Oscars: Behind the Scenes

Both the winners and losers shed tears on Oscar’s night! Winner for getting fruits for the money he spent on the publicity and losers for losing everything, the money and the glory. It may look odd when we see the insight of the Oscars, how the process goes about. It is sorry to know that awards are not genuinely given for the artistic work but the publicity stunt every filmmaker does. So it need not be the case that every movie that won Oscar is good and appealing to the common public. Advertising and marketing gimmicks are awarded on the Oscars night not exactly the films.

Hollywood publicist Michael Levine says, "Advertising, interviews, and any kind of brand-building editorial is essential to reach the 40,000 to 50,000 people who drive the nomination process." He also suggests movie stars participate in charity events which lend themselves to publicity as another vehicle to build awareness for who they are and what they represent.

Major studios shell out $15-20 million on Oscar campaigns, according to the Ad Age. Publicity and marketing play huge role in who gets noticed and for that popular studios pour millions of dollars into Oscar’s campaign. Marketing firms and people who are behind some of the winning movies are: Tony Angellotti of The Angellotti Company was behind the Shakespeare in Love and Seabiscuit campaigns. Michele Robertson of MRC helped Hilary Swank to get her Oscar for Boys Don't Cry. Longtime publicist David Horowitz worked on In the Bedroom, Chocolat and The Hours.

A subdivision of Disney, Miramax ran ads on “Amelie” much before the nominations are announced. Twentieth Century Fox has been touting hard for “Moulin Rouge”. Need not to add both won accolades! The master of the Oscar marketing campaign is Miramax. Miramax always picks up small budget movies but ensures they get good reviews in the media. For instance, Life is Beautiful, Shakespeare in Love, Good Will Hunting and Pulp Fiction are few to name. It advertises about the quality of the movie and cashes at box office citing multiple Oscar nominations. The company is so obsessed with Oscars it sends copies of its movie to every single Academy member so that he can watch and film is noted in his mind. Between 1993 and 2004, Miramax amassed 220 Academy Award nominations, winning 3 Best Pictures and 53 total Oscars, and the company’s canny marketing efforts produced 11 films that grossed over $100 million domestically.

Shelling money on campaign is always a tradition at Oscars. Orion has spent $325,000 on campaigning “The Silence of the Lambs”. Disney nearly spent $1million, on Beauty and Beast and The Rocketeer, and Columbia about $900,000 for The Prince of Tides, City Slickers, Boyz N the Hood according to media reports. Columbia bought at least 24 pages of pre-nomination trade ads for Boyz N the Hood. According to trade magazine Variety, Oscars campaign for “No Country for Old Men” cost $15million. LA Times estimates say that “Million Dollar Baby”, “Saving Private Ryan”, and “Shakespeare in Love” probably spent $15millionn each on campaigning. The Most expensive Oscars campaign was for “Gladiator” about $20million as per the unofficial estimates. This year Paramount’s investments on Oscars campaign for “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” exceed $10million reported LA Times.

Not many studios have that much of money so they try to appear more on talk shows and trade magazines. Oscar campaign contains big paid-media component advertising in film trade newspapers aimed at movie professionals. The early morning network magazine shows – ABC television’s Good Morning America, CBS Television’s The Early Show, NBC’s Today are prominent booking opportunities.

It is easy to make a movie but not that easy to get the Oscars, that too if you have to please at least 5800 voting members of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (AMPAS), who live in Los Angeles and New York City. As a part of campaign the film maker has to organise a private screening for academy members, events such as cocktail parties with film makers and cast, direct mail and ad campaigns in newspapers. All these events cost around $200,000 to $3million according to trade pundits.

If the filmmaker could able to create right euphoria before the film hits the theatre it attracts both the public and critics alike. An outdoor billboard is not just for the general public but also targets the voter. Two important Newton’s Laws as far as Oscars are concerned, firstly, release the picture in later part of the year i.e., between September and November, so that it is fresh in the minds of the academy voters. Secondly, always send the movie to some other festival to get right mood and momentum for the Oscars. Getting LA’s film critic award, New York film critic award will pave the way to Oscars. Especially, the Golden Globe award that indicates which movie is going to be the best film at Oscars. Invariably all the movies that won Oscars have won the Golden Globe award baring one or two.

