FilmIndia (1948)

SUBSCRIPTION RATES The annual subscription, for 12 issues of "filmindia", from any month Is : INLAND FOREIGN: Rs. 24/. Shillings 50/ Subscriptlon Is accepted only for a collective period of 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 PROPRl ET O R S FILMINDIA PUBLICATIONS LTD SS. SIR PHIROZESHAM MEHTA ROAD. FORT, BOMBAY Telephone . 26752 Editor: BABURAO PATEL Vol. XIV. OCTOBER 1948 No. 10. #it /Sack Ot Vic I ADVERTISEMENT RATES: The advertisement rates are as follows : Per Insertion Full Page Inside Rs. Half Page Inside Rs. i Page Inside Rs. i Page Inside Rs. 2nd & 3rd Cover Rs. 4th Cover Rs. 1st Cover Rs. 400 210 120 ISO 500 600 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. The thundering success of "Baghdad-ka-Chor". the bed Hindustani version of "Thief of Baghdad", a da production, at the Excelsior and Minerva cinemas Bombay must not only rouse the Indian motion picproducers into action hut also goad the Government ndia to sit up and take notice of the millions that be sent out of the country with impunity to soft and currency countries if such dubbed pictures are pered to exploit our people without any let or hinlce as at present. It is estimated by experts that not less than Rs. 20 is will be collected by this single picture in India, all this monev will be sent out of our country with help of an Indian, K. M. Modi of Western India aires — the man who distributes this picture in India provides it with exhibition dates in his own theatres ates which the Indian film industry needs very badly xhibit its own accumulated product. After shaking hands for years with provincial gov>rs in expensive evening suits at the gates of his mas. quite a few people expected K. M. Modi to be ;hted — a common Parsi ambition — but the whiteoed Congress government completely upset the appleby abolishing titles and K. M. Modi has still rened a plain Mister. But as India is even now a Down w th the King of England as His Majesty, a title always be conferred on any Indian who serves the interests of Great Britain. With Sir Stafford Crippa entlv under the direct tutelage of Arthur Hank, the ish film tycoon, and Modi as Rank's counterpart in ia, it is not at all improbable for K. M. Modi to aire a belated knighthood for helping the British to i out of India large sums in keeping with Britain's while imperialism in this country. Had it been a simple matter of routine business. K. Modi had enough Indian pictures to keep bis forty odd theatres continuously busy round the year. He J not have cut into the playing time given to Indian iures to make a special provision for "Baghdad-lear" (in Hindustani) at two theatres in the city simulKMisly— one of them (The Minerva) being right in heart of audiences for Indian pictures. Evidently VI. Modi wants all and sundry — from the masses to elates — to see "Baghdad-ka-Chor" and thus cultia taste for other foreign pictures on similar lines. We have never doubted K. M. Modi's business acu men. From a struggling manager of a wayside cinema in Poona, he has now become a man of two crores (his own estimate at a dinner party) and now lives in a palatial building worth Rs. 22 lakhs on the Xepean Sea Road — a roof more expensive — than the sky God has provided to the poor. His unique success and his imposing pile of millions, inspite of the Excess Profits Tax, constitute a thrilling romance of the film trade. Had the Tax not existed Modi would have become another Rank of India and brought more glory to the film trade, at which bankers have always looked with suspicion. We wish Modi even a greater success in future but we commend that trade should not be so completely divorced from the general weal of the country, especiallv in these times when the Indian rupee looks so small in comparison with the British pound and the American dollar. K. M. Modi, who himself owns film studios and whose brother Sohrab Modi is one of our leading film producers, cannot be blind to the economic problems of the Indian film industry— problems due to excess of production and shortage of theatres and the unhealthy competition by foreign pictures. Modi also knows very well that due to the acute shortage of housing accommodation and housing materials, the Government have stopped the construction of new theatres (though, of course, his 'New Empire1 in Bombay was built probably during the steel and cement controllers' sleeping hours). Under such circumstances every theatre in the country must be made available for Indian pictures if our indigenous film industry is to survive and if Indian money is to remain in the country. These are patriotic considerations which should tunc appealed to K. M. Modi as an Indian. During the present economic crisis through which our poor country is passing, every man must pull his weight by doing the right thing and helping our popular government to do their bit for the people. The part, therefore, which K. M. Modi is playing as the agent of foreign pictures in direct competition with our own, can hardly be considered worthy of a self-made man who has made all his money in the country of his birth and from his own people. He can pay back at least a little of this huge debt by denying to the foreigner an opportunity to exploit our people and in doing so