BOLLYWOOD BOX OFFICE UNPLUGGED

[Archivio]

Nell'agosto 2012 Moneylife pubblicò Bollywood Box Office Unplugged, tre articoli che illustravano l'importanza, in termini di incassi, assunta dalla prima settimana di distribuzione delle pellicole hindi, analizzando motivazioni e strategie. Di seguito ve li propongo integralmente, dal momento che l'argomento è tuttora attuale. (Cliccate sui grafici per renderli più leggibili).

WHY THE FIRST DAY AND FIRST WEEK IS MAKE OR BREAK, Sandeep Khurana, 6 agosto 2012:

'Once, the barometer of success for films was platinum, golden and silver jubilees. (...) Today, it's the first week that matters for box office success. Online bookings of new releases open Wednesday. But savvy marketers ensure that the excitement starts building weeks and months before ticketing action as the movie stars are in your face promoting the movie. They are at the mall next door, the pub downtown, gate-crashing weddings (yes, 3 idiots did it) - even the most uninitiated can predict whose movie is releasing next at the box-office. Then there is the music video launch, Page3 [terza pagina dei quotidiani, tradizionalmente dedicata alla cronaca mondana, anche a pagamento] plugs, YouTube clips, fun-bites on Facebook, Twitter teasers, online trailers, video games and more. The idiot box joins the frenzy with Amitabh Bachchan turning up as guest anchor, Akshay [Kumar] and Sonakshi [Sinha] getting face time at a cricket match, or reality shows of all hues being invaded by your favourite stars. (...) The idea is to get everybody caught up in the frenzy before cash registers start ringing on Friday.

A few discerning ones wait to read the reviews or sneak previews. Enter the analysts. Taran Adarsh, Rajeev Masand, Anupama Chopra, Raja Sen, and many more - the list is long. Reviews pouring in on Friday. Rajeev Masand’s review is Googled more than say, “home loans” in India. Taran Adarsh and Rajeev Masand have over 150,000 followers each including many opinion-makers themselves among their followers. Anupama is not far behind either. Since movies get booked well in advance, bookings for much-hyped movies happen before getting feedback from your trusted social circle. You bank on the stars promoting it and on analysts. An exhortation by Amitabh or SRK carries trust. Film reviewers, the pied pipers of cinemagoers in a star-crazy nation, carries credibility. Tragedy strikes when movie after movie, hyped by stars and reviewers turns out to be a disaster. Millions of hours wasted. Crores of rupees down the drain or into undeserving pockets! You wish the stars and reviewers had not lied and you had not trusted their hype.

Movie business for you - Reincarnated

Now for the dynamics of how it works. There was a time, when movies released in theatres could run for years, secure in the knowledge that nobody would steal the reels. That’s because you had to go to a theatre and couldn’t view it on your cable, notebook computer or smart phone. The barometer of success was platinum, golden and silver jubilees. (...) Today, movie releases need to beat the pirates by simultaneous release in as many theatres as possible. Only the rupee matters and this can also come from music rights, overseas distribution, satellite rights or video/web/YouTube releases, in-film advertising, etc. But this analysis will focus only on the box office for 33 recent releases.

Industry rides on blockbusters

In terms of budget of box-office (BO) collections, the film industry works due to blockbusters. (...)

This sets in motion a sequence of desirable and undesirable actions. A lavishly mounted movie also needs a lavish marketing budget in order to recover costs. Distributors demand item songs which make cash registers ring and every cog in the wheel from stars to cinema hall owners work at making it succeed; and the first week is make-or-break time. With stakes so high, it also needs friendly reviewers to tailor ratings to suit the industry rather than the cine-goer who forks out just Rs200 for a ticket. The mantra is simple - after the shoot, take what you can in the first week and scoot before word-of-mouth reality sinks in. (...)

Now look at performances in the first half of the current year.

The high first weekend collection is projected as validation of film’s BO superiority. This happens occasionally, like with 3 idiots, but in most cases, the hype about the opening weekend is entirely fake or good marketing. On the way out of the theatre, many people realize they have been had, but since it is all about entertainment, the reaction is amusement rather than outrage. The following two charts, based on BO collections, show how much is at stake. (Only Hindi movies released in first half of the year, between Jan-Jun 2012 and surviving at least a week at box-office are considered. There is a whole alternate business revenue stream of music rights, satellite rights, merchandizing agreements, in-film advertising is not the subject of this analysis.)