Internet site Awards Heaven usually runs an accurate list of who’s gotten what. Similarly The Hollywood Reporter and Variety and Entertainment Weekly predict almost correctly the winners. Because that’s where the studios spend their money! They spend up to $10 million for print, TV and radio awards campaigns, including full page ads in The New York Times and Los Angeles Times, targeting the cities where most academy voters live. Studios dump the voters with lavish presents and DVD screeners.

Oscar awards are a combination of popularity, box office, artistic achievement, luck, sentimentality, bribes, and most importantly, marketing. Once the movie is nominated for the Oscars, there is no going back. Movies make quick bucks at box-office. After the Oscar nominations were announced this year, “Frost/Nixon” has grossed $5.3million; “The Reader”, $4.4million; and “Milk”$2.7million according to trade sources.

So next time when you watch Oscars on TV sitting in your living room, just remember how much publicity and marketing goes behind it!

IPL: Timing is wrong

Cricketers across the globe shocked to know that Sri Lankan cricket team was attacked by a group of militants in Pakistan. Every cricket nation started saying this is the reason why we have not sent our teams to play in Pakistan and Sri Lanka is foolish to send its team. As many people as many views expressed on the issue. Net result; is Indian sub-continent secure enough to organised sports events? The immediate impact, negative, will be on India, which is going to host Commonwealth Games and IPL T20 tournament in near future.

Players from all cricketing nations are keen to be part of IPL due to lucrative money involved in the tournament. After Sri Lankan incident money may not lure them. Ponting and Clarke from Australia already withdrew from this year’s tournament scheduled in April. New Zealand all-rounder Jacob Oram said no amount of money would persuade him to put his life in danger. Immediately after the 26/11 many players expressed apprehensions about security. Attack on Sri Lankan team has doubled their fears. Even Indian government is not confident in providing proper security in the wake of General Elections. Home minister P Chidambaram already indicated his helplessness and requested BCCI to postpone the IPL tournament for later date.

But BCCI is not willing to change the dates, understandably, with big money involved. Just through broadcasting rights from various agencies BCCI will gather roughly $1.75billion. World Sports Group (WSG) that secured global media rights has promised IPL about $350 million for the first five years and a little over $550 million for the following five years for media rights. Ad revenue is distributed among IPL (40%), franchises (54%) and remaining 6% prize money. If the tournament does not kick off as planned it will be a huge loss for BCCI.

Moreover the franchise owners like Reliance Industries that invested $11million on Mumbai franchise and Sharukh Khan’s Red Chillies $7.5million on Kolkata in the first year and others have to face hefty losses, if the tournament fails to attract foreign players. Spectators come to T20 matches to watch players like Symonds, Gilchrist, Hussey, Muralitharan, Flintoff and others. It they are not seen playing, then the ticket sales which could be around $1.5 to $2million will suffer. It is already known fact that teams are expected to lose about $30 to $40million over the first five years before making breakeven. Any changes in the existing format will incur huge losses for the franchise owners.

Money that few franchise owners pouring in IPL teams is as follows:
Ø Vijay Mallya - US $111.6 million, for the Bangalore team.
Ø Shah Rukh Khan - US $75.09 million, for the Kolkata team.
Ø GMR Holdings - US $84 million, for the Delhi team.
Ø Mukesh Ambani - US $111.9 million, for the Mumbai team.
Ø India Cements - US $91 million, for the Chennai team.
Ø Deccan Chronicle - US $107.01 million, for the Hyderabad team.
Ø Emerging Media - US $67 million, for the Jaipur team.
Ø Preity Zinta, Ness Wadia - US $76, for the Mohali team.

In the first season except one or two every franchise made losses. Mumbai Indians incurred Rs 16crore loss; Bangalore Royal challengers –Rs 43crore, Hyderabad Deccan Chargers – Rs 18cr, Chennai Super Kings – Rs 0.2cr, Delhi Daredevils – Rs 6.6cr, Punjab Kings – Rs 2.4cr. At the profit side are only Kolkata Kinght Riders – Rs 13crore and Rajasthan Royals - Rs 6crore.

