Activist and environmentalist Sonam Wangchuk has responded to Aamir Khan’s recent claim that he and the makers of 3 Idiots did not know him while making the 2009 film. Wangchuk, who has himself previously said Phunsukh Wangdu was not entirely based on him, now says he had a “detailed meeting” with Khan before the film and jokes that the actor may have forgotten it.

“He was watching my speech in his Ghajini outfit. Maybe because of that he experienced short-term memory loss and forgot our meeting after 15 minutes,” he said, referring to the 2008 film where Khan’s character suffers from short-term memory loss.

“Perhaps he was too immersed in his Ghajini persona when he watched me receive an award at an event we both attended… We discussed a lot of ideas,” he said on Prakhar Gupta’s podcast.

As for the character of Wangdu, Wangchuk asserts he does not claim it was entirely modeled after him, but calls it an “influence or inspiration”.

He said, “Maybe he shared those ideas with his writers, who then modified the existing script. Perhaps he did it subconsciously, or the writers were unaware of where the ideas originated. Either way, I have no issue with it,” he said.

Wangchuk also responded to Salman Khan’s viral ‘it’s done bro’ tweet from July, when the actor asked him to end his strike. “Majbooriyan hoti hongi sabki. Aage peeche, daayen baayen dekhna padta hai. Lekin unhone kuch kaha uski main izzat karta hoon,” he said.

Phunsukh Wangdu, Khan’s character in 3 Idiots, has been popularly believed to have been inspired by Wangchuk. The debate resurfaced in July after actor Omi Vaidya, who played Chatur in the film, referred to Wangchuk as an inspiration while supporting his hunger strike.

Clarifying the connection at the London Indian Film Festival, Khan said, “No, that is not true actually. That is a misconception. I didn’t know about Mr Sonam at that time when we were doing the film, 3 Idiots... Neither Raju nor Abhijat [Rajkumar Hirani or Abhijat Joshi], who are the two writers, we didn’t know about Mr Sonam.”

However, the actor called Wangchuk an inspiration irrespective while wishing for his health.

Mumbai: Veteran actor Pradeep Rawat, best known for his performance as the lead antagonist Ghajini Dharmatma in Aamir Khan-starrer 'Ghajini', passed away on Tuesday evening at a hospital in Mumbai after a battle with cancer. He was 74.

The actor's manager Siddharth R Tiwari said that Rawat had been admitted to Mumbai's Kokilaben Dhirubhai Ambani Hospital for the past month. He was recently shifted to a cancer hospital in Bhiwandi. 

He is survived by his wife, Kalyani Rawat, and their son, Vikramaditya Rawat. As soon as the news came out, condolences from members of the film fraternity and fans poured in as they mourn the loss of the veteran actor.

Pradeep Rawat's 'Lagaan' co-star and old friend Yashpal Sharma mourned the demise. "Pradeep Rawat, Our Ghajini Deva of Lagaan. RIP," he wrote.

Actor Gajendra Chauhan also paid his tributes. "Om Shanti Om Shanti Our friend and a colleague Pradeep Rawat, who played Ashwathama in Mahabharat, passed away."

A prominent face in the Indian film industry, actor Pradeep Rawat was known for his performances in Hindi, Telugu, and Tamil cinema. His work in films like 'Sarfarosh', 'Lagaan', 'Sye' (Telugu), 'Naayak' (Telugu), and 'Ghajini' is remembered by the audience. The late actor's recent work was Vicky Kaushal-starrer 'Chhaava', where he portrayed the character of Yesaji Kank.

Breaking the mould is second nature to him. Now, in a bold move that challenges the norms of a largely risk-averse industry, Aamir Khan has chosen the pay-per-view model on his YouTube channel for his latest film, Sitaare Zameen Par (SZP), which had released in theatres in June. This aligns with his decades-long pattern of being a disruptor – as an actor and filmmaker. In this freewheeling conversation with us, the superstar talks about access, affordability and the future of cinema beyond theatres. Aamir also confesses that he’s not fearless, unlike what most would assume, and tells us why, at 60, comfort is not an option — “ab comfort hai hi nahi, toh kuch karna padega.” Read on...

