)

Originally posted by: ProfMcGonagall

Look at actors like Amit Sadh, SSR, Eijaz Khan, Rajeev Khandelwal, Manish Paul, etc. They all had big hits on small budgets but went nowhere. Ayushmann Khurrana is an anomaly. Look at Rajkummar Rao. He was bankable and after a failure, not so bankable anymore. Look at Manoj Bajpayee, Irrfan Khan, Kay Kay Menon, etc. They are still struggling in their own way.

Most of these actors haven't even delivered a single hit as the male lead?? It's pretty well established that SSR and Ayushmann had made it as bankable names. With RKR, you are literally proving my point. He delivered a big hit in Stree and has been offered/done plenty of big banner films since then but none of them have worked so why would he be considered bankable?

The rest are struggling because they haven't delivered at the box office. Irfan's son literally wrote a whole post yesterday on how his father was defeated at the BO.

Originally posted by: HugeScarcity

Irfan's son literally wrote a whole post yesterday on how his father was defeated at the BO.

An how we the fans are idiots for helping it happen

My sympathy ends there ❤️

The Hell with all that 😈

Originally posted by: ProfMcGonagall

Yes but if you look at the ratio, such movies are in a very small minority. And even in these movies, most such actors don't make it to the A league. Even you have to agree that Ranveer Singh and Kartik Aryan are doing so well due to making friends with KJo and other such top directors and producers early on. Very early on.

Look at actors like Amit Sadh, SSR, Eijaz Khan, Rajeev Khandelwal, Manish Paul, etc. They all had big hits on small budgets but went nowhere. Ayushmann Khurrana is an anomaly. Look at Rajkummar Rao. He was bankable and after a failure, not so bankable anymore. Look at Manoj Bajpayee, Irrfan Khan, Kay Kay Menon, etc. They are still struggling in their own way.

I don't deny it. Box office is important and bankable actors are going to get more movies than others, but it's still lopsided. That's my main bone of contention. I'm not against nepotism. But this movie mafia is what bothers me.

You know I took a world cinema course in undergrad. Every class we looked at a different part of the world, watched a classic and meaningful movie and discussed its ties to the religion/country. Class 3 was Indian. I don't remember the movie. I don't remember the discussion. What I do remember is the laughter. The mocking. The first 10 minutes when the professor spoke about the movies and put up photo after photo of Switzerland, nepo kids, masala movies, etc. The professor was trying to keep the class in order, but all the class could do was joke and laugh about dancing around trees, physics defying action, etc. There were 5 or 6 Indians in the class. We all reported it, but I will never forget that. It's what got me so against this movie mafia. We have a brilliant "alternative" cinema section. We need to bring it mainstream and maybe some nepo kids can help bring it out. But only if the truly deserving ones get ahead.

Well articulated post by you, dear 👏

Thank you for sharing your experience with movies as a subject in your undergrad.