Tool to track Bolly releases

LINK

Between Kites and Raavan, which will open bigger at the box office? Will a political film like Raajneeti start better in Mumbai or in Delhi? Is Kites only wooing young audiences or also older viewers? Now Bollywood has the luxury of having access to these answers and more. The world’s largest film industry finally has a weekly tracking tool — a norm in Hollywood for decades. With the opening weekend now making or breaking a Hindi film, understanding the buzz around a forthcoming movie can come in handy.

Cinematix, the weekly tracking tool launched by the Mumbai-based media research and consulting firm Ormax Media, tracks Bollywood films around six weeks prior to their release date till the day they open.

Awareness and interest levels around a film are being gauged by interviewing moviegoers in the 15-34 age group. Currently being conducted across three cities — Mumbai, Delhi and Ahmedabad — the survey throws up many other telling data that, if available to moviemakers in advance, can help them make adjustments in their marketing and promotion campaign.

“Pre-release awareness and intention to watch are the factors affecting the opening weekend collections of a film,” Shailesh Kapoor, CEO of Ormax Media, told The Telegraph. “On the basis of the response, you may choose to take a relook at your media and creative strategies during the pre-launch phase.”

For example, the Shahid Kapur-starrer Badmaash Company, which arrived on May 7, had only a 31 per cent “intention to watch” in its release week and the not-so-great opening figures at the box office bear testimony to the accuracy of the survey.

Compare that with Kites (releasing May 21), which 71 per cent of the respondents intend to watch, according to figures collated till May 14. That figure will go up further this week and thus Cinematix predicts a historic opening for the Hrithik Roshan-Barbara Mori romance.

Like in Hollywood, producers will have to subscribe to the weekly data from the survey. They will get a detailed report every Monday with age, gender and city-wise analyses of their movies.

“I think it’s an interesting concept and can be useful for filmmakers like us,” says Kites director Anurag Basu. “But the survey has to be done in more cities to get an idea of the pan-Indian buzz of a film.”

Calcutta and Hyderabad will be added to Cinematix’s survey area in the next couple of months. “The five cities account for almost 75 per cent of the box-office collections and so the results will give a fair idea of the nationwide buzz,” says Ormax CEO Kapoor.

The only previous attempt in Bollywood to understand the pre-release mindset of audiences has been through preview screenings.

But that has been largely to re-edit the film according to exit interviews of handpicked viewers. 3 Idiots, for instance, was shown to many preview audiences in quite a few Indian cities before it actually released on December 25 last year.

Hollywood does both — hold preview screenings and track the buzz. Satrajit Das, associate manager of market research firm Nielsen Bases, says: “Our US-based parent company does these surveys regularly and they always present interesting data for Hollywood studios to work upon. It’s good that Bollywood is finally taking a leaf out of their book and approaching releases methodically.”

What’s intriguing, however, is not the broad result that the tracking tool is throwing up but the small details it is coming up with.

For example, cinegoers in Delhi are not that keen to catch Raajneeti despite the buzz about it being loosely based on Sonia Gandhi’s political career. Katrina Kaif may want to keep track of that.

42 Responses to “Tool to track Bolly releases”

  1. interesting…

    as a general rule of thumb though certain genres (SRK’s romances/family films, Hrithik with stunts and so on..) which are ‘universal’ in terms of attracting the most economically influential segments of the audience cannot generally be beaten. An OSO has to be decent to satisfy most people. CDI has to be very good. With Raavan the buzz seems special but have the aunties for example bought into it yet? They’re very influential in multiplexes. Raavan’s 35 crores might be like 45 crores for Kites (just throwing out numbers). Or some such thing. But in absolute terms there is rarely a match. Which is why Aamir’s Ghajini achievement is in some ways more remarkable than the 3I one. With the latter every single person with a pulse was on board. But Ghajini had the sort of theme that audiences in Hindi hadn’t supported for just about forever other than single screens.

