FilmIndia (1946)

1 October, 1946 FILM-INDIA = lived not only to tell their own story but to conduct the money-lending racket themselves. The banks and the insurance companies in India are usually run by unenterprising and conservative || folks who would not stretch their little finger to do some pioneering in the fields of finance or help to stabilize other national industries. They have always looked at the Indian film industry with suspicion— and at times with good reasons seeing the ^generally uncultured, indisciplined and irresponsible personnel obtained in this industry — and have never ventured even to inquire of the financial needs of our film industry. In Free India, this would, however, be a highly I unpatriotic and unenterprising policy for banking jinstitutions which are incidentally the pillars of all 'national industries. It is up to our bankers to pick and choose the future personnel of our film industry by trusting the right type of people .and giving them the run of industrial finance on banking terms. In Hollywood the entire film industry is completely financed by the banks and not one bank has reported itself in the bankruptcy courts as a result of financing films. We cannot understand why something that can be done on a larger scale in Hollywood cannot be done on a smaller one in India! It is high time that our financial wizards begin to think of the Indian film industry on indigenous lines now that our people are on the threshold of freedom. Once our bankers get into this industry, the gamblers will go out leaving the field to genuine industrialists to stabilize the future. Mumtaz Shanti threatens to charm millions once again in "Padmini ' a story of Punjab Film Corporation. Some one should listen to this to prevent a few more suicides. STOP THE VANDALS Editor Harbans Lai Chopra of the "Insurance News" wants to know, in his recent editorial, whether film people keep the promises they give. He welcomes the assurance, given by the Indian Motion Picture Producers' Association, that "producers are advised to avoid scenes in their pictures which would directly or indirectly harm the interests of Insurance or any other indigenous industry." Says Editor Chopra, "But we cannot be satisfied with mere lip sympathy unless it is backed by effectual action. Saying and doing are two different things. Mere assurance that the film producers have been advised not to indulge in such dishonest practices in future cannot take us anywhere. What we want is that the offensive portions from the films "Tadbir" and "Dhamki" should be forthwith expunged. If that is not done, we cannot be pacified with mere sweet promises and must take them as a mere eye-wash." Asks Editor Chopra, "whether despite the assurance given by the producers, these films ("Tadbir" and "Dhamki"i are to be allowed to carry on with their dirty propaganda against Insurance and those engaged in Insurance." We are sorry to disillusion Editor Chopra in his expectation of a square deal from chronic bluffers. Very few people in the film trade believe in doing anything decent. Apart from cutting out the offensive parts from "Tadbir" and "Dhamki", even their assurance about the future means nothing. It is painful to confess but it is a fact that our film business lacks character. It has no decency about it. The Insurance people have now only one way left to get the offensive portions expunged and that way lies in appealing to the Popular Ministries and enforcing these cuts through the Censors. And the Popular Ministries should listen to their grievance, which is very just and proper, and compel the producers of "Dhamki" and "Tadbir" to cut off those offensive portions which slander our Insurance business. Our irresponsible producers must not be allowed to run wild with their own business and in doing so ruin the prestige and reputation of others. YOU'LL HARDLY BELIEVE That a London scribe describes Jayashree as 22. With those mathematics Shantaram ought to be 28, Motilal 25. Jaddan Bai 30. Khurshid 25, Shobhana 25, Nalini .Tayawant 12 and Baby Madhuri stillborn. Publicity does create a rare optical illusion. That since christening "Dr. Kotnis" as "The Song of Buddha", Shantaram has come to believe in himself being the 1946 re-incarnation of the Great Teacher. Let us hope that this hallucination does pot result in his deserting Jayashree. I?