It is undeniable that Pakistani cinema has literally raised ashes. Empty cinemas showing films lower than standards with full houses featuring a diverse range of local films in 2015, the film industry surely grew – perhaps step as a giant, but quite important. 2016 should still be a year full of achievements, because around 30 films are likely to see daylight, each of them promising to be unique in terms of content – contemporary sockets of biopics and war sagas with ribbon comedies and political satires – the sky is the limit of this new breed of film entrances.
To put it in number, the collective figures of the country’s box office increased by 28% in 2015 compared to 2014 and, even if local films represent less than 3% of the total (according to social media reports), this figure should only increase. In fact, the first official version of this year, Ho Mann Jahaan, has already reached the list of the five best most profitable films in the history of Pakistani cinema. Although all these signs of lucrative time to come, it seems ironic, especially when the filmmakers publicly say that the films they make are only outside passion and that they do not really harvest substantial monetary advantages.
In order to help us understand the ambiguity of these statements, Hashim Raza, CEO of Cinepax Cinemas, explained that the corporate model was followed for the distribution of income. “50% of the raw income of a film are immediately taken by the exhibitor,” shared Raza. “According to the amount remaining, around seven to 10% are the distributor’s commission. And the rest is the producer ends up obtaining. Now, if he / she has managed to make the film less than this amount, obviously when it was a profitable business.” In short, Jawani Phir Nahi Ani may have made a company of around 500 million in Pakistan, but this is not the amount of profit that the producer made on his investment.
Many Lollywood’s rigid liners blame the influx of Bollywood films for low incomes, calling for a complete ban, while in fact it was Bollywood who gave Pakistani cinemas a new lease. Others blame the government for lack of support. In an interview prior to SITTEP, the writer who became director Ashir Azeem asked “a fundamental / national political framework that protects the interests of local filmmakers and cinema”. But although the government is far from recognizing the Pakistani film industry as an economic engine, unlike China, where state -controlled entities have regularly clearly have dates of foreign blockbusters to give free access to national films to the public, it does not move away from the relaxations that the State already offers. In addition to making efforts on the creation of a lucrative commercial environment, the Pakistani government has not imposed an entertainment tax for years now, apart from the negligible restraint taxes on sales and income which “are paid on a commercial transaction between two entities”, as Raza says, and which has no direct impact on rein tickets.
Although it is also logical to eliminate calendars on important release dates for local films (in order to offer them more mileage), this can only happen if enough films are produced so that cinemas continue to do well even in such exclusivity, otherwise it will collapse as it did, after the Zia diet. What does industry therefore need to ensure long -term stability and sustainability?
Number of screens
Currently, there are around 52 screens in the country that have technology to support the new form of digital cinema. Obviously, an increase in the number of screens will result in an increase in income, because the films will allow a wider audience to draw. Example: China, which has around 28,000 screens for a population of 1.3 billion, has 15 new screens at the opening of the country daily – one of the reasons why the biggest film outside of us, last year, was a Chinese animated film Monster Hunt. Last summer, the Chinese box office reached the $ 70 million mark in one day. Although it may seem too ambitious for a reference, this validates the argument on having a higher number of screens in the country.
“The number of screens at the moment is too low,” said Jami, director of the Moor acclaimed by the criticism of last year. “Once this number reaches 200, the feasibility of making films will change considerably because for the moment, a good film with a budget from seventy to seventy million only makes a profit of two million. You can earn more money than that simply by putting these 70 million in a bank. Once the number of screens increases and this profit will double, the game will change.”
Cinema owners are not unconscious of this and around 20 to 30 screens should open in 2016. However, the fact that most of these screens are among the multiplexes that have a higher ticket price. The plush seats, contemporary parameters and modern technology are all expensive installations and you have to pay a bonus to take advantage of it. But according to a recent report by the Pew Research Center, 97.6% of the Pakistani population belongs to the low -income class, which cannot afford to pay this premium. While some multiplexes like Cinepax include morning programs at a reduced price, the multiplex model, although important, is to snub a considerable part of potential film buffs. Even if some of them pay for a unique experience that the multiplex offers, unique screen cinemas are always relevant for sustainable growth.
That said, unique screen cinemas also require a constant flow of local productions because it is without regulation on hacking, Bollywood movies can easily be watched on cable television. This need to growth in the films supply leads us to our next required.
Number of studios and technical laboratories
Films like Waar, Karachi is Lahore, Na Maloom Afraad and Zinda Bhaag have all been shot in Pakistan with the most updated technology, often imported from abroad. Many of them also had to cross borders or go abroad for a sound mixture and / or publishing in the absence of technical expertise and laboratories at home. There are also moments when filmmakers may have to pay import rights to the treated product they report. All this is added to the net cost of making a film and in addition to that if you choose to shoot outside to give the film a more commercial attraction, it is a major bump on the pockets of filmmakers who make home investments.
The options are then to limit yourself to a stop budget or turn to sponsors, and in both cases, the quality of the film is compromised, as we have witnessed many and many times. Shah, although done with honest intentions, suffered in terms of resonance of the feeling of a film, while Dekh Magar Pyar was more like an advertisement.
“There are two parts in the infrastructure of a company. A part is retail, which, in this case, refers to the cinemas, and the other is a studio. We have started working on the construction of cinemas, but the other half is still nonexistent,” explains Nadeem Mandviwalla of Atrium cinemas. “Once people start to invest in studios, overall costs are starting to decrease. What would be better, go to ten different places for a product and find everything in one?”
There is no doubt that this financial integration and this investment are what Pakistani cinema needs long -term sustainability, but subjective uniqueness is also important to an equal extent. As Mandviwalla says, “four years down, an investor will only be interested in investment if the industry and its content generate the type of excitement films only among the audiences.”
Currently, the majority of Pakistani films are more or less experiences and although some filmmakers like Sarmad Khoosat and Jami have managed to bring an original vision to the screens, and subsequently succeeded in their attempt, others resorted to the precipitating copy and the copy of Bollywood homework. The latter should not be the reference index for our ambitions. Even if financial stability is obtained, it is the uniqueness of the Ourdou cinema and its ability to connect with the Pakistani diaspora in the world which will determine possible success.
