When heroine-oriented films find it difficult to survive at the box-office, why do producers invest in these kinds of films? Wouldn’t it be safer to produce films which are desired by the public?
– Your question can be answered in more ways than one. Firstly, what works and what doesn’t can’t be predicted. If it was so easy to understand what works at the ticket windows, everyone would only make hits, right? Secondly, every once in a while, there comes a film which breaks the mould and yet scores at the turnstiles. That is why the urge to make different cinema — and that includes women-oriented films because they are fewer than male-oriented films. Thirdly, if producers were to play safe and make only films which, according to you, are “desired by the public”, there would probably be only 15-20 films produced every year. And even then, predicting the success of those films would still remain a difficult job.
After the stupendous success of Hanuman Ansh, which was made on a shoestring budget, what is the logic behind making big-budgeted devotional or mythological films? Does the success of films like Hanuman Ansh and before it, Mahavatar Narsimha, suggest that mythological or devotional films should be made in controlled budgets?
– Why only mythologicals or devotional films? Films of any genre stand a better chance to click and pay dividends when made at controlled budgets. But it is not always possible to make films with limited, small or controlled budgets. Some films require humongous budgets because they are conceived that way.
How are the producers of Ramayana planning to release the film on 6th November when Diwali falls on 8th? Pre-Diwali days are supposed to be bad for the box-office, right?
– It is because it is RAMAYANA. Ramayana and the festival of lights have a deep connection.