A week is a long time in Hindi films. Especially, if it is the first week. It is analyzed down to each day by film trade analysts and watched for its trending collections. We notice some very interesting insights and trends.

On an average, two-third of a movie’s BO collection is done before business before the second week begins. On an average, a movie’s BO collection drops to one third of the previous week, every week, till it disappears into oblivion - this is the one-third rule. The graph above shows aggregate week-wise collections post-release. Movies that beat this rule are the winners. For instance, a dark horse like Vicky Donor could see collections drop just 5% less in week two. A movie whose BO collections drop 65%-70% in a week is primarily rejected by audience; that an Agneepath still earns Rs100 crore is due, in no small measure, to the inability to cancel bookings made before its Friday. They are still trade hits but not by popular choice.

Here is a plan that seems to work. If viewers are numbed by a blast of star power and publicity blitz to ensure that first week plans are full before reviews, social media feedback or word-of-mouth reach them, the producer can make a killing. This explains why they pull out all the stops and plan a release with such care. For a good movie, the progress path is altogether different - we will examine this in the next part'.

WINNERS AND LOSERS AMONG THE 2012 RELEASES, Sandeep Khurana, 7 agosto 2012:

'Who were the Survivors (the workhorses), Fakestars (work for the industry too but not so much for the audience), Rockstars, (as they are low-budget winners) and the duds for the fist half of 2012. In the first six months of 2012, 35 Hindi films were released, of which 33 reported their box office (BO) numbers and the remaining probably sank without a trace. As we pointed out in the first part, the frenzied hype that accompanies a movie’s release is purely commercial. Influencing reviews to get better ratings is a part of this. Let’s see how it works.

We analysed the movie ratings of as many as 33 reviewers for each movie. We then looked at the drop in BO business from the first week to the second as an indicator of public verdict. We then included a third dimension of total movie business to build a complete perspective on the movie in a single snapshot. (See graph: Jan-Jun 2012: Business, Reviews, People’s verdict). There is a whole alternate business revenue stream of music rights, satellite rights, merchandizing agreements, in-film advertising that is not the subject of this analysis.

We then classified the whole set. The Rockstars are those that were high on reviewers’ and peoples’ choice - they received high ratings and also sustained business in the second week (see graph). The Survivors are movies that received average ratings but survive to retain the audience interest and do not drop more than a third in the second week. The Duds are movies that simply fail to take off with both viewers and reviewers. And finally there are the Fakestars - which generate huge BO business in the first week, only to crash over 70% in the second week. These are over-hyped movies and, but a curious co-incidence, their names provide clues to this category. 

The viewers guide to the categories: Rockstars, Survivors, Fakestars and Duds

In terms of business for the entire industry, Survivors are the workhorses - they are not stars though, not high on critics list, but just good for an average laugh by the masses. Fakestars work for the industry too but not so much for the audience. Rockstars, especially as they are low-budget, are the ones we could do with more of. Duds - let us not waste time on them. 

Good, large production houses play safe with big movies to ensure they are Survivors - big bankable stars, tested formula, item songs, prime release dates, zero or low competition from other movies, secured by marketing, etc - all this often prevents them from being Duds by just a whisker. 

The distribution channels

Based on channel structure, ownership, market size, local issues and movie-related factors there is a full treatise possible on territory level insights. We restrict our focus to the BO (Pie chart: Collections: Jan-Jun 2012), but even a quick glance shows heavy dependence on just two key regions in terms of revenues. Corporate entry into Bollywood was expected to bring in such professionalism. It has indeed cured some ills but has also introduced others. We need introspection on how to connect the dots to create win-win movies. What good is a good Bollywood movie without a sequel?'. 

MOVIE REVIEWERS, REVIEWED, Sandeep Khurana, 8 agosto 2012:

'Like in every profession, movie reviewers come in all shades. There are trade analysts, willing to offer glowing reviews to help drive box office (BO) collections and there are others, who are courageous enough to stick their necks out and call a flop despite the producer’s clout. To be honest, a reviewer is only a chhota [piccolo] culprit, in the big faking game to ensure first week collections. Stars who promote Duds (movies that simply fail to take off with both viewers and reviewers) are bigger culprits. Interestingly, among the big names a dispassionate look at the numbers throws up only one reviewer as being disposed to hand out benevolent ratings to producers to drum up business, but being unfair to readers. As we said earlier, the first week collection, especially the all-important first weekend is often influenced by the marketing blitz and star promotions. The reviewers really influence only the second week. Since reviewers are after all human, we do understand occasional aberrations, mistakes or differences in perception; however, we have also come across a pattern of consistent, undeserved high ratings by a reviewer that stand out. 