You are aware that we are able to reach only 2-3% of our population in the theatrical business, and this is for the biggest hit. For a film like Sitaare Zameen Par, around one crore people would have watched it by the end of its theatrical run. In the absence of enough theatres being built, this model is perhaps the only way to reach the vast majority of India, especially with rising internet penetration. In one stroke, this solves that problem for everyone. It’s great for filmmakers because it strengthens them and empowers them to make better films.

Today, cinemas in India, and here I am talking about the multiplexes, are trying to give a unique experience, but that costs money. So, over the years, theatres have evolved from the time when I started out with Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak (QSQT). Back then, the average ticket price was Rs 10. Today, the ticket prices are not affordable for a large section of society. And multiplexes, because of the high cost and heavy investment (in terms of rent, etc), have also started catering to an audience who can afford to come there. So, who will cater to the masses? This model caters straight to the masses.

In every press conference prior to my film’s release in the past 10 years, I would be asked, ‘Aap filmbana rahe ho, jo masses hai woh kaise dekhenge?’ The answer to this and the pricing of tickets is not in my hands. I can’t tell theatre owners who have invested a lot of money to go into a loss. If this model works, it will dramatically change the way we distribute films. From an economical point of view, I had strong OTT offers for SZP, if I were to accept that, it would have been a safe bet. I chose not to. I would rather earn Rs 100 from each Indian who watches my movie. Also, this is a great opportunity for younger filmmakers who are trying to break in and don’t get a chance to showcase their work. It will give creative voices more freedom. It will give them the freedom to price their content the way they want to.

Let me clarify, my loyalty is to cinema. Cinemas came first, then theatres came to serve cinema. Earlier, there was no theatre. Cinema dikhaneke liye pardah laga dete the, and it would be shown through a projector. Phir tent aaya, wahan dikhate the. Then permanent theatres came about. Cinema is what I am protecting, and emotionally, I am very tied to theatres. I believe that the theatrical experience cannot be replaced by anything else. When you are sitting in that dark space with 300 people around you, it’s a group experience where you laugh and cheer together. Imagine watching Lagaan, where the whole theatre is cheering...abhi woh experience aapko ghar pe baithke apne family ke saath bhi nahin milega. I am loyal to cinema first, and then to theatres, clearly in that order. To answer your question, I think first of all, we need more theatres. In districts where there is no single screen, not even a single theatre, we should at least have one theatre. India needs many more theatres, but they should be economical theatres.

Yes, of course. I really hope so.

Absolutely! I believe that we need theatres in tier-2 and tier-3 cities. The tier-2 cities have theatres, but as we go deeper, we don’t. I also feel that it’s not that people want to watch only action films in theatres – that was the feeling for some time. If that were the case, SZP wouldn’t have done well, and Saiyaara wouldn’t have been such a success. These are phases that keep coming and going. When I did Ghajini, everyone told me that you are doing an action film at a time when this genre was not working. It worked. I think audiences are interested in watching films irrespective of the genre.

No, it doesn’t. Stories that inspire me and affect me the most are what I gravitate towards.

No, no, there is a lot of fear. There is fear every time I am doing a film, and unfortunately, my choices are also unusual, but I can’t help but make them. When I was doing Dangal, I felt that dus saal baad karte hain, abhi mein itna mota, buddha dikh raha hoon. Just before that, I had done PK and Dhoom 3. People thought I am 30-35, they didn’t know I am 55. I thought yeh film karoonga toh meri asliyat saamne aa jayegi (laughs). It was in my blood; I had to do it. I am not a fearless person. Before the release, you can’t assume the film will work, at least my films. There were exceptions like Ghajini and Dhoom 3, where you could say yeh kuch toh karegi. But with the unusual ones, it’s difficult to tell. I go with my instinct and my heart. So, I am not thinking about what the audience wants to see. I am thinking mujhe kya banana hai.

I suppose so. If the status quo is comfortable, I have no problem with it. But when it’s not, then I want to do something to correct it. I am comfortable about being comfortable, but ab comfort hai hi nahi, toh kuch karna padega, haath pair marna padega, because in today’s times it is difficult for creative people to make what they want to make. Unless you have a subscription model pre-sale, you can’t greenlight a project. That’s not a comfortable situation to be in for creative people.

