MNS targets theatre owners for Marathi movies.
Maharashtra is fast turning into the most fundamentalist state in India.
.. while farmers are dying in Vidarbha.
News You Can't Use!
newsyoucantuse [at] gmail [dot] com
newsyoucantuse [at] gmail [dot] com
MNS targets theatre owners for Marathi movies.
Maharashtra is fast turning into the most fundamentalist state in India.
.. while farmers are dying in Vidarbha.
17 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 16, 2010 at 10:55 am
vishal
There is a government resolution requiring multiplex owners in Maharashtra to show atleast one marathi movie. Some theaters are not complying & the state govt. is lax in implementing. MNS acts are deplorable but your ‘fundamentalist’ statement should be put in context.
August 16, 2010 at 10:57 am
Deepak Iyer
@Vishal: The fact that there is such a law only lends more credence to my statement.
August 17, 2010 at 10:34 am
Sriram Iyer
This is a sad state (no pun). Although there shouldn’t be any such rule it has been sadly followed everywhere in the country. Karnataka and Tamil nadu have stringent rules of ‘protecting’ local film industry that they impose heavy taxes and also restrict the number of ‘non-local’ film shows.
But then here’s the flip story multiplex owner seldom screen local (here, marathi) films and even if they do, they do so in odd timings. You have to check the following story, I couldn’t get the link in Passion for Cinema, which had the story in detail.
(http://www.mid-day.com/entertainment/2009/jul/210709-Bollywood-Anurag-Kashyap-Flimaker-Fame-Cinemas-nationwide-campaign-multiplex-chain.htm)
August 17, 2010 at 10:38 am
Deepak Iyer
Anurag Kashyap is free to call for boycott because the owner’s behaviour was in bad taste. But the theatre owner is free to not run shows that he thinks isn’t good business for him. Theatre owners are not social workers, and they haven’t pledged to protect cinema. If he had only 30 people to screen the movie, it’ll clearly be a net loss for him. I wouldn’t even call that a bad decision
August 17, 2010 at 11:49 am
Sriram Iyer
Well, yes the theater owner has every right to not run the show if it’s not feasible to him. But then think of you as one of the 30-odd people who’ve turned up for the show all excited and to be shooed away this way is quite ridiculous. I have sat through movies with less than 5 people in the audience, Gulaal, I saw with my friend had only 4 people, the other two were making out in the last row.
And to believe that Marathi films have improved in the last few years or so. A bit of assistance from theater owners would help in a big way, although to Thackeray-ize the situation is sad indeed.
August 17, 2010 at 12:07 pm
Deepak Iyer
I wouldn’t bother if I were one of the 30-odd people. The theatre isn’t owned by me.
Marathi movies have improved by orders of magnitude, and theatre owners not screening Marathi movies are only missing out on a new business avenue. I don’t want to penalize them for being stupid.
P.S. As long as you aren’t confusing you two with those two .. [;)]
August 17, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Sriram Iyer
Well, I disagree. Again. If I have booked tickets for a film, taken time out, and above all beaten the traffic to get to the cinemas. And they decide to not screen the movie is indeed highly bothering and calls for an outrage (mild though
).
Whether to screen Marathi films or not is the decision of the theater owners, and I wholeheartedly agree with whatever their decision be, but to cancel a show when quite a handful (30 is a good number of people) have turned up is just moronic.
And I disagree. Again. Marathi films have been doing well over the last few years, critically and commercially. Valu, Tingya, Shwaas (selected for the Oscars), Dombivili Fast, Natrang, Me Shivaji Raje Bhonsle Boltoy, gabhricha paus, harishchandrachi factory (another one selected for the Oscars) and many more.
There ARE people who’d like to catch a marathi film, and because most Hindi films have turned out to be turds, it’s only fair. And so what if there are only 30-odd of them, if those theater owner had screened that film, may be around 60-odd would turn up later.
I am a non-marathi speaker, but I have caught many marathi films and it’s just sad that political parties like to milk it for their own good, and an avid film-goer is stranded with no good options.
P.S. Those two weren’t my friend and I. It was Taran Adarsh making out with Karan Johar.
August 17, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Deepak Iyer
I don’t see what you’re disagreeing with. We both agree the theatre owners decision was moronic and makes bad business sense.
P.S. : Me Shivaji Raje Bhosale Boltoy was a bad movie. It doesn’t deserve to be in that list.
August 17, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Sriram Iyer
Yes. And if all theater owners hadn’t been like that guy, we *might* not have been discussing this.
Let’s just hope marathi films get good enough shows across theaters, for we, now, cannot blame the quality of films, which have been quite good.
And above all let’s hope more than 30-odd people turn up to watch those movies.
Cheers
August 28, 2010 at 8:29 am
Why forcing theatre owners is fundamentalism. « News You Can't Use!
[...] I had a post recently where I called Maharashtra a rising fundamentalist state. There was some discussion in the comments [...]
August 29, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Rupesh
I was confused on the issue because I read both the sides. After reading the article, I’m still confused. I don’t care about MNS and SS (I agree with you here). I was thinking more about government rule. It shouldn’t be there if we believe in open market, supply-demand economy and business owner’s rights. But if, according to some marathi producers, marathi films are not getting theatre just-because theatres are not screening the shows and want-to-kill the cinema; then some action need to be taken. Would that action (like the Rule) be justified ? I don’t know.
Want to see another such regulation? See uptick Rule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uptick_rule)
To get more confused, read Atlas Shrugged.
August 29, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Deepak Iyer
You’re right there: The rule must go.
Meanwhile,
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Empty-halls-greet-films/articleshow/6448515.cms
August 29, 2010 at 10:19 pm
Deepak Iyer
Wait .. if the theatre owners want to kill Marathi cinema, the right thing would be for MNS to arrange screenings and organize boycott of theatres, if that’s what the majority wants.
Forcing theatre owners by rule of law still isn’t constitutional.
August 30, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Rupesh
Yes. I totally agree.
I did some more reading on this and about why such rules (& regulations) exist in the era of open market, rather about is it legitimate for government (or any body) to put restrictions on business. Well; some sort of explanation is that many time government offers protection to these businesses and hence it has rights along with the responsibility of ‘greater good for greater number of people’.
I don’t see any reason for government to put such restriction on cinema halls.
I agree with you.
August 30, 2010 at 7:09 am
vishal
“P.S. : Me Shivaji Raje Bhosale Boltoy was a bad movie”
.
It must be paining you that it was a big hit & Marathis identified with the cause
I don’t think I would have got to see the wonderful Harishchandrachi Factory if this rule wasn’t there. Theater is not a private place. It is public & has to be adhere to majority laws.
August 30, 2010 at 7:15 am
Deepak Iyer
1. I think I meant Me Shivaji Raje Bhosale Boltoy was a “bad movie”. It was jingoistic, and hence popular (like Gadar). And if I recall correctly, it asked Marathi people to stop whining and pull up their socks.
2. It is not the government’s job to make sure you see good movies.
3. Theatre is certainly not public property!!!
http://www.indiauncut.com/iublog/article/shouting-fire-in-a-crowded-theatre/
September 3, 2010 at 4:57 am
vishal
Movie tastes are personal so I would stick to my opinion on Mi Shivajiraje..
Fortunately, I can never understand Amit Verma’s posts.
Theatre is not public property, it is a public place. This comparison might seem crude but Hindi cinema is the Vedanta here.