With its initial success BCCI is thinking big for the second season. But BCCI involved in controversies with every board has multiplied its problems. Every Cricket Board expressed anger over the lucrative money that is forcing players to prefer IPL than play in their national sides. Similarly its deadlock with ICL has already ruined some of the player’s career the classic example could be Shane Bond from New Zealand.

In the current situation if the matches get postponed to later date many international players miss IPL matches as they have to play for the national teams. April and May have traditionally been off-season in most countries except England and the Caribbean, that is the reason why BCCI has chosen that time. But with ongoing disturbances the timing has become wrong. Added to the woes are the terrorist attacks. While 88 percent of foreign IPL contracted players, reported they wanted better security and 83 per cent wished for assessments made by independent security experts, the IPL is yet to respond. Not to forget the December Mumbai attacks caused the abandonment of the Champions League Twenty20 tournament.

It’s a war between money and terrorism or should we simply say security concern. How many are willing to come is the million dollar question. Australia’s Shane Watson who plays for Rajasthan Royals don’t see any threat however he demands assurance from BCCI that everything will go well. If general elections are not around then the situation might have been slightly better. Under such a chaos let us wait and see does money rules all fears or not!

Radio: Changed, but not dead

Times change, so that the technology. It is not wise to say one technology is superior to another and it will trash the earlier one. Technologies complement each other, same the case with the media. When cable television came into the scene, people thought that will be the end of newspapers. But that never happened.

In the case of the radio also, it is still one of the unshakable media going strong. Even today the reach of radio is far more than any other media. No doubt traditional radio begins to compete with new era of audio technologies – internet and satellite radio, FM radio, iPods, digital HD radio and MP3 downloads etc. Similarly listener perceptions have changed. No more boring interviews or documentary styled programs! Of late radio listening is largely confined to the car. Still traditional radio has its loyal audience, though the time spent on listening to radio has reduced over the years.

However, the basic value or meaning of radio has not changed. Whether people likes to sit and listen to radio in their living rooms over a cup of coffee or listen to it while traveling in their cars or through net while browsing or chatting, they do spend considerable amount of time on radio. In India a person listen to radio on an average 70 minutes according to NRS 2006 report 10minutes lesser than 2003. Even today after having so many options Vividh Bharti is popular among the mass.

People may be going for Internet radio or FM radio most. While on net people can listen to programs and stations from other areas, at times that are more convenient to their schedules, and to content they might not be able to get anywhere else. In a survey by Arbitron/Edison Media Research, 17per cent of those who had reported listening to Internet radio said they did so to hear audio they couldn’t get other places; 13per cent said they wanted more music variety and 15per cent sought to control or choose the music played. In the modern era, people are looking for something more than what traditional radio offers and they have the choice.

Look at the way community radios operate. In America, they are non-profit and non-commercial services that caters to the needs of certain area, people and targeted audience. For UK it is an illegal pirate radio service. The ideology towards community radio may differ from place to place but its services more or less remain the same – providing entertainment to the people through music, local news and information. In India community radio is quite effectively used for education purposes. Universities and NGOs use it for social cause.

Similarly, internet radio or e-radio is a broadcasting service via internet is yet another form of traditional radio. Many Internet radio stations are associated with a corresponding traditional terrestrial radio station or radio network like BBC. Most of these Internet radio services offer news, sports, talkback, and various genres of music—everything that is on the radio station being simulcast over the internet with a netcast stream. Studies show roughly 1 in 5 Americans listen to internet radio regularly, BBC’s internet radio doubled its listenership in past one year.

The digital revolution has brought revolution in radio services. Once it is started there is no looking back. From web to satellite to mobile phones, listeners need not to worry how to reach radio in a particular time and there is variety of programs to chose. The traditional radio has not dead but taking new forms. Where traditional radio stations are struggling to cling on to the audience and get revenues, metamorphosed radio is opening new avenues.

Why West liked Slumdog...

Bravo! Congrats to all those who made into big at Oscars this year with ‘Slumdog Millionaire’. Its winning streak started at the BAFTA, journeyed through Golden Globes and ended at Oscars. Incredible! 10 nominations and 8 Oscars!