I do feel a sense of responsibility, so I don’t do films that propagate any thoughts, views or ethos which are not mine. At the same time, I also believe in having my freedom as an artiste, as that’s how I always operated from the beginning. I have selected films that I wanted to do. Some of them worked, some didn’t. Fortunately, most of them did. I have tried not to take the unnecessary load, ki meri har film 300, 500 ya 600 crore banayegi. I am not chasing that. Mujhe Talaash ki script pasand aayi aur mujhe pata tha yeh 500 crore ki film nahin hai, yeh 200 crore ki bhi nahin hai. In fact, I remember telling the team that I believe the film will do about 70 crores. It went on to do 95 crores. I did the film as I loved the story. Just because I knew it wouldn’t break my Ghajini record, didn’t mean I wouldn’t do it. I can’t think like that. This comes from my excitement as an artiste, and also because I can’t keep doing the same kind of films again and again; I don’t know how to do that.

I still remember that moment – I remember the premiere show of the film. My uncle (Nasir Hussain) had booked the balcony, and the stall was for the paid audience for the first day, 6 pm show. And Shammi (Kapoor) uncle had come, in fact, he was the only star my uncle had called from the film industry. I remember walking into the film with no one recognizing me, and when the film got over and I walked out, I was mobbed.

Singer Benny Dayal, known for his peppy hits, broke onto the scene a decade ago, with back-to-back hits, from Pappu Can’t Dance Saala and Nazrein Milana (Jaane Tu... Ya Jaane Na, 2008) to Kaise Mujhe (Ghajini, 2008) and Tu Hi Toh Meri Dost Hai (Yuvvraaj, 2008) and others.

The singer shares that he was supposed to make his debut with the song Behka Behka, also from Ghajini. “I was working as an HR professional in a corporate firm. At that time I was offered to sing the track, [but] I told sir (A R Rahman, the film’s composer), ‘I’m at work and I’m unable to come now immediately for the recording’. I was really sad, but then Kaise turned out to be beautiful eventually,” the 38-year-old shares.

Shedding more light on Kaise Mujhe — a wistful romantic melody that struck a chord with audiences — he recalls, “Before Ghajini’s recording happened, he (Rahman) had recorded the song with just a melody. He had no intentions of composing it for the film. He asked me to sing the track. When the work for the movie started, he played the melody to Aamir (Khan, who played the protagonist) sir. Aamir sir loved the melody and wanted to use it in the movie. He also said that he wanted the same singer to sing the song. When I sang the song, I didn’t even know where the song was going,” Dayal recounts.

Talking about his synergy with the music maestro, Dayal says: “It was A R Rahman who actually identified the true potential of my voice. Initially, when I was being approached or I used to approach composers, I felt like a lot of them were clueless. They didn’t know which actor’s face my voice would suit. However, I always have faith that I am good at what I do,” says Dayal.

Asin, 29, is marrying Rahul Sharma, 36, a Delhi based first generation entrepreneur, who is six feet two inches in height, has done an engineering and then been to Harvard. He has two older sisters who are both married and his parents, who retired as principals of schools, were both teachers and now live with him in Delhi. Asin is a selfmade girl and always wanted to marry a man who was, too. Rahul is down-to-earth, principled and correct and unlike Asin who likes to take her time before coming to a decision, he is instinctive and a quick decision maker. ASIN OPENS UP FOR THE FIRST TIME ABOUT HIM. EXCERPTS:

All Is Well took over two years to make. Did that delay your plans of marriage?
Honestly, at the beginning of 2012, I had three films in hand - Bol Bachchan, Housefull 2 and Khiladi 786 - but it wasn't exciting me so much as an actress, so I had decided to not act any more after finishing these three. I had several self imposed restrictions, for instance I don't do bikini scenes, don't wear skimpy clothes, don't do physical intimacy onscreen. I come from the Southern most part of India and had worked in the South and then made the shift to Mumbai. I had no grandfather, Godfather or even a satellite connection with the film industry. I didn't even have a star boyfriend to keep me in the news. And therefore honestly, it's quite miraculous I have done the films that I did. I have always said that I came into this field not because I needed the money and nor did I chase fame that was a bonus. What I liked was acting and working in films. After Khiladi 786, I was on a break when Umesh Shukla wanted to come and narrate All Is Well to me. I could not say a no to him as he had made one of my favourite films OMG Oh My God and I was keen to meet the maker of it. So we met. I had done 24 films till then and everyone felt that I should do 25 films before I took a break. I asked Umesh, 'What kind of a film would you like to make?' And he said, 'I would like to make entertaining films that makes sense to people. People say leave your brains behind and see the film. But why leave your brains at home? It's an organ that is a part of your body, please bring it with you when you come for the film.' I liked that. All Is Well was a simple family film talking about relationships, giving a sweet message. It didn't involve me to shake my booty and Bhushan Kumar called me to tell me that the film would be completed in 45 days flat. I said to myself, 'Wah it's a quickie!' And I said a yes. But it turned out to be the longest quickie of my career as it took more than two years to finish it.

