HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS TO BOOK VIDEO PIRATES

(From our issue dated 21st May, 1994)

DO YOU KNOW?

* JURASSIC PARK has created a city record by collecting 1,54,972/- in 1st week, 1,55,484/- in 2nd week, and 1,56,456/- in 3rd week at Shubham, Lucknow.

* JURASSIC PARK has created a re­ cord by collecting 73,741/- in 4th week at Navina, Calcutta.

YOU ASKED IT

What business is the Hindi dubbed version of Jurassic Park expected to do?

– Over a crore per major territory! It has already crossed 50 in Bombay and touched 50 in Delhi-U.P.

Will the Cine Artistes’ Association be able to monitor the star-ceiling scheme?

– It doesn’t seem so. It is like pro­ducers asking for self-censorship.

How much does tax exemption add to a film’s business?

– At least 25% unless the film is a flop.

When will producers apply brake on the ever-increasing prices of films?

– When distributors apply brakes on their eagerness to buy such films.

HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS
TO BOOK VIDEO PIRATES

Hollywood studio giants Paramount and Universal Pictures have decided to take on Indian video pirates. This ann­ouncement was made at a press conference in New Delhi on 20th May, by the vice president of the Motion Picture Export Association of America (MPEAA) and director of the Asia-Pacific Anti-piracy division, Lowell B. It came close on the heels of Parliament passing the Copyright (second Amend­ment) Bill, 1992 last week.

The new amendment provides that rental or lending of even legitimate video cassettes without authorisation from the copyrights owner or its licensee, shall be an offence.

Video library owners were warned that copyright infringement or piracy was a cognizable offence and a police officer was entitled to take suo moto action and seize without a magistrate’s warrant all pirated video cassettes, equipment and machinery used for making such copies. The penalties ranged from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 2 lakh and imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years. Subsequent offences would attract heavier penalties.

MIX MASALA

PRICEY BOOKLET

A leading producer, whose film is due for a very early release, has done what no producer must have done earlier. He has charged his distributors for the booklets sent to them! Each booklet has cost the distributors Rs. 10!! Can’t believe it? We, too, can.

KRISHAN DHAWAN DEAD

Veteran actor Krishan Dhawan breath­ ed his last on 20th May in Bombay follo­wing a cardiac arrest. He was 67.

Krishan Dhawan had started his career with Prithvi Theatres and had acted in a number of plays. He worked in about 100 films and in almost all films made by Manoj Kumar, Navketan and R.K. He had a prominent role in Ram Teri Ganga Maili. He had also acted in several TV serials.

He is survived by his wife and actor-son Dilip Dhawan. The final rites were performed this morning (21st May).

PRASENJIT WEDS DEBASREE ROY

Prasenjit got married to leading Beng­ali film actress Debasree Roy recently in Calcutta. The marriage was kept a closely-guarded secret.

ART DIRECTOR KULKARNI DEAD

Veteran art director N.B. Kulkarni died at his residence in Bombay on 15th May after a brief illness. He was 78 and is sur­vived by his wife, a son and a daughter.

After his education at the J.J. School of Arts in Bombay, he started his career as an art director with Bombay Talkies. He later started working with Kamal Amrohi. Among the films for which he had erected sets were Kavi, Stage, Dayara, Razia Sultan and Pakeezah.

COURT SCENES IN FILMS: RAJASTHAN LAWYERS
IN COURT

Lawyers are shown as persons sold to criminals, tampering with the evidence, shouting in the courtrooms at the top of their voices….. judges are shown as weak­ lings, lacking knowledge of law…. the law is shown to be full of loopholes and helpless… judicial process never reaches the criminals who, in turn, are not booked for their crimes….. These are some of the many charges in the writ petition filed by the Rajasthan Chapter of Indian Associa­tion of Lawyers, through its secretary Vineet Kothari, in the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan high court.

Reacting to the charges against court scenes depicted in Indian films, which allegedly degrade the judicial system, Justice V.J. Palsikar on 17th May issued notices to the government of India and the Cenral Board of Film Certification (CBFC). Submitting the writ petition, senior advocate Marudhar Mridul said that these only tend to shake up the faith of the common man in the judicial sys­tem. The scene from Shahenshah was cited as an example. In the scene, the hero barges into the court, bashes up the eye­ witness and eventually goes to the extent of having the villain hanged to death in the precincts of the court. In the writ peti­tion, it was prayed that a retired judge of the Supreme Court or an eminent jurist be appointed as chairman of the CBFC, whose duty it would be to not permit any scenes to be passed, which depict the law or the court of law in bad light.