    Like

  2. I’ve expected Raavan scores over Rajneethi in ‘Intention to watch’

    Like

  3. Dishant Says:

    LOOKS LIKE KITES WILL COLLECT 4-5 CR ON THURSDAY

    Like

  4. When i said Raavan has no buzz in the first 10 days of the promos released people went after me and labled me as Anti abhisehk…Doesnt this survey vindicate my point??

    But yes i can tell that at this point of time Raavan has garnered decent to good buzz…

    Like

    • i think raavan’s buzz really picked up quite a fair bit after the theatrical trailer came out with housefull…dats when ppl were taken aback by d sheer power nd quality of this film’s trailer!!
      nd ofcourse now dat each nd every song is getting over 1 lakh views on youtube just in a couple of days..u can tell dat ppl are aware nd are interested a lot in this movie!!!!

      Like

      • mksrooney Says:

        absolutely agreed mansi…

        i remember i saw the trailer for the first time with house ful.. and audience reaction was unbelievable.. everyone went silent… and then started the curiosity …

        Like

    • this is hardly the be all and end all when it comes to gauging buzz! C’mon! Also it’s clear that the number keeps going up as one gets closer to the release date and of course depending on vol of advertising. But it’s one ‘interesting’ and evolving metric (which equates incidentally ‘buzz’ with ‘intention to watch’ as in fact many media pieces do as well, completely inaccurately, not knowing the distinctions between hype and buzz). Hardly the definitive industry standard! So this piece does not save you in any sense!

      Like

  5. Amit kumar pandey Says:

    hmm.. let the time come…
    raavan will release after mif june so why so much og hubala..

    raavan with its good story n songs will automatically attract movie goers n i m damn sure that in multiplexes where movies changes every week raavan will stand out n will go for multiple weeks n everyone will be profitting from it..

    Like

  6. ideaunique Says:

    but one thing is clear – Hritik is MUCH MUCH bigger a star in terms of BO at the moment than Abhi……..

    Like

    • in his strength genres yes.. he was pretty mortal in JA.. and this was a film that otherwise trended well.. but in his strength genres Hrithik (I’ve been saying this for some years) might be the biggest box office star Aamir excluded. In other words if everyone did their strength genres and assuming comparable quality for the films Hrithik might come out on top. BUT this is very different from reproducing that success in a JA sort of film. And that’s the entire point. One can be Will smith and have hits in one’s genre but that’s never the whole story in an industry that values these ‘different’ ‘prestige’ films. Hence Aamir’s supremacy. Take something like BnB or the average openings of Abhishek films that year including Dus and SR. These were all in the high range for that period. And it’s not a multistarrer thing because look at Bachchan’s average initials that very year without him even in successful films. Multistarrers add to the interest but there has to be an anchor in these films. Abhishek then walked away from this paradigm. Rightly or wrongly is another debate. We then saw a JBJ get 20 crores in week 1 even after getting mauled. But Abhishek did not have films (before the current lineup) that would do well with any other star exactly as they are. In the current lineup with an Abbas-Mustaan for example we know how films like race have done. Does all of this mean that Abhishek is comparable to Hrithik in box office terms in a verifiable sense? of course not. But whoever doesn’t look at the rest of the story can’t explain Abhishek’s projects either!

      The final point I’d make here is that Kites being good or bad matters once people have seen the film in the initial round. Because this genre attracts an audience, especially with hrithik (though Race pulled off a D2 like initial without him.. the same range at the very least). So irrespective of reviews people show up. Much as they’ve showed up for most of Akshay’s comedies despite poor ones recently. It is after Mon or so that the film starts dipping. the initial isn’t dependent on the reviews in dominant commercial genres.