Talking about your marriage, when will you be getting married to Rahul Sharma?
Rahul and I have been together for almost four years. I will get married by the end of the year.

How did you meet Rahul?
My story is eerily similar to the story of my film Ghajini. Just like my character Sanjana in the film faffs and makes up the story of being linked to Sanjay Singhania, that I met him first at the Mumbai airport, and that he said a hi and I said hi and how he came and sat next to me and then said I love you. My story is eerily similar to that. Rahul and I first met at the private airport of Mumbai as I was going to another country for work with Akshay Kumar for the promotions of Housefull 2. Now, I have just walked in and Akshay takes these early morning flights. So there was Akshay, me and this person who was just a stranger not connected to the film. So I wished everybody good morning and then there is this guy standing next to Akshay who he introduced me to as his friend Rahul. We exchanged 'hi's and went into the flight. All big stars have their friends accompanying them, so I assumed he was that friend. Eventually, as the day unfolded, during the day I have realised who he was. I realised that it was actually, his flight, his tournament we were going for, he was sponsoring us and basically everything was happening because of him. I liked the quality. He was very simple and down-to-earth and that quality stuck with me. And then Akshay tells me the same day, 'I think you two will be good for each other.' I was like, 'What? Where is this coming from? Akshay is a very good friend, one of my favourite co-stars and can joke with me, so I thought this one was also one of his random jokes. Akshay is family for us and some how, has a good sense of people so he sensed that similarity between Rahul and me. Of course I didn't know what Rahul's side (Rahul and Akshay are best friends) was as that may have also been the reason why Akshay was pursuing it.

How long did it take to convert your first meeting into a relationship?
So after our first meeting, we had spoken a few times over the phone and then Rahul was somehow convinced that I was the girl for him, so on one of the times, he asked me if he could meet my parents. He said, 'I have clarity that you are the girl for me and I want to meet them and make my intentions clear.' I found that extremely gentlemanly, to meet my parents upright right at the initial time. We had just spoken 2-3 times, that too thanks to Akshay. Anyways, Rahul came and met my parents and expressed his intention to them. He is very sorted and knows his mind clearly. And he tells them, 'I would like your daughter's hand in marriage.' And they said, 'Okay, but let's ask her what she wants.' I said, 'I want some time.' So with their permission, we started to get to know each other.

You are not an intuitive person and would like to think through all your decisions. What attracted you to Rahul?
Yes unless I am not convinced about it, I will not do it in life and that applies to everything I do. My expectation of a life partner is a guy who is self-made. Because I am a self made person, so if someone is a self made person, I would appreciate that about him and Rahul is. He started his business at such a young age and has reached the place he has. No amount of money would appeal to me, but achievement on your own merit would. He has that drive, ambition and passion. And I have always said that integrity and strength of character is of utmost importance to me and he has it and like how. Also he is level headed, mature and along with all of that, the fact that he is so grounded, and simple. He is very correct in doing things the right way.

Is he romantic?
Yes, he is romantic but he is not very verbally expressive. Neither of us are cheesy. He is not very overtly expressive and is very underplayed as a person. So he does a lot of things, big things but he does it subtly. He is never like I am the man. He has clarity of thought, vision and an opinion. His decisions are thought of but he arrives at them quickly. Also, he is very family oriented with strong roots.