SATISH KULKARNI APPOINTED

Prominent Marathi film producer Satish Kulkarni has been appointed as special invitee on the board of directors of the Maharashtra Film Stage & Cultural Development Cor­po­ration (Film City) and the Kolhapur Chitra­nagari Mahaman­dal, by the government of Maharashtra with immediate effect.

SAAWAN KUMAR TAKES SHOW
ORGANISERS TO COURT

Saawan Kumar has filed suits in the courts of law in London and New York against two show organisers who have allegedly used photographs of Sridevi and Anupam Kher from his underproduction film, Chaand Kaa Tukdaa, without seeking his permission.

Nilesh Patel and Alan Cordery of Celebrity Promotions International Ltd. will hold the show in London on 4th June. The New York show is being organised by Kanu Chauhan and it will be held on 28th May. Both the show organisers have allegedly used stills of Chaand Kaa Tukdaa in their publicity pamphlets/hand­ outs etc.

Saawan Kumar has served a legal notice on Celebrity Promotions in London and is expected to move the court any day now. Before leaving for London and New York on 19th May, Saawan Kumar informed that he would claim heavy damages from both the show organisers.

STOP PRESS

COURT ORDERS SIPPY TO DELIVER
‘AATISH’ PRINTS

Judge Deshpande of the Bombay city civil court today (on May 21) or­dered Sippy to deliver the prints of AATISH to Bombay exhibitor U.A. Thadani for release on 27th May. This order followed Vijay Sippy’s appearance before the judge at the latter’s residence this morning, where Vijay claimed that AATISH was complete and ready for release. He also said, the letter of Anand recording studio, pro­duced by the FMC in court yesterday (May 20), was incorrect.

Earlier, on May 20, the judge had fixed May 23 as the date for further hearing, but realising the urgency, the matter was heard today itself.

Technically speaking, therefore, AATISH can now be released on 27th May subject, of course, to the CBFC clearance. The release plan of the film following the court order, however, was not known.

FMC-FDC DISPUTE: NO HEADWAY

With no settlement arrived at bet­ween the Film Makers Combine (FMC) and the Film Distributors’ Council (FDC), the FMC’s embargo on releases continues for the second week. No films were released this week. G.P. Sip­py’s Aatish was due for release on 27th May (next week) but with no time left, the release on 27th seems to be almost impossible. The new date has not been announced so far. (Read Aat­ish release story given elsewhere in this issue.)

There is no evident move for a com­ promise from both, the FMC and the FDC sides. It may be recalled that the embargo on releases was announced by the FMC on 1st May in retaliation to the FDC’s decision that (i) no film would be registered by any distributors’ association unless the producer gave an undertaking that he would post- pone the release of its video cassettes by three months from the date of thea­trical release, and (ii) producers should obtain clearance certificate for new films from the FDC.

In view of the FMC embargo, a meeting of the distributors of Delhi-U.P. was held on 20th May in Delhi under the aegis of the Motion Pictures Association (MPA).

The meeting was very largely atten­ded and the “unilateral” action of the FMC was discussed. The distributors reitera­ed that the FMC had gone back on the joint decisions taken by itself and the FMC in Indore in November ’93. They felt that the joint decisions should be strictly adhered to by the FMC. The distributors requested the FDC not to com- promise with the terms already settled.

The distributor-members were of the view that the producers had taken this decision under the pressure of a lobby created by Cable TV operators and Video Operators Association, who are injuring the distributors’ interests as al­so the interests of the industry all over the country.

It was also decided that the distributors may not pay the instalments due or they may claim compensation/damages from the producers for not giving the delivery on due date.

The FDC was also authorised to take a decision that the films, as and when released by the distributors, should be in the sequence they had been cen­ sored or advertised for release but de­layed due to the unilateral decision of the FMC.

FMC chairman Shakti Samanta told Information, “Distributors don’t want to meet the producers to settle the mat­ter. Producers are willing to sit across the table. The general opinion is for a 1-week delay in the release of video cassettes. Beyond that, the delay period could be left to the individual producers and distributors. But as far as cable TV goes, a three-month delay was ag­reeable to producers. As regards the star ceiling, it can rightly be monitored only by the FMC.”