      At the same time doesn’t the constant assertion (hrithik is bigger than Abhishek) indicate a certain anxiety or at least lack of certainty? Why does it have to be asserted time and time again by fans of different stars? Even when no one is making the claim (and for the record I’ve never made anything other than the present claim in box office terms.. or otherwise)? In other words why does a ‘negative’ (Abhishek is ‘not’.. this, that, and so on) constantly have to be reinforced? What is it about Abhishek that so disturbs the current Bollywood setup? My answers are known to all! In a more theoretical sense I would suggest that he is a ‘symptom’ of a much larger ideological struggle that operates at the level of popular culture and in this case films. Which is why note that when people dislike or hate him they always do so in certain specific ways. It is never the kind of dislike where one simply ‘passes on’.

      Like

      • there is incidentally nothing wrong in sticking to strength genres if one is a certain kind of star. But it becomes increasingly difficult in an age where the ‘prestige’ product is valued. Hrithik himself has had to account for this from time to time. Now we see with his future lineup some more risky projects than usual. These films not only affect the initial, they also make a final gross that much lower. Of course it isn’t only about prestige. Hrithik could technically do three films like Kites every year but he’d soon find himself in Akshay terrain. The audience would get bored (more quickly in the current age) and it would be harder for him in any case to keep topping the stunts and dances of the previous film. Akshay’s films are now much more over the top or crazier than when he had all those hits. He’s forced to. On the very same terrain you have to keep raising the bar. This is also why Hrithik couldn’t just do another Dhoom. He had to make it ‘international’ with Kites and so forth and present the appearance of a different sort of film within the strength genre.

        Like

        • ideaunique Says:

          u luv abhi my friend….keep it up….abhi needs such fans….but mark my words….five years down the line abhi will still be doing many films BUT ….BUT…..HE WILL NEVER BE CONSIDERED IN TOP 5 ACTORS….EITHER FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF BO OR ACTING SKILLS……i like him too but this is the sad reality and will be so….u may want to note down today’s date with what i said 😦

          Like

        • the bet is on..!

          Like

  7. The more people try to downplay him or his star status. he seems happy with what he has!!!!

    @junirbachchan
    life isn’t about waiting for the storm to pass, it’s about learning to dance in the rain

    Like

    • ideaunique Says:

      “he seems happy with what he has!!!!”

      hello! he has the very beautiful aish….:-) who wudn’t be happy with that? 🙂

      he is a shashi kapoor deal as far as acting is concerned – he will be around for a long time to come – one ravana here and one guru there….in between, he will sparkle but will be sidelined by hritiks and johns and ranbirs and neils and imranns and shahids…..i don’t care much abt. his acting career. he is a good human being and i like him more for that….and he is damn lucky in terms of having parents and a fairy as a wife! no doubts abt. that….

      Like

      • First time I’m hearing that he’s getting sidelined by neil and john etc. I mean Hrithik is one thing, but I don’t even know what zip code john abraham is in. His high point IMO was taxi No. 9211 — and that was 4+ years ago…

        Like

      • Hilarious comment. This would be news to John and Neil.

        Like

      • interestingly there is this other symptom as well.. there is a fair number of people who praise him as a ‘human being’ in the exact proportion that they call him a non-star and so on. I have never seen a star where those who disliked him or found him unacceptable in other ways were so eager to provide a character certificate at the same time! what might this mean?! Does one assuage one’s ‘guilt’ this way?!

        Like

        • ideaunique Says:

          ha ha ha…..satyam can’t stand anything against abhi…..i am enjoying as i am right on the target 🙂

          Like

        • You know Idea, every single thing that you’ve said today was also said about Aamir Khan at one point. More or less. Even after Lagaan, even with all his hits, people didn’t accept the obvious till he got these two massive hits (20 years into his career!) and even then some partisans promptly said ‘this only means Aamir is one of two (SRK) or three (SRK, Hrithik) and that they could also get the same totals’. And of course before Lagaan the media (and those on blogs) used to laugh about relatively low openers (sarfarosh) that remained stable because of WOM, hence arguing against his stardom vis-a-vis SRK. Nothing is new under the sun! The partisans change. You’re not a target here. But you too are succumbing to a fairly ‘common’ narrative on Abhishek (whatever your reasons are). And within this narrative when people like myself argue with you the game is usually to turn the tables and suggest ‘oh you love him so much’, ‘oh you’re offended with what I said’ etc! Once you said that Aamir had achieved what Bachchan had not. let’s be serious!

