The era of the Corona epidemic has created a religious crisis vis-à-vis Bollywood. How to decide the success of movies, after all, by the scale of the box office? If in changing circumstances, movies are deemed successful or not based on the box office, then what are the lessons to be learned from Belbottom, Chehre, and Thalaivi? Is it to be assumed that all three films were not entertaining and therefore failed? Because all three movies were average and very weak at doing business than expected. Especially the face and Thalaivi. While the flip side of this is that whoever saw the movies was impressed by the abundance of content. Highly praised. Both viewers and critics. How can a failed movie be good?
But in the age we find ourselves in, the situation has come to the fore in such a way that even unsuccessful movies are entertaining and good. Even a good movie is failing. This is the scene after Corona. And the only reason for this is the deficiencies in the distribution of Corona-compatible movies. After the opening of theaters, everyone is afraid of the sorry state in which films are shown at the box office and there is a stampede among the filmmakers waiting for the premiere. The release schedule for many major movies was changed. Would it be okay to stop the movies and wait for the pain to come?
Four pictures are being taken on the pros and cons of Bollywood distribution, which are like case studies.
Movie posters courtesy of Wikipedia.
# 1. Case Study: OTT is OK, but what about viewers who don’t have access?
The merits of film distribution and its relevance to Corona’s situation are worth considering. The release of OTT is the most favorable situation for distribution in the event of an epidemic. The biggest drawback of the medium is that its access is limited. The reach is mainly in metropolitan areas and also for a limited audience of income and age groups. The second big drawback is that on about half a dozen paid OTT platforms, on average, users subscribe to only one or two platforms. That is, if a movie is released on Amazon G5, there is a possibility that Netflix or other OTT subscribers will not be able to see it. On the occasion of this year’s Eid, Salman Khan preferred the OTT release for Radhe: Your Most Wanted. He also presented a plan: “Pay-per-view option.” In this plan, there was also the option to buy and watch the movie through DTH. Radhe’s content may have been poor, but to a large extent, Salman managed to attract audiences on G5 and DTH. Despite this, it can be assumed that the film may not have reached the widest audience, as it is likely to reach theaters. The creators of Bhuj and Mimi only gave preference to OTT releases.
The downside of the release plan is that stars like Salman and big billboards can make a profit in exchange for movies, but movies from small to medium producers. Do they also entertain themselves with OTT platforms in the same way as big banners?
# 2. Case Study: Theaters are fine, but what about this loss?
Given Radhe’s limited reach among audiences, the creators of Bellbottom took the initiative for a traditional theatrical release. The biggest challenge of the traditional model is that of the Crown itself. Due to the protocol, the capacity of the theaters was reduced by 50 percent. From above, circuits such as Mumbai are closed, where the bulk of the Bollywood collection comes from. It is also a problem in leprosy that the large audience watching the naked dance of the epidemic is not ready to risk going to the cinema and seeing the movie. Due to the limited screens from above, there was also a fight between the films. Due to the hanging of Bell Bottom and the Marvel movie, the face did not get enough screens. In general, the box office did not appear to be the only support for the producers.
# 3. Case Study: Theaters and OTTs Belated
Thalaivi manufacturers tried to come up with a mixed distribution formula depending on the situation. Namely, the movie will also be released in theaters and will also be out on OTT in a short interval. In case of epidemic, you see this adequate distribution system. But the multiplex stayed in the middle. Multiplex like PVR and Inox disagreed with this. Actually, until now the system was that after the movie hit the multiplex, there should be an OTT transmission only at an interval of at least four weeks. The multiplexes argue that due to the anticipated release of the film on OTT, there will be a commercial loss. Thalaivi Hindi happened not to get screens in multiplexes. The Thalaivi Hindi circuit is based on a single screen, which is already in a dilapidated state. Obviously the movie business suffered. Based on the current collection, Thalaivi can be considered a disaster at the box office.
# 4. Case study: Theater-OTT both together, but …
In the current situation, the fourth release plan is to release the film simultaneously in both OTT-theaters. Thalaivi’s lessons are visible in this, but they are not complete. It is said that preparations are being made to include Salman Khan and Aayush Sharma’s Final: The Final Truth in this distribution plan. Here too a screw multiplex seems to be stuck. Multiplexes will never agree to this. Not accepting multiplexes means the same fate as Thalaivi at the box office. Because in the urban public, the multiplex only attracts a wide audience. Thalaivi was on screen only, her advantage and loss is visible in the film’s collection.
The analysis of the four case studies makes it clear that the films will have to work in the distribution plan both in theaters and in OTT. Having only one place is not beneficial to anyone. Producers and multiplexer groups will have to find a middle ground. Obviously everyone’s concerns are their respective earnings. It would be better if all parties sat together and re-determined profit sharing in the current situation. The loss of being inflexible is general and no one has made movies to make up for the loss.