VETERAN PHANI MAJUMDAR DEAD

Veteran writer, producer, director Phani Majumdar breathed his last on May 16 at Hinduja Hospital in Bombay. He died a natural death. He was 82 and is survived by his wife, Monica Majumdar, an actress of yesteryears.

Phani Majumdar started his career in Calcutta under the great P.C. Barua in 1931 at New Theatres, and graduated as an in­ dependent director after seven years with a bilingual, Street Singer (Hindi) and Saathi (Bengali) under the banner of New Theatres. The films were commercially successful. His next, Zindagi, was a hit. Kapal Kundla, his third film, also did well. He migrated to Bombay in 1941 and made a number of notable films including Mohabbat, Justice, Door Chal­en, Hum Bhi Insaan Hain, Andolan, Tamasha, Dhobi Doctor, Baadbaan and Faraar.

In 1955, Phani Majumdar signed a five-year contract with Singapore-based Shaw Brothers and made a number of films for them.

On his return to India, he made many films during the sixties, like Pyasi and Oonche Log. He made his first film for Raj­shri, Aarti, in 1962. It was a super-hit. He held a kind of world record for directing films in eight languages: Bengali (his mother tongue) – 3, Hindi – 35, Malay – 8, Chine­se – 2, English – 1, Magadhi – 1, Mai­thili – 1 and Punjabi – 1.

Recently, Phani Majumdar was associa­ – ted with the writing of the epic tele-serial, Ramayan. He also completed a script on Swami Vivekananda as well as one on Lord Buddha.

Phani Majumdar, who was among the first few Indians to have studied scenario writing and cinematography in America, wrote the scripts of such popular films as Kajal, Neelkamal, Badaltey Rishtey, Jaan Hatheli Pe and Ek Chadar Maili Si.

A very humble person, Phani Majum­dar always kept himself busy in writing scripts. He was felicitated by the Indian Film Directors’ Association in December 1991 on his 80th birthday. Shakti Saman­ta, who started his film career with Phani Majumdar’s Andolan, paying tributes to his guru, had then called him ‘a pure human being’, B.R. Chopra had said that he was a versatile man and to find an equal to him was very difficult.

Paying his tribute to Phani, prime min­ister P.V. Narasimha Rao said that he was a multi-faceted film personality whose films stood as a testimony to his talent as a filmmaker. Information and broadcasting minister K.P. Singh Deo said, “His death is a loss to the cine world in particular.”

‘Aatish’ Release Drama

SIPPY CORNERED

The heat that the Aatish release controversy generated all through the week gone by and more particularly on Friday, May 20, would make even the Sun hang its head in shame. There were as many stories about the release date of Aatish as tongues that wagged. At the time of going to the press, however, it was certain that Aatish would not be released on 27th May. In G.P. Sippy’s own words, “It will take some time now. But Aatish will not come on 27th.”

A number of developments took place simultaneously on 20th May, making it difficult, if not impossible, for Sippy to meet the release date of 27th May.

Bombay exhibitor U.A. Thadani moved judge Deshpande’s court in the city civil court, Bombay, on 20th, seeking delivery of the prints of Aatish for release at his cinemas on 27th. The FMC, presumably fearing that Sippy was hand-in-glove with the exhibitors, obtained a consent letter from him (Sippy), permitting the FMC to defend the case in the court. It was argued in the court on behalf of Thadani that he had contracts with Sip­ sons (the Bombay distribution concerns of the Sippys, which would be releasing Aatish) to rele­ ase Aatish at his cinemas on 27th. It was also pointed out that the film had been released on 6th (for 1 show) at Edward, Bombay and the daily collection report for the said show was produ­ced in the court as evidence. The FMC (on behalf of Sippy) argued that since the film was not complete, delivery thereof could not be effected. In support of its claim, the FMC produced in the court a letter of Anand Recording Studio, stating that the film’s mixing was not yet comp­lete. On behalf of Thadani, it was argued that Aatish had already been certified by the CBFC and, therefore, the question that it was incomplete did not even arise. The C.C. no. (1216, UA, dated 5-5-’94) was quoted. The judge reserved his order and, in the absence of G.P. Sippy in the court, asked for an affidavit from Sippy to as­ certain the actual position regarding its completion. The matter was again fixed for hearing on Monday, May 23. Sippy has been directed to file an affidavit, if he so desired. It is reliably learnt that Vijay Sippy, however, will appear in the court today (May 21) at 11 a.m. and state on oath that his film is complete and ready for release. If the court orders that the exhibitors were entitled to be given delivery for 27th release, there is a possibility (theoretically speaking) of the film coming on schedule. But there is another hitch – that of the censor certificate (read further).