          Like

        • ideaunique Says:

          but what’s wrong with my liking abhi as a human being more than him with an actor? u seem to think that i m trying to be politically correct here? ha! i have never tried to do that…..i have similar opinion abt. srk – don’t like him much as an actor but as a human being – luv him – he has come up really hard way – if anyone has a problem with that – let it be….

          Like

        • there’s nothing wrong with it Idea.. I am just unsure why this structure keeps cropping up — ‘I will not go to the theater to watch his movies but I’d love to have milk and cookies with this ‘nice man’ one day, even make end of life decisions in his presence’! It’s as if I said ‘I cannot stand Dravid’s batting but I am willing to socialize with him’!

          There is nothing wrong either way. There is no relevance of one to the other. To return to cricket once again ‘Yuvvraj cannot handle spin but he loves his mother and I respect him for this’!

          But if his being a ‘good person’ truly matters so much why doesn’t another kind of ‘logic’ develop? For example ‘I don’t think Abhishek can act, I don’t like how he looks, but he is such a nice person I wish he’s the top star’! Or ‘Hrithik is much much bigger as a star compared to Abhishek but Abhishek is much much nicer and hence I hope he becomes the much much bigger star by next weekend’!

          Like

        • ideaunique Says:

          “But if his being a ‘good person’ truly matters so much why doesn’t another kind of ‘logic’ develop? For example ‘I don’t think Abhishek can act, I don’t like how he looks, but he is such a nice person I wish he’s the top star’!”

          but that is what I mean when I say i like as a human but not as an actor at present. And my favorite abhi films are refugee and shararat – both were BO duds – so if I were purely judging him on BO – that wudn’t be the case – and because i like him – i wudn’t mind saying harsh things abt. him unlike any fanatic fan – he is already 37/38 i think and has lost precious 15 years of his career while making not very good choices – and unless raavan does for him what zanjeer did for BIG B – he is just going to stay afloat and competition is far more stronger now with his contemporaries and juniors – so….i stand by my thoughts….

          Like

        • actually he’s 34.

          15 years? Didn’t know he debuted the year DDLJ released.

          Like

        • ideaunique Says:

          ok 10 yrs – i remember watching refugee in 2000…

          Like

  8. ideaunique might have forgot names like Arshad Wasi, Irfan Khan etc.

    Like

  9. Am I the only one totally baffled by the kind of acting praise Hrithik has come in for throughout his career? I’ve always considered him a near non-actor, which is not to say he’s not a star which he obviously is. But there’s this compulsion to turn him into De Niro which I simply don’t understand.

    Like

    • I don’t think he is a non-actor, but he is a superficial actor — he is perfectly competent; i.e. services the script, as opposed to bringing it to life or adding an unexpected dimension. I liked him in Jodha-Akbar, but for the most part the early Hrithik films featured better performances than the recent ones (Luck By Chance is an exception — the part was superbly written). The other problem is that — perhaps because of all the praise and adulation that he got from day 1 — he shows no signs of improvement. i.e. he is not a better anything today than he was when Kaho Na Pyar Hai released (I had predicted at the time that he didn’t strike me as the sort of actor who whould grow): he’s preserved a kind of breezy smoothness, which grates more on me now because the films/parts have become more plastic and manufactured. I still think Rakesh Roshan is the shrewdest “reader” of his son’s persona among Bollywood filmmakers. Brett Ratner is, as always, an exception.