You waited for All Is Well to release to announce your marriage. Did it bother him?
No, he is very chilled and cool and his only policy in life is whatever makes you happy, do that even if it does not include me and that is the footnote also. He is very selfless and outstandingly secure and I feel that's pure love, the rest is selfishness. He has no 'I' in him, it's all about 'You' with him. Throughout the relationship, his sole concern is my happiness. People profess love but a lot of times, it is actually selfishness. I have always believed that love is what helps you develop into the best person you are, it's a selfless emotion but people usually follow the corrupted version. The true version is when the other person is happy. When he came home to meet mum and dad, he was not like I like her so I want to marry her. Even then he said, 'It's her choice. Now you figure out, you make a decision, I am here.' To find that kind of non selfish love is very rare.

You managed to keep this relationship a secret for this long.
My relationship is not a secret, it's just private. And there is a difference between what is a secret and what is private. Both of us are extremely low profile and we don't like to flaunt anything, be it our relationship or anything else.

He is a vegetarian and you are a fish eating Malayali. So will the fish be comfortable in your life?
Actually, I am not a fish fanatic unless it is made in a certain way. Most of the time, my parents and I would eat very light vegetarian food. But also honestly, Rahul doesn't care. He will eat whatever he wants to eat and I will eat whatever I want to.

Does he have a favourite film of yours?
After we started dating, one of his sisters said to me, “I saw Ghajini and came back and told Rahul, 'This is a film about you'.“ He was in the same state of life that Aamir's character (Sanjay Singhania) was at that point in time. He was trying to build his company into the biggest mobile company in India Air Voice Mobile with orange brand colour. He was even driving the same car as Aamir in real life. And can you imagine it's eerie that Rahul built Micromax mobile and his brand colour too is orange. The only difference being that he did not have that girl in his life. So his sister told Rahul, 'Aisi wali ladki le aa.' Rahul apparently went and saw the film post that. And then his sister tells me, 'We had told him to get a girl like that. We didn't know he will bring that girl only. We could not have been happier'

So A R Murugadoss, who has written and directed both the Ghajinis, is the real culprit?
Yes and I told him, 'What pen have you used to write this story with? Please write a happier ending though in your third version (as in the first two, my character dies).' Even in my dreams I could not have imagined that it would come so true in my real life.

Where will you be based post marriage?
I will be based out of Cochin as I have my home there, Delhi where Rahul lives and has his HO and Mumbai where Rahul and I both have homes. Rahul anyways travels almost a fortnight a month.

Are you going to continue with films post marriage?
I have been working from the age of 14 and as of now, I am not taking up anything and will definitely take a break from films.

Do you plan to play a role in business post marriage?
I have not really thought of it, but no, not as of now. Right now, I am looking forward to experiencing this phase in life of marriage.

Any plans of becoming a mother?
I have not really thought of motherhood or that far ahead but it will be a natural succession.





A few weeks ago, the unthinkable happened. A Salman Khan film failed to hit the coveted Rs 100 crore mark in its first week of release. This was a rarity for the Bhai of Bollywood, who has delivered back-to-back super hits since 2010. Yet, Salman is unlikely to be affected by the film’s flat performance. If trade experts are to be believed, Khan made his Rs 100 crore even before Jai Ho hit screens.

Says trade analyst Komal Nahata, “The film, budgeted at about Rs 75 crore, including print and publicity costs, and was sold to Eros International for Rs 120 crore. Its broadcasting rights were about Rs 55 crore and music around Rs 13 crore. So, the film had made Rs 113 crore even before release. This isn’t too bad a start for a film.”

The current era though is a far cry from the times when films depended solely upon crowds filling up single screen theatres across India. There were no elusive ‘100-crore’ clubs.

First one crore movie

One of the first films the masses showered with love and money was Lanka Dahan (1917), a mythological silent film by Dadasaheb Phalke. Veteran film historian Amrit Gangar says coins from ticket counters were apparently collected in gunny bags and transported on bullock carts to the producer’s office. “Lanka Dahan was a silent film, but people went crazy about it. There were long queues at Majestic cinema in Bombay where people would fight for tickets and toss coins at the ticket counter because the film was mostly houseful.” However, it was in 1943, that Kismet, directed by Gyan Mukherjee, became the first film to reach the coveted box office milestone of Rs 1 crore. Who would have thought that the journey of the crore in Indian films would begin with a movie made for under Rs 2 lakh? It was a time when India was in the throes of patriotic fervour. The Quit India movement had just been launched. Kismet, a crime thriller with patriotic sentiments, tapped into this feeling.