It may be mentioned here that the judge opined that the FMC’s embargo on relea­ses was general and a consequence of the fight between distributors and producers. Exhibitors could not be made to suffer because of the embargo, the judge noted.

In the meantime, G.P. Sippy obtained letters from Anand, retracting its earlier letter given to the FMC. The two letters dated 19th May clarified that the mixing of Aatish was complete and that the earlier letter was inadvertently issued by an administrative staffer of Anand, who had no technical knowledge.

Meanwhile, the FMC also rushed a complaint to the CBFC on the basis of the letter it had obtained from Anand. In turn, the CBFC sent a letter to Sippy Films on 19th May (received by Sippy late in the evening of 19th), which, in effect, can­ celled the certificate (no. 1216, UA) issu­ed by it. The letter reads:

“We have received a complaint from M/s. Film Makers Combine that mixing and re-recording is being carried out in the Hindi film Aatish after a certificate for public exhibition has been issued. In this connection, your attention is invited to Rule 33 of Cinematograph (Certifica­tion) Rules, 1983, which clearly states that when a film is altered by excision, addi­tion, colouring or otherwise after it has been certified under these Rules, it shall not be exhibited unless the portion or por­tions excised, added, coloured or otherwise altered, have been reported to the Board in Form III in the Second Schedule and the Board has endorsed the particulars of the alteration or alterations on the certificate. It is further laid down in Rule 33(4) that pending examination of the altered film under this Rule, the applicant shall not exhibit the film incorporating the proposed alteration.

“You are therefore requested to com­ply with the provision of Rule 33 and submit the necessary application to this offi­ce for further necessary action. You are further advised that till the issue is finally settled, no action in regard to exhibition of film Aatish may be taken on the basis of certificate no. UA-1216 dated 5-5-1994 issued by this office.”

According to G.P. Sippy, he was shock- ed to receive the letter from the CBFC. In a hard-hitting reply to the CBFC, he has said that Shakti Samanta, who was the president of IMPPA, was misusing his position as the CBFC chairman and had issued him a letter to appease the mem­bers of IMPPA.

He denied that rule 33, as mentioned in the CBFC’s letter, applied to Aatish. He also mentioned in his reply that he had already submitted on 17th May the addi­tions to the CBFC, and the same had even been viewed by two members of the exa­mining committee and the assistant re­gional officer, but the endorsement on the censor certificate was pending. A hurt G.P. Sippy told Information, “The FMC has stabbed me in the back when I was standing by the FMC. The letter of the CBFC, written at the behest of the FMC, is totally wrong and illegal.” Sippy’s remark re­garding standing by the FMC was an obvious reference to an undertaking given by him to the FMC on 18th May that he would not release Aatish on 27th since the dispute between the FMC and the FDC was not settled. Vijay Sippy told In­ formation, “We’ve made a movie, we’ve got it certified. Is that a crime? Why are we being penalised.?”

CBFC chairman Shakti Samanta, however, did not think that the CBFC letter had cancelled the censor certificate. “It is only the official language used,” he said matter-of-factly, adding, “If Sippy has already submitted the additions and they have been viewed by the CBFC, the cen­sor certificate cannot be withdrawn. It’s a small thing.” Shakti-da said, he did not draft the letter to Sippy Films, as rumour­ ed. “I definitely told the administrative officer to use soft language,” he explain­ed.

In the meanwhile, according to reliab­le sources, the Bengal distributor of Aatish has secured a court order directing the producers to give delivery of the prints to him for release on 27th May. The Over­ seas distributor has filed a similar case in Bombay.

But with the censor certificate being put on hold, the Sippys cannot hope to achieve much on the strength of court orders. What assumes paramount importance now is the stand of the CBFC. Only if it gives Aatish the green signal can the film be released on 27th. In Vijay Sippy’s words, “We want to release the film. But Aatish is in a strange fix. Let’s see.”

