RATAN JAIN

THE IPO CAN WAIT

It was an occasion for double celebration. Two Venus films created landmarks at the turnstiles, a rare phenomenon these days. Josh celebrated its silver jubilee, while Dhadkan completed its 100-day run at several theatres across the country. But the man behind the feat, Ratan Jain, appears to have taken the success in his stride. He is busy, too, with the final touches to his forthcoming ventures. The eldest of the United Seven Jain brothers, Ratan Jain, shares some of his views on the film industry....

What, according to you, have been the perceptible changes that have come about on the film production scene in recent times?
Sophistication has arrived in a big way. There is also a greater spirit of understanding and co-operation among the various departments of filmmaking, than there was, say, ten years ago. At the same time, the competition between films and other entertainment avenues has intensified. Films have to fight it out with the TV and cable networks for viewership. And to top it all, they have to contend with piracy. This is a very sad state of affairs. I hope the recent amendments in the Cable TV regulation act will help curb the menace of piracy.
In terms of filmmaking, there have been many changes. Producers have been pumping in large amounts of money into their films to make them look grander there are many who are making money too in the bargain. Though there is hardly any drop in the the number of films being made, the tribe of "proposal makers" who launched films in the hope that finances would follow, have vanished from the scene. Only genuine filmmakers with a passion for filmmaking are now left, and that’s a good sign for the industry.

On the one hand, filmmakers cry themselves hoarse over the rise in production costs, while on the other, films are still being launched with multicrore budgets?
Yes, that’s become the order of the day owing to the tremendous pressure from the other media. A film has to look polished, with all the latest technological innovations that the audience has come to expect. That means one has to shell out a mega fortune into every film. But, as everyone knows, even this doesn’t guarantee success. So the filmmakers are forced to sign the so called stars, who help them take a good initial. The stars don’t come cheap either, and that adds to the production costs.

That’s why the trade has come to set such great store by the initial. A good initial is imperative for films to cover costs. The media has become a big spoilsport, though.

How’s that?
The media seems to be unaware of the huge investments that go into the making of a film. And on day one, at the end of the very first show, they come out with a verdict on the fate of the film, which I think is grossly unfair. That sends wrong signals to the audience and partly affects the film too. It may not affect the very good films but the average ones fall victims to it. It’s happened with my films too. In the case of Josh, there were those who adamantly insisted the film was no hit, citing the percentage of collections. But that hasn’t affected the film in the long run. Good films will run at any cost.

Talking about the stars and their prices, are they justified in demanding such astronomical sums by way of remuneration?
To some extent, yes. The artistes know the film is going to be marketed on the strength of their names, and the filmmakers generally don’t have a problem selling a film with a good starcast. That being the case, the stars are bound to ask for their prices. In any case, it’s a question of demand and supply. Good products run and when they are scarce there is bound to be an artificial rise in prices. So one has to work according to the prevailing market conditions.

Over the years, only a handful of stars have really ruled the roost. Are the filmmakers in general vary of grooming newcomers, and making it a level playing field?
That’s right. That’s a fact we have to accept. I agree with you though, like the rest of us, I have done little to improve the situation. That’s because making a film with newcomers takes up a lot of time in grooming them, and to top it all, one cannot be sure whether the audience will accept them in the end. There are filmmakers who are ready to take the risk and some have been quite successful too. Even, I have plans to make two films with newcomers probably next year.

According to you, what’s the ideal formula for success?
Frankly, if I knew, all my films would have been successful. My endeavour has always been to make a good film. That approach sometimes clicks with the audience, and sometimes not. Personally, my style is to select a good script and a good director, by which half the battle is won. The film should appeal to the masses. I have always gone by my instincts. Once I like a story, I make it a point not to deviate from the original storyline even for the sake of the film’s marketability.

Do you think there are enough good writers around?
No, I don’t. That’s a disturbing fact, though I come across so many stories and writers everyday, that it has become a tiresome thing to sort out the good ones. It’s rather unfortunate that in an industry where more than 150 films are made in a year, there’s such a dearth of talented people.

That’s partly also because everyone’s in a mad rush to launch films, and quality has taken the backseat. And that’s why films lack originality as they are borrowed from the South Indian movies or Hollywood potboilers. We need real committed people who know their jobs well. Only then will the scenario ever improve.

Dis you expect Dhadkan to emerge successful at the b-o?
Honestly, I did. I was sure the film was a clean entertainer, with its good music and family-audience appeal. Many thought that Sunil Shetty, Akshay Kumar and Shilpa Shetty would not do justice to the film. But I had faith in them. I’ve always launched films with only those people whom I trust, and solely on the basis of their talent. When we invest so much money in a film, one’s convictions are very important.
In fact, Dhadkan was launched much before Mela and had got delayed because of Mela. So the film took almost 4 years to complete but I feel it proved to be well worth the wait.

What went wrong with Mela?
I feel it lacked sophistication, and that may be because it was a dacoit story. These sort of things can happen with any filmmaker. We learn so many things after the film’s released.

To what extent are you involved with the nitty-gritties of production, apart from providing the finance?
Believe it or not, a producer is involved with a film from the day it is launched. It’s because the stakes involved are too high. In my case, I make it a point to offer suggestions wherever needed. I also decide on the story of the film. So, in a way I am there till the final print is out. A producer should know what is happening to his film at every stage in the production.

Has corporatisation and industry status really helped the industry?
Yes and no. How many people have really benefited by it all? These things add more pressure on the filmmaker as they become more answerable to the public. It’s my personal opinion that filmmakers ought to go in for institutional finance which is available to anyone with a good business track record.

So does that mean Venus has no immediate IPO plans?
Yes. We don’t have any such plans, at least not immediately. We’ve adopted a wait and watch approach. We’re evaluating the public response to recent IPOs. As I said earlier, I’m happy raising finance from the banks as it is less cumbersome. But let’s wait for the right moment.

But are the other departments of filmmaking ready for the new changes. Are they disciplined enough?
I think all other sectors of the industry are aware of the trends, and have become more disciplined than ever before. Even the artistes are aware who the genuine filmmakers are and are allotting dates accordingly. So that’s definitely an improvement on the past.

Even then, films still take more than a year to complete...
That’s true. I feel, that will take a while to change. The artistes have committed their dates around three years ago, and they are finding it difficult to adjust to the new situations. One hopes everything will be alright in a year or so.

Finally, here’s one on the booming audio market. The music companies are offering almost twice the amounts they were paying a couple of years ago. Why?
I don’t see any boom in the market. I think the situation’s much the same as a couple of years back. The only difference is the reason is the rush among the music labels to grab the rights, especially if the banner concerned is a good one. That has contributed to an artificial price war. It’s happened at a time when the music companies don’t make profits on six out of every 10 films. So the trend’s quite a disturbing one. There is no doubt that some new avenues have opened for audio. The CD sales have increased over the years. But these do not in any way justify the prices being quoted.


>>>Padmaraj Nair