In the lead role was Ashok Kumar, playing a Robin Hood-like character who doesn’t mind breaking the law for the greater good. Says film scholar and archivist PK Nair, “Ashok Kumar was a superstar and people loved his part as a pickpocket who dodged the system to help the public.” Kismet was produced by Bombay Talkies. “It ran in Calcutta’s Roxy theatre for almost three years. It was by all estimates the first film to make a crore. It was released in undivided India, so the crowd was bigger,” adds Nair.

The song ‘Door hato ae duniyawalon, Hindustan humara hai’ then became an anthem. “At that time, films were allowed to be made only on restricted raw stock, as it was expensive and had to be imported. Between 1939-45, films had to be made with a maximum 12 reels. However, the British made an exception for movies that were considered a boost to their war efforts. The song ‘Door hato ae duniyawalon’ took an indirect dig at the British, but they never found out how,” says Nair.

The golden ’50s

Post-independence was a golden era for Indian cinema, when the industry started to flower. The Partition caused a disintegration of the hitherto influential film companies, such as Lahore’s Shorey Studios and Pancholi Studios, and the era of independent producers began. Producer-directors like Raj Kapoor, Guru Dutt, Mahesh Kaul and Mehboob Khan, among others, brought out one masterpiece after another. “Guru Dutt paid homage to Gyan Mukherjee in his film Pyaasa, because Kismet was such a cult. Pyaasa created history of its own,” says Nair. It was the showman Raj Kapoor, however, who really flourished financially with films such as Barsaat, Awara and Shree 420. “Shree 420 was the film that made over Rs 2 crore and broke Kismet’s record,” adds Nair.

Randhir Kapoor, Raj Kapoor’s eldest son, says “My father never thought of money. He used to make movies for the passion of it and he’d do anything to fulfill his creative urges.”

Another filmmaker who did not compromise on his grand vision was Mehboob Khan. After his film, Aan, become a massive hit, he made Mother India (1957), included among the 100 best films of World Cinema by Empire magazine, was made with 26-year-old Nargis Dutt playing mother of two.

In an interview to The Telegraph, the late Sunil Dutt, Nargis’ co-star in the film and her husband, had said “We were amazed with Mehboob Khan’s conviction to be able to pull off a film like this. We shot in several states across the country and he spent more than Rs 35 lakh on it, which was a big amount in those days.” Mother India, the first Indian film to be nominated at the Oscars (in 1958), made approximately Rs 4 crore and ran for over a year at Liberty theatre in Bombay.

The star system started to gain prominence in the ’50s as well. The decade marked the rise of Dilip Kumar, Dev Anand, not to mention Raj Kapoor. Dilip Kumar became the first actor to charge Rs 1 lakh per film. Sidharth Bhatia, author of Cinema Modern: the Navketan story, says, “In the ’50s some South Indian producers had approached Dilip Kumar with an offer. When he refused to take it up, Sriramulu Naidu, a producer from the South who was making Azaad, offered him an exorbitant amount to act in the film, which Dilip Kumar accepted.”

The advent of colour

At the start of the 1960s came another epic, K Asif’s Mughal-E-Azam. Asif’s dream was to release it in technicolour. But the film’s mammoth budget of Rs 1.5 crore kept the film under production for nine long years. Says Haya Asif, granddaughter of K Asif, “There was a scene in the film where they had to show pearls being thrown on the floor. He (Asif) wanted real pearls. The financers initially refused, but he got it done eventually.” The film ran for over three years and made over Rs 5 crore. “Ticket prices were hiked from Rs 1 to Rs 50 and Rs 100,” says Nair.

Interestingly, the advent of Eastmancolour in the ’60s was one of the biggest factors in the success of films in India. Then came foreign shoots, the trend starting with Shakti Samanta’s Shammi Kapoor-starrer, Singapore (1960). Raj Kapoor, too, filmed several films abroad. Manoj Kumar shot Purab Aur Paschim extensively in England, France, Rome and Switzerland.