COMPOUNDING TAX INTRODUCED IN KARNATAKA

Specific Cinema Activities Accorded Industry Status

The Karnataka state government has taken a major decision which will prove beneficial to the film industry. It has accorded cinema the status of an industry, besides announcing several concessions and subsidies, including a slab system for collection of entertainment tax. The subsidies will total Rs. 25 crore.

The new slab system for entertainment tax collection is as follows: for places with population upto one lakh, 15% for 14 shows per week; it would be 20% for 21 shows in places with a population bet­ ween one lakh and three lakh; 22% for 23 shows per week in places with a population between three lakh and five lakh; 25% for 25 shows per week in places with a population between five lakh and 10 lakh. In towns with a population of over 10 lakh, the tax would be 28% for 25 shows per week.

The much needed revenue, generated by the immediate introduction of the slab system, would help in setting up a film city in the state.

Further, an exemption of entertainment tax for three years to new cinemas excluding those in Bangalore, was announced, provided they reserved 75% of their screening time for Kannada films. A 10% subsidy upto a maximum of Rs. 5 lakh would be given for construction of cine­ mas outside the city.

A cash investment subsidy of 10% with a ceiling of Rs. 5 lakh would be granted for setting up film processing, printing and developing centres, outdoor shooting units, dubbing and recording theatres and film studios. Non-speculative cinema activities such as the above would be accorded industry status. These units would be exempted from payment of stamp duty, and concessional registration charge of Re. 1 per Rs. 1,000 would be collected for loans on credit documents to be executed by them and sale deeds to be exempted for purchase of land required.

Chain Of Events

The Film Makers Combine seems to have beaten G.P. Sippy at his own game. The sequence of events:

(1) 1st May: FMC puts an embargo on all releases after 6th May.

(2) 5th May: Censor certificate is issued to Aatish.

(3) 6th May: Aatish is screened in one show at Edward, a side cinema of Bombay, without any fanfare or notable announcement.

(4) In Bombay, exhibitor U.A. Thadani prepares to move the court to get Sippy to deliver the prints to him for release at his cinemas on 27th May as per contract between him and Sippy. G.P. Sippy is fully aware of Thadani’s move even before 10 days.

(5) 18th May: The FMC is critical of Sippy’s move to release Aatish on 27th without waiting for a solution to the FMC-FDC dispute. Sippy gives an assurance that he will not release the film on 27th. FMC asks Sippy to let it (the FMC) appear in court on behalf of Sippy in the Thadani case on 20th. Sippy grants permission.

(6) 18th May: A delegation of FMC meets Ramesh Patel of Filmcenter and asks him not to deliver the prints of Aatish till the FMC-FDC dispute is resolved.

(7) 18th May: The same FMC delegation goes to the CBFC office in Bombay and questions its issuance of a censor certificate to the film even though its post-production work is still in progress at Anand recording studio (Anand’s letter obtained by FMC).

(8) 19th May: The CBFC dashes a letter to Sippy Films on a complaint by the FMC. Sippy Films is asked by the CBFC not to release the film under the censor certificate issued to it on 5th May.

(9) 20th May: Thadani moves the city civil court, Bombay. No order is passed. Case kept back for Monday, May 23.

(10) 20th May: An infuriated Sippy writes to the CBFC, alleging foul play and seeking its endorsement on the censor certificate for the additions made in the film and applied for certification on 17th May. (The additions, claims Sippy, have been seen by the regional officer and two members of the examining committee on 18th.) Sippy refutes the charges that alterations have been made in the film after the C.C. was issued on 5th May. He also obtains a letter from Anand recording studio to the effect that its earlier letter (issued to the FMC) was null and void.

(11) 20th May: The Bengal distributor of Aatish obtains a court order, directing Sippy to deliver the prints of Aatish for release on 27th.

From the above, it is clear that G.P. Sippy wanted that his film should be released on 27th May. He tried his best to meet the release date, but some­ where along the way, he seems to have bowed down to the pressure of the FMC. The FMC’s complaint to the CBFC later, seems to have hurt Sippy.

The FMC, on its part, did not want to take any chances. Not only did it obtain authority to represent Sippy in court, it also complained to the CBFC and had the censor certificate of Aatish virtually cancelled! But for this, Aatish may have been released on 27th May. The FMC, however, upheld the unity among producers.

