Late December 2024. An actor arrives in a swanky car. A new one. Yet, another acquisition. The going is good. The journey of pleasure seems endless. He continually engages with that part of his self which craves pleasures that satiate the whims of the body and mind. But the part of his self which could have given him the lasting feeling of purpose, meaning and joy remains unattended and parched.
He bumps into the producer of his latest flop film at another producer’s office. Nonchalantly, he smiles at the producer. The producer smiles a smile which suppresses his fury whose passion and intensity were the only ingredients required to make the failed film work. The actor enters his luxurious car and leaves. In that mind-numbing luxurious comfort of his car, there is no space for guilt of the failure of his latest film. The guilt has not even touched his mind’s surface. As his car passes, the producer tells his secretary, ‘The money these actors are making from films even when their films are failing. Yet, they are not reducing their fees. Don’t they wish to experience the joy of creating a film by becoming collaborators?’ After some time, the producer notes, ‘And the irony is the money these actors are making from films is not even coming back into the industry. It is being invested in real estate, start-ups, established companies and other materialistic acquisitions.’
This anecdote has become almost a repeat occurrence in the Hindi film industry in the past three and a half years. It contains seeds of all critical elements which explain the large problem of the Hindi film industry: Why Are Producers Unable To Make a Good Hindi Film?
Intention, Joy and Non-film income
Though there are several critical challenges, a fundamental challenge in making a good film is the mindset of actors. There is a high degree of nonchalance and complacency in the way actors today approach filmmaking. Among various factors, the genesis of this approach is the high non-film income of actors. Today, in a year, non-film income of actors, which includes endorsement deals, inauguration ceremonies and paid posts and marketing or promotional messaging on social media platforms fetch A-list and mid-level actors enough money to reduce their disproportionate dependence on films for money. According to various sources in the industry, it is estimated that A-list actors make Rs 25-175 crore in a year as their non-film income. Mid-level actors, these sources said, make Rs 10-50 crore in a year through non-film sources.
Unfortunately, the actors of preceding generations could never make such a huge amount of money in a year. For them, films were their only prime source of income. Guided and governed by their passion, hunger and intense desire to do good work, these actors worked as creative collaborators by adopting a highly flexible approach towards their producers. Some worked for a tiny sum. Some did not charge money and agreed to take share of profits of films or bought a particular film territory or territories. In this way, they showed their desire to be part of the creative joy which comes with making a good film.
But in recent years, going by the Hindi films released in theatres, a question which emerges in the minds of film buffs and critics is: Do today’s actors even intend to experience the creative joy which comes from making a good film? There are actors who are behaving like smart private equity investors who make good money and exit a firm before it gets listed on stock exchanges. These well-known and well-accepted actors lack the intention to be part of the adventure of cinema but have the drive of an astute and cold investor. This has butchered the very spirit of making a good film.
Broadly speaking, there are two main challenges in making a good film. One is: Creative Challenge. And the other is the eternal and since time immemorial: Funding Challenge. To a considerable extent, when these two challenges are seen from the standpoint of costs, creative challenges seem to be relatively more surmountable than funding challenges. The costs involved in identifying a good script have always been much lower than remuneration of actors. Generally, actors’ remuneration forms 50-55% of the total cost of making a film. This shows that creative challenges can be dealt with.
But funding challenges remain as actors have not shown clear inclination to reduce their fees for films given their low dependence on films for income. The reluctance and inflexibility to reduce fees is observed more in mid-level actors than A-list actors. A-list actors either produce their own films or opt for share in profits of films post their releases. This saves a huge amount of money for producers which they can easily invest in films. But A-list actors do fewer films than mid-level actors in a year. This means that the onus is more on mid-level actors to reduce their films. Given their relatively high non-film income, mid-level actors can easily act boldly and back films which have good scripts and take their remuneration from the profits of films post their release. But this is not happening on a large scale. Industry observers point out that talent management agencies which represent actors and derive their income from the pay structure of actors sell convincing stories to them about increasing their fees or remaining fixed about them. Consequently, the industry is staring at a precarious situation in which a section of mid-level actors is not reducing fees due to their low dependence on films for income.
