FilmIndia (1948)

SUBSCRIPTION RATES The annual subscription, for 12 issues of "filmindia", from any month Is : INLAND Rs. 24/FOREIGN: Shillings 50/ Subscriptlon Is accepted only for a collective period ol 12 months and not for a smaller period. Subscription money should be remitted only by Money Order or by Postal Order but not by cheques. V. P. P.s will not be sent. filmindia PROPRIETORS FILMINDIA PUBLICATIONS LTD. SS, SIR RHIROZESHAH MEHTA ROAD, FORT, BOMBAY. Telephone ! 26752 Editor: BABURAO PATE L Vol. XIV. SEPTEMBER 1948 No. 9. ADVERTISEMENT RATES: The advertisement rates are as follows : Per Insertion Full Page Inside Rs. Half Page Inside Rs. i Page inside Rs. * Page inside Rs. 2nd & 3rd Cover Rs. 4th Cover Rs. 400 210 120 150 500 600 1st Cover Rs. 1,000 The cost of the advertisement should be submitted in advance with the order. The advertisement will be subject to the terms and conditions of our usual contract. A/eur Celluloid /Sitla5 and &almta5 I Whenever there is a shortage of raw films in the Intry, we find Chandulal Shah of Ran jit at the head of ■ raw stock distributing committee which is always Ined, in what seems like a collusion with the Kodak jple who are the largest importers of raw films in this Intry. I No sooner there is a sufficiency of supply,Indulal Shah disappears from the [MPPA delibcraIsand is usually found on the race course. I Strange though it seems this phenomenon repeats If at regular intervals of raw stock scarcity and one Jders whether Chandulal's interest in The Indian film listry begins and ends with the raw stock position in Jcountry. Is he afraid of losing his share of the spoils le is not on the committee that decides to allocate the I film supplies to the different producers from day to I There is no denying the unfortunate fact that there jL. acute shortage of raw stock in spite of the GovernMt's permission to import a liberal supply. No one Iws exactlv whether this shortage is artificial or due to Ses bevond the control of the manufacturers and ■orters of the raw films. lOne fact, however, stands out significantly that lnever there is a shortage of raw films, artificial or J/oidable, quite a few people make quite a bit of ■ey by selling a part of the stock in the black market. ■ There are two ways of feeding the black market in Is. One is by giving the stock to stooges who have ■uction companies merely on letter heads and conduct Want film laboratories and the other way is to dole la couple of tins every time to small producers who lot do any substantial work with these and are commd to resell the tins in the black market before the ■ emulsion gets time-barred. A Another disgusting feature of this unofficial raw film wol is the willing co-operation which a reputed busi1 firm like Kodaks lends to the strong clique of pro1 rs who are members of the Producers' Association. ■ One fails to understand by what canons of business lilitv can the management of Kodak (India I Ltd. ■y its rather too willing co-operation with the initial members of the IMPPA in doling or denying ■stocks to the favoured few or otherwise, seeing that Inain mission of Kodaks is to import raw films and It to people who ask and pay for it. ■If what has been reported to us by several reliable iucers is true, Kodaks are also guilty of rank impoli teness and Hitlerian behaviour. It seems that the producers who call at the Kodak offices in Fort, are made lo dance attendance on the gentleman who is evidently in charge of the raw film sales. This man. it is said, often becomes rude to the point of disgust and many film producers, who are always cash customers, are often unceremoniously shouted at and pushed out of the film godown of Kodaks. Surely, that is not the code of business conduct with which Kodaks have come to India to trade! Or have they? In a postwar world there are bound to be shortages of one commodity or other. But does that justify any unnecessary rudeness towards our people by the hirelings of a foreign firm? Supposing we call upon a couple of these top dogs to give us a glimpse of their present bank balances and overseas remittances during the war. will they be able to justify their present assets with the nominal salaries they have been earning all along? It is a delicate question to ask but one rudeness calls for another and it would do well for these people to be polite to our producers and let the sleeping dogs lie rather than provoke some public spirited person to dig out the gruesome facts of the past and the present and discover the skeleton in the family closet. We hope this is taken as a friendly warning for the future and we are not compelled to expose picture deals for distribution nor disturb the merry liaison with some film laboratories which may probably prove the way the raw film stock takes long before the producers expose it with their intellectual stink. Whatever the real facts may be. it is a matter of deej) regret for a firm of Kodak s international prestige to be unwittingly involved in the pettv politics of an influential clique of motion picture producers at the expense of small producers. There is already a great consternation among the small producers at the way they are being elbowed out of their legitimate share of raw stocks bv the powerful clique that controls the distribution of raw stocks. And all this with the willing co-operation of Kodaks — a firm with international prestige. The studio owners have only one axe to grind and that is to choke off as many independent producers as possible so that their own putrid studio products get as little competition as possible. It is a well known fact in the industry that many independent producers often produce better quality pictures than the professional studio owners who generally plan their productions as just so 3