As an Indian it is a proud moment. Few years back every Indian prayed for ‘Lagaan’ that were nominated for best foreign language film. But Slumdog... is altogether a new experience. At Oscars function our own A R Rahman sang a song from Slumdog. Mumbai and India’s name was on everyone’s lips. India is really shining!

In India more than 1000 movies are made every year. But none could appeal west. Then what is great in Slumdog. Why West appreciated it so much and poured its love over it?

Very recently India won individual gold for the first time along with few bronzes at summer Olympics. It sent a spacecraft ‘Çhandrayaana 1’ on lunar mission, only the sixth country to do so in the world. Few months back Mumbai is on world map for horrified militant attacks. India is recognized all over the world for its software technology. During current global economic crisis, India is still posting a growth rate of 7%. Today’s India is different. The Young India has more to offer to the world. Is Slumdog falls into that category? Difficult to say.

Still the question remains why West liked Slumdog?

The first images of India in Western people is Taj Mahal, Sadhus and Saints, temples for their architectural value, snake charmers and elephants, rich culture and last but not least for Bollywood movies. The real spirit and success of India is lost among those mentioned images. When West thinks of India, they think of poverty, over population, its biggest slums and terrorism. Slumdog offered exactly what West wants and thinks and likes to see about India. Its progress and prosperity hurts West’s ego! Cruel if I state but true in reality.

Yesteryears angry young man Amitab Bachhan poured his anger in his blog. He said, “If slumdog projects India as Third World dirty under belly developing nation and causes pain and disgust among nationalists and patriots, let it be known that a murky under belly exists and thrives even in the most developed nations.” His comments no doubt have invited controversy across blog world. However, the harsh truth remains.

If we look into the history of Oscars and Indian movies – every year we send a movie to foreign language category. Among all those movies that are sent, those who were nominated for Oscars are Mother India (1957), Salaam Bombay (1988) and Lagaan (2001). The core element of these movies is poverty and famine. Lagaan which has mixture of Indian culture and poverty that questioned British supremacy has not gone well with the West. British daily, The Telegraph, remarks on movie sums up the attitude of the West, “A Bollywood film that portrays the British in India as ruthless sadists and Mafia-style crooks has been chosen as Delhi's official entry to the Academy Awards in America.” The British press perhaps could not digest India winning over British even after 60years! Ironically, A R Rahman who won double Oscars for Slumdog was the music director for that movie. And if you ask any Indian they prefer Lagaan’s music over Slumdog for sure. In fact, Slumdog which won the best film is nowhere near Schindler’s List or Life is beautiful.

Some may argue that Slumdog depicts the dreams and aspirations of Young India. A common man in India does not any more cares what world calls him or says about him. This West’s so called Slumdog Cinderella fairy tale is certainly hurts many Indians pride at the international forum. Whoever saw the movie do not easily identify themselves with the protagonist of the movie ‘Jamal’, but surely questions about the slums of Mumbai.

What works for West may not necessarily work in India. Calling Slumdog an Indian movie is the biggest mistake. It is not that we have not shown slums and poverty in our own movies. Satyajit Ray’s ‘Pather Panchali’ is a classic by its own on the said subject. Why West forgets that India with vast culture and resources was ruled by British nearly 100 years. The second most populous nation in the world is in the process of building itself, already made its presence known to the world. It is not easy for any Western society to feed 100crore people every day.

If anyone thinks Vikas Swarup’s Q&A, the novel the movie is based on is projecting the spirits of slum dwellers who are trying to make their life better, they have aspirations, dreams and desires, as he says. Then sorry the film failed to show any of these things. Slumdog Branded India as a poverty ridden country in a Bollywood way. Actually it failed even in bringing the soul of Bollywood into it. This is a BRITISH portrayal of India, everything starting from Taj Mahal, Call centers, slums and skyscrapers.

If West wants to make a movie on India, let them feel for the people in the country first. As Seoul Times in its review rightly said, “There is nothing Indian about this film.” Gandhi, which also received accolades at Oscars, is a movie if not Indian film is atleast about an Indian and India’s struggle for freedom is much closer to our hearts. Yet we feel proud for those who are moved by the Slumdogs in India.