Then, there is an additional burden of marketing a film which costs producers Rs 10-15 crore. Given these factors, producers have become more vulnerable in the whole ecosystem today than ever. They are finding it difficult to arrange funds and start production of films.
The Shahrukh Khan Way or Skin in the Game
Increasingly, industry observers believe that if actors are interested in making good films then they must act as collaborators or investors who are more committed to the fate of a film than just to the remuneration it can fetch them. There are veteran producers who opine that actors’ fees must be linked to the box office openings of their last released films. For instance, if an actor’s last film released in theatres opened at Rs 25 crore at the box office, then the actor can charge Rs 25 crore as his remuneration for the next film. This approach can result in high and solid commitment from actors to films.
Another way to deal with the present situation is following what superstar actor Shahrukh Khan has been doing for years. Khan once said that he follows a flexible approach when it comes to his fees for films and derives high income from non-film sources. This is because films provide stardom to actors which they cash in on through non-film commercial engagements. This is how it works. A key factor to note here is: falling stardom of actors also reduces their income from non-film sources as actors remain in demand outside films based on how well their films do at the box office. So, actors must have skin in the game to ensure smooth making of films.
Today, making a good film is not about following what worked previously. Almost all stakeholders—writers, actors, producers, editors, set designers and other key departments—must up their game. This is because the idea of entertainment has changed from basic to specific. Reels, YouTube, streamers, live events and sports have upped the idea or notion of entertainment for the public. Recent performances of films show that viewers will not tolerate or forgive halfway decent films in theatres. So, makers of films must bear in mind that the grammar which has worked till date must be treated as a starting point to create their ‘best’ films and not merely ‘good’ films.
He bumps into the producer of his latest flop film at another producer’s office. Nonchalantly, he smiles at the producer. The producer smiles a smile which suppresses his fury whose passion and intensity were the only ingredients required to make the failed film work. The actor enters his luxurious car and leaves. In that mind-numbing luxurious comfort of his car, there is no space for guilt of the failure of his latest film. The guilt has not even touched his mind’s surface. As his car passes, the producer tells his secretary, ‘The money these actors are making from films even when their films are failing. Yet, they are not reducing their fees. Don’t they wish to experience the joy of creating a film by becoming collaborators?’ After some time, the producer notes, ‘And the irony is the money these actors are making from films is not even coming back into the industry. It is being invested in real estate, start-ups, established companies and other materialistic acquisitions.’
This anecdote has become almost a repeat occurrence in the Hindi film industry in the past three and a half years. It contains seeds of all critical elements which explain the large problem of the Hindi film industry: Why Are Producers Unable To Make a Good Hindi Film?
Intention, Joy and Non-film income
Though there are several critical challenges, a fundamental challenge in making a good film is the mindset of actors. There is a high degree of nonchalance and complacency in the way actors today approach filmmaking. Among various factors, the genesis of this approach is the high non-film income of actors. Today, in a year, non-film income of actors, which includes endorsement deals, inauguration ceremonies and paid posts and marketing or promotional messaging on social media platforms fetch A-list and mid-level actors enough money to reduce their disproportionate dependence on films for money. According to various sources in the industry, it is estimated that A-list actors make Rs 25-175 crore in a year as their non-film income. Mid-level actors, these sources said, make Rs 10-50 crore in a year through non-film sources.
Unfortunately, the actors of preceding generations could never make such a huge amount of money in a year. For them, films were their only prime source of income. Guided and governed by their passion, hunger and intense desire to do good work, these actors worked as creative collaborators by adopting a highly flexible approach towards their producers. Some worked for a tiny sum. Some did not charge money and agreed to take share of profits of films or bought a particular film territory or territories. In this way, they showed their desire to be part of the creative joy which comes with making a good film.