Another expensive film of those times was Vijay Anand’s Guide (1965). Says Sidharth Bhatia, “Guide was made for about Rs 60 lakh and this budget doubled because the American filmmaker, Tad Danielewski, who was directing the English version, had a falling out with Chetan Anand after the first three schedules. So they had to revisit many places and reshoot the English version. Also, Guide was a rich film when it came to locations since a lot of it was shot in palaces. Though it did make money when it released, it was much later that people recognised it as such a cult.”

The ’60s saw ground-breaking trends with films such as Dosti where the producers (Rajshree Productions) spent on publicity. Says PK Nair, “I remember that Dosti was made for about Rs 20 lakh. They spent almost the same amount publicising the film because it did not have many stars. There were hoardings and full-page ads in newspapers, which was new for a Hindi film. The first film to put out a full-page newspaper ad was a South film called Chandralekha (1948).”

When multi-starrers ruled

The ’70s saw the superstardom of Amitabh Bachchan, considered the first actor to command a fee of Rs 1 crore per film. The decade also saw the rise of the multi-starrers, a trend set by Manmohan Desai with films like Parvarish and Amar Akbar Anthony. Rosie Thomas, professor of film at London’s Westminster University, who has been studying Indian cinema for the past 35 years, says, “I came to Bombay from England in the 1970s and I spent a lot of time with Manmohan Desai trying to understand the mindset of filmmakers. I distinctly remember a story session I sat in on, where they were segregating Hindu, Muslim and Christian characters with different coloured chalks on the blackboard. It was fascinating how stories were deliberately being targeted towards sections of crowd so that it reached maximum people.”


In 1975 came Sholay, the highest grosser of all time for almost two decades. Ramesh Sippy started to make the film with a budget of a crore, but spent an additional Rs 2 crore. Among the many things that made Sholay an expensive and challenging film to make was the number of extras and production people on set, believed to be the highest in Bollywood history. Sippy says, “There were more than 200 people on set at any given time. We had to build roads from scratch for many action sequences. The film ran for five years (amounting to Rs 15 crore gross) because there were no DVDs or video tapes or multiple screens at the time. If I release Sholay with 5,000 prints today, it’s never going to run for that long. Today a film will have to make at least Rs 1,500 crore to be equivalent to what Sholay made in its time.” Sholay’s box office record was broken 19 years later by Hum Aapke Hain Koun (1994), which earned approximately Rs 69 crore.


Then came another monster hit, Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge. The film also marked the beginning of the end of the silver and golden jubilees. Very soon a new business model would redefine the industry, bringing in crores of money even though the film itself wouldn’t last at the theatre or in public memory beyond a few days.

The magic of multiplexes
Multiplexes and film studios changed the dynamics of the business. Increasing number of digital prints and extended weekend releases resulted in films raking in more moolah faster than expected.

“Earlier, a film released in about 25 cinemas with four shows a day, making it 700 shows a week. Today if a film releases in 100 cinemas with 25 shows per day, that makes it 1,625 shows per week,” explains Nahata.

This and an aggressive marketing campaign paved the way for Aamir Khan’s Ghajini (2008) the first 100-crore film ever. The success of Ghajini was followed by 3 Idiots (2009), which garnered over Rs 202 crore till Shah Rukh Khan’s Chennai Express broke this record, Aamir’s film Dhoom 3 broke the record again with over Rs 260 crore.

But the winners are also the producers who make smaller budget films, and yet set cash registers ringing, leading to big profits.
According to filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt, that is an important yardstick for measuring a film’s financial performance. Vishesh Films, owned by Mahesh Bhatt and his brother Mukesh, have adopted this prudent approach. Mahesh Bhatt says, “What gets lost in the hype over collections is profitability. The mindset is to make expensive, big budget films, but the actual profit of these films may not be very high. Unlike these, Aashiqui 2 was made with a modest budget of 35 crore, and yet made almost Rs 100 crore.”

Filmmaker Shekhar Kapur says that in many ways, the most successful film in Bollywood history is Monsoon Wedding (2001). “That film was made within a crore and technically speaking is probably the most successful Indian film in years (it earned Rs 180 crore overseas). But they are not the people who aspire to be part of the crore clubs.”

Interestingly, Kapur’s Paani, being produced by Yash Raj Films, is said to be among the most expensive films to be made in India. “The budget will be not less than $150 million. At that rate my revenue should hit at least Rs 5,000 crore,” says Kapur.