We considered an exhaustive list of 38 analysts and all available ratings by them for movies included in the study. (Refer Graph: The dozen Pied Pipers of Hindi Cinema). Those with less than 10 reviews are excluded from detailed analysis of the reviewers themselves but ratings given by them retained for the movie analysis. It must be recognized that any positive or negative outcomes are purely data-driven and unintended. (Only Hindi movies released in first half of the year, between Jan-Jun 2012 and surviving at least a week at BO are considered. There is a whole alternate business revenue stream of music rights, satellite rights, merchandizing agreements, in-film advertising that is not the subject of this analysis.)

It flows from the analysis and the chart above that not all analysts do justice to the ratings. A good analyst must exploit the full range from 0 to 5 to rate movies, especially when viewers reject movies frequently. If a reviewer gives a 3 and 4 star rating for all movies reviewed by him/her, you are not getting a worthwhile opinion. A reviewer can be purely value-based and unconcerned by BO collections; or can be purely a trade-based critic. But the review must be qualified by a disclosure. (Reviewers whose ratings were included in the research are: Rajeev Masand, Taran Adarsh, Shubhra Gupta, Anupama Chopra, Blessy Chettiar, Omar Qureshi, Martin D'Souza, Komal Nahata, Raja Sen, Madhureeta Mukherjee, Kunal Guha, Avijit Ghosh, Srijana Mitra Das, Saibal Chatterjee, Sukanya Verma, Subhash K. Jha, Aniruddha Guha, Khalid Mohammed, Piyali Dasgupta, Mayank Shekhar, Kanika Sikka, Vivek Bhatia, Prashant NDTV, Shomini Sen, Mrigank Dhaniwala, Preeti Arora, Zinnia Ray Chaudhary, Resham Sengar, Priyanka Ketkar, Puja Banta, Nikhat Kazmi, Soumyadipta Banerjee, Shakti Salgaocar, Aseem Chhabra, Shaikh Ayaz, Ritu V. Singh, Anirudhha Guha, Gaurav Malani) 

Head to head

The top two analysts of the film world head-to-head for all movies they rated in the period of study make for interesting comparison. Note that barring two movies out of 33, Taran Adarsh always rates a movie higher than Rajeev Masand. Rajeev Masand has an average ranking of 2.2 and the third horse in the race, Anupama Chopra has ranking of 2.3 as against Taran whose average is way higher at 3. For the statistically inclined - there is a significant difference in all parameters. Take away the exception - Bittoo Boss, and you know the rule. It is cognitively difficult to dissociate ratings by linking them with names; a high rating is a high rating and it fools us into an inflated opinion about movie’s worth. 

The difference is more pronounced when it comes to big-budget movies. For the 10 costliest movies in the period, the average rating by Rajeev Masand is 2.15 and that by Taran Adarsh it is whopping 3.45, on same scale of 5. That Taran’s ratings are influenced by a movie’s budget, more than popular choice, is too obvious to require further explanation. It is no coincidence either, that he is trade analyst and the bias shows. Week 2 continuation/drop of business and thereby the public verdict, supports possibly Rajeev and Anupama’s review ratings as also those of most other analysts. Even last year, the costliest movie ever made, Ra.One was given the highest rating of 4.5 by Taran, when most analysts could not even tolerate the movie till interval. On other hand, after the same movie, Anupama Chopra wrote a very honest article - Box Office Followers - blasting the obsession of box office with moneybags. To quote her, “The multi-crore grosses that eventually follow are then bandied about as proof of quality. The art becomes irrelevant.” 

The Fakestars - the film industry helps create them because of what rides on them and not because of intrinsic merit of the movie reviewers can help build them up with an extra star. Check our film reviewer rating comparator for all movies in the Fakestar category for the top three reviewers. (See graph: Aggressive promotion, inflated ratings and reality strikes in week 2). For seven out of eight movies, Taran Adarsh has more generous ratings than the other two. The eight movies listed below accounted for 50% production cost of the industry’s cost of making 33 movies in the period under study'.