      Like

      • I don’t think he’s a non-actor either and I’d agree with your characterization of him here. But it’s a slap in the face to good actors in Hindi cinema when movie stars like him who are perfectly competent are then put up on a pedestal that doesn’t have much to do with the qualities one associates with movie stardom. It’s an old grouse I have in any case – the film media doesn’t communicate effectively so the same sort of language used to describe an Irfan or Arshad performance (to riff on ted’s joke above) is more or less placed in service of praising the average Hrihtik performance. Nonsensical.

        Like

    • This points to an elementary failure in India’s ‘film culture’ (though of course there isn’t one in the true sense!) which includes the audience. There is the inability to separate different kinds of cinema and therefore different kinds of performance. John Wayne was always very effective in his world but no one thought he was Olivier! In the former’s world however Olivier would get swallowed up by Wayne (even the thought sounds so absurd.. Olivier in a Western!). Because of this inability to keep genres apart or an equal one to keep box office results distinct when the films are otherwise not comparable in any sense the Kites review is the result.

      If you took out all contexts Hrithik in Kites, abhishek in Yuva, Aamir in RDB, Saif in Omkara, SRK in OSO.. etc etc etc are all praised in the same ways using the very same language. The Guru or Black kind of moment stands out only because the language becomes more ‘excessive’ in terms of degree. But it is still the very same language.

      Similarly partisans of one star or another do not simply say ‘I love Hrithik/SRK/Akshay [or whoever] and I want every film of this star to be a hit irrespective of the merits’. This would be easy to understand. But what happens is that people try to convert this partiality into objective language. It is as if Will Smith is being ‘defended’ as an actor in the very same language that DiCaprio is! Or some of the former’s films were being praised the way the latter’s Scorsese films would be (though in truth there is still more ‘thought’ in something like I, Robot or I am Legend than any equivalent blockbuster Hrithik has done). or if you said that De Niro had a fine performance in Raging Bull the response would be: yeah but Stallone had a bigger hit in Rambo and he is a ‘much much’ bigger star!

      Now having said all of this I should be fair. The ‘Hollywood’ paradigm holds sway in Bollywood which is why Abhishek cannot simply be ‘accounted’ for using Hrithik’s Krrish-like box office standards. Which is precisely what creates the problem on the blogosphere or in certain media outlets. It is like the obsessive parlor game of who’s the top star or who’s in the top bracket. How could this game be played every single day if the answer were that obvious?!

      Like

      • “The Guru or Black kind of moment stands out only because the language becomes more ‘excessive’ in terms of degree. But it is still the very same language.”

        Exactly. It’s always a matter of degree, not a shift in the level of insight or a change in perspective.

        Like

  10. I’d also agree that Hrithik probably coasted and “hardened” in some ways as an actor precisely because of this kind of misleading praise. Because not only does it gas up an ego, but if you look at Hrithik’s attitude-driven interviews these days he’s shifted into something of an American/Western cliche for”serious” actors. It’s as if somewhere along the way he stumbled into a Charlie Rose interview with Sean Penn, and since in India Hrithik is regularly touted about with the same adjectives Penn and the like get in the American press (!) he perhaps considered blending (with immensely awkward results) this kind of crabby/condescending offscreen persona with his own history and within his own context.

    Like

  11. ideaunique Says:

    LOL 🙂 it seems that i’ve triggered an interesting discussion here 🙂 much like a sell-off world stock markets are witnessing…….DOW is having a free fall……

    Like

  12. This exchange of comments actually reminds me of Zafar Khan, the character Hrithik played in Luck By Chance. 🙂

    Like

  13. myselfaamir Says:

    Spectacular set of thoughts and i am really enriched by the quality of these thoughts. but one thing i am still not convinced that Abhi’s comparison with Aamir is something i don’t think is the right analogy, one because Aamir made a blunder in the beginning of his career by signing dozens of terrible films, but after that phase he learnt his lesson and did what is now a trend of signing one film at a time strategy, but Abhishek even today after so many years of experience hasn’t learnt the lesson it seems, with the decisions he used to take signing up of new films, some turn out to be horrible decisions. So i think he has still a lot of distance to cover with regard to comparison with Aamir.

