My analogy of porn was merely to drive home the point that such "conferences" are meaningless, i am not sure what the objective of the "meeting" was and this other article doesn’t help either -

http://specials.rediff.com/movies/2005/nov/09sd1.htm
( the reporter thinks its a joke as well - just read some of his wise-cracks in his report !)

So going by the title which is Development and Impact of Indian Film one can only think that they will be talking about “current” and “future” development in Indian cinema which frankly speaking is a BIG ZERO at least as for as "style" goes and well as for "content", 99 % of bollywood had remained the same for over 100 years now ( and yes i have seen India’s first feature film Raja Harishchandra ). That’s the reason why i am really pissed when folks come-in and comments on how much "reach" India has and how “easy” it is to read Indian films blah blah ...., this kind of talk will take us nowhere.

In a broad-sense neither porn nor bollywood has changed over 100 years ( porn films existed even during early silent era , reportedly they were shown in brothels ) and neither can it afford to change ( given the high return vs. investment ratio in both case) - hence "development " is a farce for most parts.

As for them shown on streets - well other than sub-continent list me any other country that shows them in their streets ?? . As a test-case , in most ( if not all) cities in the US bollywood films are shown is "designated" theaters only. In Denver its the Buckingham hall and every week you are guaranteed a new "Indian" film and couple of blocks away on Broadway you have a "dedicated" theater that shows porn ( i think pretty much 24 hours a day ) and again you are guaranteed a new release every week ! - well at macroscopic level i don’t see any difference between these two "dedicated" theaters !. Simply put both bollywood and porn will remain on the fringe of “ accepted global cinema” – that is unless either one of them evolve(s) - cant seem to reason how porn can do it , but bollywood has a chance at least and to a certain extent I have to give credit to RGV camp and the likes of ghosh, kashyap among others – I just wish it happened fast enough !

That part of the analogy is fine. But you keep going back to it. I interpreted it as trying to link them together and thereby insinuate by association. I hope you agree that they several levels removed in terms of respectability

My intention in posting the article was to understand the reason for its reach. I agree that its not neccessarily creativity. But it is clear that there is something basic in indian films that appeals to a large audience - especially in asia and the so called third world. It is probably escapism rather than anything else. I also was wondering if bollywood should cater to this niche audience


They are apparently quite popular in the middle eastern countries (from hearsay)

Yeah that conference did look like a complete waste of time

The DVD reviewer at DVDTALK had this to say

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=18800

"Fans of Bollywood films have plenty of choices when it comes to new movies to watch, as the Indian musical movie genre pumps out films with the frequency of the porno industry."

seems funny..., i was mentioning the same thing couple of weeks back !

I think they take into calculation ALL of the different languages in India when they say "Bollywood". Thus, "Bollywood" has the greatest quantity of films released per yer.

There are so many American films released every week. Most of them don't get recognised - Indie Flicks, porn. Same is the case in Hindi or any other regional language. Only about 2 or so films are recognised each week. There are other releases, B & C grade quality films, but I'm sure they aren't the only factor in this "Bollywood" makes the most films per yer myth??? someone please clarify.

In the link you gave it says :

"with India's biggest impact so far being minor crossover successes like Bend it Like Beckham, a film that isn't even part of the genre."

I can't stand this! Why do people even think BILB is from India? It's certainly not bollywood but is not even an Indian film! It's British. There's only one bollywood actor in it and the rest of the cast is British. I don't think India should get the credit for this.

I remember on B4u when one Indian entertainment show someone was interviewing George Lucas and asked him what bollywood films he saw that he liked, he replied "Bend it like Beckham". When pressed further to talk about bollwood he replied "err...I'm more into Satyajit Ray films".

India does have films that can be appreciated worldwide that are not part of "Bollywood". Monsoon Wedding did well across the world and doesn't fall into the bollwood category, although some people still mistake it for one. Films like 'Hari Om' are shown with success at film festivals but may never be picked up upon and may be forgotten over time. They are not promoted by India and the film industry prefers to send films like 'Andaaz' and 'Paheli' for Oscar nomination. Don't expect "Bollywood" to grow up soon, 'Black' was made to just win awards.

Good point. Its not that there are NO good Indian films, its just that they tend to market the most commercial films abroad, specifically the most commercial Hindi films.

Yeah, the term "Bollywood" fits perfectly. That's because they are only thinking about NRI families seeing their films abroad. Bollywood is more successful amongst NRI families than non-bollywood/arthouse cinema. The money is really made through Bollywood.