Slumdog is truly for your (West) eyes only!

Sports: not for you, not for me

The saga of Indian sports from Milkha Singh to golden boy Abhinav Bindra is uninspiring. The first reaction of ecstasy has gone as quickly as it came. Then the final realization was it enough to fire up 100crore population? 50years ago Milkha Singh lost bronze medal in Rome Olympics from then on there are not many motivating stories but few shades of success in the form of PT Usha and Karanam Malleswari.

First time in the history of Olympics Indian hockey team failed to qualify for the games. Shame! First time history is created by winning 3 individual medals at the games. Incredible! Beijing Olympics has shown both sides of a coin to us. People may criticize our performance at the games is below excellence pointing at 100 and odd medals to China and US. Small countries like Jamaica and Ethiopia too got medals at the games. Yes. But does anyone look closely at the numbers – China entered with 736 athletes, US with around 500, Australia with 430. At the same time 56 athletes from India participated in the games. The medal tally reflects the performance evenly. China and US around 100 medals each, Australia got 45 medals and India 3, if we compare them at ratios all of them stand at the same pedestal.

That doesn’t mean India did great at the games. No doubt, many of our athletes not qualified to play the games. Whom to blame? The Government! It is easy to pass the buckle. But how many parents in India are ready to encourage their children to join sports at the expense of studies, other than cricket. How many companies are ready to endorse sports persons other than cricket? Unless, they achieve something on their own at the international arena! Many talented athletes in the country are looking in vain to get sponsorships, better coaches and improved infrastructure.

India is competitive in technology but fails to convert the same in sports. How many universities in the country provide sports related courses for instance? Sports science is a major in some of the Australian, US and European universities. Sport and Exercise science, Sports management, Sports marketing, sports psychology, sports therapy, sports tourism, strength and conditioning science are some of the courses to mention. Our education system has to go a long way before adopting some of these courses and motivate our youth to take up them and government to provide employment opportunities rather than reserving quota for sports.

Australia won most of its medals in water, because their children are trained in the schools from kindergarten age in swimming. Our primary schools hardly provide any sport equipment. In the Western world, sports are well blend with studies at the school level itself. If a boy or girl is good at some sport they are trained in that game along with the studies. But in India, you are on your own. By any chance the child has the talent, where to go, with whom to practice and how to expose to competition? Lots of sportspersons do not get a chance to travel to big sporting events held outside the country and the reason always is the lack of funds.

So when occasionally people like Bindra win any medal, we have to pinch ourselves so that the truth sinks. Yes really an Indian won a gold medal at Olympics level. It is not that India is a complete failure as far as sports is concerned.

Once Indian hockey team is at top with 11 Olympic gold medals, we produced world class Badminton players like Prakash Padukone, young talent like Saina Nehwal entered the quarters of the women's singles event at the recently concluded Olympics, Grand masters like Viswanath Anand in Chess, World champs like Geet Seth in Billiards and snooker, Indian men’s golf team won silver at the 2006 Asian Games, Equestrian team bronze, Indian Volleyball team ranked 5th in Asia and 27th in world rankings. India always did well at Asian Games and Commonwealth Games but failed to do so at Olympics. Lack of exposure at world level for our sportsmen and women and world class training reflected in their performance when they are asked to do.

In 2010, New Delhi will host the first ever Indian Grand Prix. Although there are no F1 circuits in India at present, there is an F3 circuit at Sri Perumbudur near Chennai. Delhi will also host 2010 Commonwealth Games too, the second-largest multi-sport event in the world. According to several informal statistics, India is the country in the world with the lowest number of total Olympic medals per capita (of those countries that have actually won at least one medal). Do statistics change for better by holding international events at home? Unlikely! For sports in this fiscal just over Rs 11billion is allocated. We have so many programs on the paper but so little to spend on them. Most of our budget goes for administration salaries and establishment.

So, next time when India fares badly at any games don’t lose heart. Because neither the government nor the citizens of this country has any flair for sports. However, do expect for yet another Abhinav Bindra or Rathore or, Jitender Kumar to rise to the occasion and make it to the top. One day hope all these individual efforts cumulative into a collective performance. Till then kudos to those who believe in sports.