Films and exhibits being made on controversies and tragedies is just not a brand new phenomenon, however there’s all the time a proper time for these initiatives to be made. However, the current bulletins relating to Titanic’s re-release and Ramayana’s airing on TV appear to indicate that makers solely care about cashing in on an issue on the time that they deem is correct.
James Cameron‘s Titanic is scheduled to re-release to Netflix on July 1, a few days after the Titan submersible mishap that claimed the lives of five people onboard, who were diving to the location of the Titanic shipwreck. People soon started calling out the streaming giant for its bad timing and being insensitive for announcing the release of the film soon after the tragedy, hoping it would call off or postpone the release. Though it was confirmed later that the deal to bring the iconic film back was finalised much before the OceanGate disaster, netizens feel the streamer should consider delaying the re-release.
On the other hand, amid the ongoing controversy around the theatrical release Adipurush and the fact that it has hurt the religious sentiments of many people, Shemaroo TV has announced that the original Ramayana would air on the small screen again, starting next week. The epic mythological tale was aired during the pandemic also on popular demand, and now to calm down angered audience after watching Adipurush, airing the show seems to be a good idea.
But the bigger question remains: Is it a wise and ethical move to cash in on such controversies? How would the audience respond to the same? Stakeholders weigh in on the matter.
Atul Mohan, trade analyst
If one has invested so much money in a project, they’ll search for the proper time to encash it. It’s a sensible business transfer to get extra viewership, after which ethics don’t come into the image. The youthful era, who won’t have seen the unique Ramayana or Titanic, would have a look at it as an excellent choice {that a} TV channel and an OTT platform has made it accessible for them. Those who’ve watched Adipurush, they know the errors within the movie, so it’s good that they will revisit Ramanand Sagar’s Ramayana.
Anees Bazmee, Director
This is the period of cutthroat competitors within the movie trade, so no matter one deems is nice for his or her business, they need to not assume twice earlier than going for it. The tragedy that occurred with OceanGate submersible was unlucky. A basic movie like Titanic ought to be launched at any time when, so that individuals can take pleasure in it… That shouldn’t be linked to any controversy. Some folks might need objected to this as it might have harm emotions, however you may’t please everybody. And if Ramayana is being aired once more due to the Adipurush controversy, there additionally, I don’t really feel it’s flawed as a result of that is the precise and actual story, which everybody ought to watch.
Taran Adarsh, commerce knowledgeable
Capitalising in controversies is just not a brand new factor and has been happening for a number of a long time. In the wake of Adipurush criticism, I feel it was sure to occur. Somewhere down the road, it’s a democracy. It is a sensible transfer as a result of folks ought to watch Ramayana. But, once we speak concerning the private tragedy of oceangate, I don’t know the way folks will react, there can be divided opinions. Titanic itself is a movie primarily based on an enormous tragedy however, I agree re-releasing it so quickly after the Titan submersible mishap isn’t proper on humanitarian grounds.
Girish Johar, Producer and movie business knowledgeable
Making a business out of anybody’s tragedy is just not an excellent or proper factor to do. It can get a postponement, conserving the difficulty and viewers’ suggestions in thoughts. That has occurred additionally up to now. Adipurush additionally obtained pushed after the suggestions of the viewers. We mustn’t do business business on a tragedy. Everyone has been cashing on controversies for some time now, it isn’t new. As a fraternity member, I imagine it’s taken as a advertising and marketing software, and never for harming anybody. Any publicity in movie is nice publicity, be it optimistic or damaging. I don’t assume Ramayan airing is hurting any sentiments or feelings. It is innocent. But in some other case, when you’re exploiting an issue for a egocentric motive, then that’s flawed.
Prem Sagar, son of Ramanand Sagar
It is a hardcore advertising and marketing technique and an ideal alternative. We have given the rights to pick out channels, and whoever has the proper business acumen, they’ll search for the proper time to benefit from it. It is a really damaging method to name it exploitation. People wish to see Ramayana and TV and streaming platforms are serving to in bringing it again. Agar ek achha granth ya basic wapis aata hai, then what’s flawed with it? Why correlate it with Adipurush? Cinema is a business artwork kind, and when you don’t make sufficient cash, how would you churn out extra initiatives?
Dipika Chikhlia, Actor
From an viewers’s viewpoint, it’s the most effective methods you subside an issue and the harm that has gone together with it. There is a number of anguish and ache with the discharge of the dialogues and the seems to be of Adipurush. When it involves the channels, its not a noble trigger of their head, it’s undoubtedly simply encashing on the TRPs. This is wise advertising and marketing. The viewers will anyway have an excellent response to the re-release of Ramayana. When you make one thing which has a soul, which is made with an excellent intention, it’s famous. A very good movie or an excellent tv present will all the time work. I’m certain it would take folks one other 50 years to surpass this Ramayana. At this level, no matter is made can not even be put into comparability with Ramayana to be sincere.
Source: www.hindustantimes.com