But in recent years, going by the Hindi films released in theatres, a question which emerges in the minds of film buffs and critics is: Do today’s actors even intend to experience the creative joy which comes from making a good film? There are actors who are behaving like smart private equity investors who make good money and exit a firm before it gets listed on stock exchanges. These well-known and well-accepted actors lack the intention to be part of the adventure of cinema but have the drive of an astute and cold investor. This has butchered the very spirit of making a good film.
Broadly speaking, there are two main challenges in making a good film. One is: Creative Challenge. And the other is the eternal and since time immemorial: Funding Challenge. To a considerable extent, when these two challenges are seen from the standpoint of costs, creative challenges seem to be relatively more surmountable than funding challenges. The costs involved in identifying a good script have always been much lower than remuneration of actors. Generally, actors’ remuneration forms 50-55% of the total cost of making a film. This shows that creative challenges can be dealt with.
But funding challenges remain as actors have not shown clear inclination to reduce their fees for films given their low dependence on films for income. The reluctance and inflexibility to reduce fees is observed more in mid-level actors than A-list actors. A-list actors either produce their own films or opt for share in profits of films post their releases. This saves a huge amount of money for producers which they can easily invest in films. But A-list actors do fewer films than mid-level actors in a year. This means that the onus is more on mid-level actors to reduce their films. Given their relatively high non-film income, mid-level actors can easily act boldly and back films which have good scripts and take their remuneration from the profits of films post their release. But this is not happening on a large scale. Industry observers point out that talent management agencies which represent actors and derive their income from the pay structure of actors sell convincing stories to them about increasing their fees or remaining fixed about them. Consequently, the industry is staring at a precarious situation in which a section of mid-level actors is not reducing fees due to their low dependence on films for income.
Then, there is an additional burden of marketing a film which costs producers Rs 10-15 crore. Given these factors, producers have become more vulnerable in the whole ecosystem today than ever. They are finding it difficult to arrange funds and start production of films.
The Shahrukh Khan Way or Skin in the Game
Increasingly, industry observers believe that if actors are interested in making good films then they must act as collaborators or investors who are more committed to the fate of a film than just to the remuneration it can fetch them. There are veteran producers who opine that actors’ fees must be linked to the box office openings of their last released films. For instance, if an actor’s last film released in theatres opened at Rs 25 crore at the box office, then the actor can charge Rs 25 crore as his remuneration for the next film. This approach can result in high and solid commitment from actors to films.
Another way to deal with the present situation is following what superstar actor Shahrukh Khan has been doing for years. Khan once said that he follows a flexible approach when it comes to his fees for films and derives high income from non-film sources. This is because films provide stardom to actors which they cash in on through non-film commercial engagements. This is how it works. A key factor to note here is: falling stardom of actors also reduces their income from non-film sources as actors remain in demand outside films based on how well their films do at the box office. So, actors must have skin in the game to ensure smooth making of films.
Today, making a good film is not about following what worked previously. Almost all stakeholders—writers, actors, producers, editors, set designers and other key departments—must up their game. This is because the idea of entertainment has changed from basic to specific. Reels, YouTube, streamers, live events and sports have upped the idea or notion of entertainment for the public. Recent performances of films show that viewers will not tolerate or forgive halfway decent films in theatres. So, makers of films must bear in mind that the grammar which has worked till date must be treated as a starting point to create their ‘best’ films and not merely ‘good’ films.
You may also like
High blood pressure cases are rising – three ways to prevent hypertension at home
Boden shoppers 'feel amazing' in 'really flattering' summer dress that's on sale
JDU, BJP slam Lalu Yadav over Tej Pratap's expulsion, raise questions on Aishwarya Rai episode
Virgil van Dijk's true thoughts on Trent Alexander-Arnold as training footage emerges
UP Dalit farmer couple attacked over cattle grazing row
