FilmIndia (1946)

September 194a FILMINDI A up the matter with the head office of Wheeler's to check this unhealthy practice and get his quota of supplv increased." R. X. Gupta. GORAKHPUR. U. P. CADDISH? '•In Bangalore city the picture houses screen the Maharaja — the King of Mysore, at the end of every show. I have noticed that only a microscopic mass pay their homage by standing: while the others rush out of the picture house like "whipped dogs out of a dog kennel". Is not the King of Mysore our own monarch of Mysore?" BANGALORE. S. .4. Khader., SHOWMANSHIP? "It is very sad that your beautiful production "Draupadi'' was released here at a House which is not worthy of a great picture. "Ritz" is most inconveniently situated in a corner of the city, and its machine being old the light t>n the screen is dim and the Bound inaudible. Its Rs. 1|12[ seats arc long rows of semi-circular benches, and are most uncomfortable. A fat lady sitting in front of us was protruding from all sides and the poor gentleman accompanying her had to leave one of her adjoining seats vacant to allow her some extra space. And then fans. About a dozen electric toys, that decorate the ceiling, laugh over more than five hundred heads, and move carelessly like a band of age-worn drowsy lotus-eaters. An old man had actually brought a hand fan with him. I must call him Confucius of the day!" DELHI. Nemi rha»H. MY FRIENDS? "I very solemnly crave for a few lines of your esteemed magazine to ventilate my grievance about the Nigar Talkies, in the capacity of a lay filmgoer. In this 'notorious' cinema hall of this great industrial town black-marketing is carried on almost everyday on a very 'grand' scale. The jobbers find the place very congenial to carry on the filthy business without any check or restraint. These nasty and burly fellows create daily a scene at the booking window and put the simple cinegoers to a lot of trouble and inconve nience. It is horrifying to see some of these sturdy and corpulent fellows jumping above the heads of the cine-goers to easily make their way to the booking window, thus physically hurting other persons and disfiguring their clothes. Very often abusive language is used, even blows are exchanged and the cinema hall assumes the appearance of a tiny 'battlefield.' Because of *hese rogues the queue-system cannot bo maintained. Many reports have been made to the managements of the theatre but to no purpose. In There is nothing in her eye. Zahur! Jyoti wonders in "Dharkan \ a social oirturc spite of the insistent demand of the picturegoerg for an adequate and fair system of ticket distribution, their is no response from their side. Will yon Mr. Patel. move your friends, M|s. General Talkies Distributors Ltd.. Delhi, owners of this cinema to take immediate steps to remove these sad conditions? Thanks!" Pandit Jwale Prasad. CAWNPORE. POOR. ME! '"Have you ever seen a Burmese film. Mr. Editor? Burma too is producing some good films: social, historical etc.. and some of the Burmese stars have good flair for acting, and display good traits and talents; and their qualities of act ing are not inferior to those of me Indian stars. They also create many a bright and breezy scene and situation peculiar to their customs and history which is very interesting to see. "But the pity is that with my little knowledge of Burmese I am unable to understand the theme and its significance; and the cinema management too does not give even a short synopsis of the ^ory either in Hindustani or English to enable us Indians to understand it. "So, if you can manage to give reviews of some good Burmese films occasionally in ''filmindia". it will make the magazine popular in Burma and the Burmese film industry too will appreciate your judicious reviews and suggestions. So what do you think of this. Mr. Editor?" RANGOON. H. A. Rahman. UTOPIAN "JUDAS points out that about 350 pictures are being produced every year in India. Whereas your rate of reviewing pictures is five to eight per month at which rate you will be reviewing about 75 to 80 pictures per year, that is, one fourth of the total production. Out of 75 to 80 reviewed pictures, you hardly recommend a score of them. To take a specific instance, we in Xagpur received about a hundred pictures within the last six month? out of which you had reviewed only 26 in your esteemed magazine. The reviewed pictures were: 1. 'Rattan'. 2 Dr. Kotnis'. 3. 'Vikramaditva'. 4. "Ek Din Ka Sultan'. 5. 'Phool'. 6. 'Pharbati Anken'. 7. 'Maharathi Kama'. 8. 'Taramati'. 9. 'Din Raaf. 10 Bhartrahari'. 11. 'Chand Tara". 12. 'Dharnki,' 13. 'Chand Chakori'. 14. 'Dhanna Bhagat'. 15. 'Krishnarjun Yuddha', 16. 'Kaise Kahun.' 17. 'Lakha Rani'. 18. Laila Majnu,' 19. 'Mun Ki Jeet'. 20. 'Sawan'. 21. 'Nala Damayanti' 22. 'Shirin Farhad'. 23. 'Pannadai' 24. 'Paristaan'. 25. 'Tadbeer'. 26. 'Village Girl'. Out of these also you recommended 1, 3, 4. 5, 6 only — "Dr. Kotnis'' of course I saw before the review appeared and I could not wait longer for the review when the Shantaram brand picture was actually run 67