    Like

    • In fairness to Aamir he didn’t have the kinds of opportunities in the 90s that Abhishek has today. But there’s a common thread to both though. No matter who you are and even if you utlimately become as wise as Aamir clearly has been for more than a decade you still have to acquire this wisdom or learn certain things. Aamir once said in an interview that he signed many films after QSQT because these sounded good on paper but looked terrible in the execution. He added that more than the script the director counted. But even after he learnt his lesson he essentially reduced his volume and though he was one of the top stars of the 90s (something which often gets underrated) there was still a sense of his trying to find his way against the Yashraj onslaught. The 90s was precisely the time when Aamir did not really have a narrative and he paid the price for it, most obviously with lower initials in many instances than would otherwise have been the case. Because he didn’t have the sorts of high profile projects with frills that get the biggest initials.

      Abhishek too as soon as he became successful in ’04 and especially ’05 almost instantly started walking away from those obvious strength genres. In instances he had bad luck but again he was trying to do satisfactory films as an actor and this involved risky stuff. Again it takes a while to learn that the risky must either be balanced by the commercially friendly or at least within the ‘risky’ one has to hedge one’s bets a bit (i.e. different films outwardly but otherwise more conformist or at least strong in the script sense). Again I think he’s finally arrived at a lineup that does everything. Remains to be seen how this does but hard to believe he doesn’t get significant success here.

      So these things have to be learnt. There’s no short cut. Unless one is the other kind of star who simply wants the box office at any cost. The ambition of Aamir in the 90s was as surely not appreciated as Abhishek’s is today. It is precisely the most ambitious kind of star-actor who’s always looking toward history and tries to do films that have more than a reasonable chance of standing the test of time.

      So there are distinctions for sure but there are clear analogies as well. Remember it took Aamir 13 years to get to his real breakout moment with Lagaan (i.e. a game changing one). abhishek is in his tenth though it’s really 6 years because he didn’t get success right away. Since then he actually has a number of significant films (which is to say films with shelf life and/or films where the impact transcends the pure gross) and he certainly has taken enormous strides in terms of acting prestige. But on the blogosphere a lot of the debates tend to obscure this. Yes he could have been in a better position today but even if he were he wouldn’t be doing better films than he is currently. He’s definitely made mistakes and yes not everyone becomes Aamir in terms of acquiring that kind of wisdom. We’ll see how he does going forward but I don’t think he’ll eliminate the risky completely.

      And again Aamir had to make those blunders to learn the right lessons. Much as he had to spend some years doing all kinds of stuff without a clear cut narrative to profit from it this past decade. The seeds of a career have to be sown earlier. Hrithik decided he more or less wanted to be the KNPH guy and he’s maintained his box office standing despite the absences et al. SRK also decided after DDLJ that he loved blockbusters too much to ever give the genre up. But these decisions have consequences too. These stars lost standing as actors compared to the competition and he genre thing is great while it last but when it gets stale and there’s a dead end it’s that much harder for the star to reinvent himself. We see what’s happening with SRK.

      Like

  14. Totally unrelated: got in a email fwd. 🙂
    kumar gaurav never grew past childhood, his opposite –> AK Hangal 🙂 who never saw childhood

    Like

  15. alex adams Says:

    “First time I’m hearing that he’s getting sidelined by neil and john etc. I mean Hrithik is one thing, but I don’t even know what zip code john abraham is in. His high point IMO was taxi No. 9211 — and that was 4+ years ago…” agree qalandar.
    how can hritik be clubbed with neil, john…haaha
    Now the only thing remaining is to bring in megastars fardeen, zayed, tusshar into the mix to skew the discussion. These “biggies” should be kept out of sane comparisons..

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.