Garma-Garam

** I was in Jaipur earlier this week and it was disheartening to see veterans in the trade in a despondent mood. Both, distributor-exhibitor O.P. Bansal and distributor Trilok Singh, were critical of the high prices de­manded by producers on the one hand, and sky-high theatre rentals, on the other. Mr. Bansal was of the view that within a couple of years, the MG royalty sys- tem would go and films would be re- leased on agency/commission basis. Trilok Singh-ji lamented, “I’ve stopped buying films… I don’t understand where the prices are going… There’s nothing like average business today. If your film doesn’t click, you are in the red.” Mr. Bansal said, he failed to understand how a star can shoot up his price by leaps and bounds just because one Raja Babu clicks.

3-E
Education-Entertainment-Enlightenment

Primary Dispute And Secondary Disputes

It is funny how the dispute between the FMC and FDC has been temporarily side-tracked and a new dispute – that bet­ ween the FMC and G.P. Sippy – has arisen. The impending release of Aatish is creating so many problems that it has be­ come a full-time job for the FMC to monitor Aatish alone. No doubt, the FMC has risen to the occasion and is doing all it can to keep unity among producers alive. But putting in so much time and effort in the Aatish case is leaving it with hardly any time to think of a solution for its primary dispute, that with the FDC. One hears that all is not well in the FDC too. Reportedly, a section of the FDC office-bearers aren’t too happy with Santosh Singh Jain’s over-enthusiasm in granting clearance to two films of the South. Interestingly, one of the films stars Sanjay Dutt. While Sanjay Dutt has not been clear­ ed for Subhash Ghai’s Trimurti, he has got the FDC’s (cour­ tesy Santosh Singh Jain) green signal for the South film. And this has not met with the approval of all in the FDC.

His Conviction, His Confidence, His Price

Vidhu Vinod Chopra has been pretty lucky in getting the price he demands from distributors for his 1942 A Love Story. After C.P. Berar, which was sold for 40, the deal for C.I. has also been clinched at a fabulous price. One can’t help admiring Vinod Chopra’s conviction in his product. Not once dur­ ing its making did the man lose confidence when no buyers came forth at the price he was quoting. He continued to make his film with the concentration few could emulate and most would envy. And today, he is getting the rewards of his confidence and perseverance. In fact, when Chopra had signed R.D. Burman to score the music in the film, it hadn’t met with much approval in trade circles because R.D. was considered to be passé. Today, if Vinod Chopra is getting the phenomenal price for his film, it is largely because of the popularity of its music. The ‘Ek ladki ko dekha to aisa laga’ song, especially, has caught the fancy of music lovers throughout the length and breadth of the country. One waits with bated breath now, to see whether the film will also catch the fancy of cinegoers in a similar fashion.

From 1977 To 1994

For Parto Ghosh, directing Teesra Kaun? for N.N. Sippy must be the most exciting thing. For, Parto used to assist Maneck Chatterjee when the latter was directing N.N. Sippy’s Ghar in 1977. Parto used to then get a salary of Rs. 200 per month. From a salaried assistant to calling the shots – for the same producer – is indeed a creditable growth.

Goodbye To Rajasthan

J.P. Dutta has a penchant for shooting his films in Rajas­ than. No single director must have exposed as much raw stock in the deserts of Rajasthan as J.P. has. Whether it was Ghulami, his first directorial venture, or Hathyar, Batwara or Kshatriya, Rajasthan has always been the backdrop in his films. But the surprise is that he will not shoot a single frame of his new film, which he is directing for producer Sunderdas Sonkiya, in Rajasthan. Seems unbelievable but it’s true!

New Chief For ‘Mukhia’

Producers Mushir Riaz had announced Mukhia over a year back. Remake of the Tamil hit Thevar Magan, it was to have been directed by J.P. Dutta. But J.P. has now been re­ placed. South film director Bharatan will call the shots. Inci­ dentally, while Anil Kapoor plays a leading role in Mukhia, a hero to play the title role is yet to be finalised.

Then And Now

This one is from music director Milind: “Till about two months back, music companies used to insist that songs have a little bit of double-meaning lyrics to “lure in the masses”. After Andaz, the same music companies tell us to keep miles away from vulgar lyrics.” How typical of the film industry!”