Jump to content

Talk:Cinema of India/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Tamil Cinema Section

I just removed info about Bollywood actress since it look inappropriate for this article. It will be great if someone add more info about Tamil Cinema Industry. Ashok (talk) 04:08, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Oscar

There is no prominent mention of the oscars and Golden globes like Jai Ho and Life of pi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.229.34 (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Further expansion

  • Awards
  • Music and international interaction.
  • Lengthier description of the diaspora, especially the South Indian diaspora since industry in south is more diverse.

Above mentioned are a few more topics that i intend to take care of in near future. JSR 0562 17:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Review as requested by JSR

  • I would like to see more detail about Regional industries in this article, a tabular description is not enough.
  • A section devoted to Bollywood and another to Regional, would make a clear distinction between the two, which is not clearly seen here. I suggest a reorganization of layout
  • Suggested layout:
    • History
    • Bollywood covering Hindi cinema
    • Regional
      • Bengali
      • Kannada
      • Malayalam
      • Marathi
      • Tamil
      • Telugu
      • Other
    • Film music
    • Global discourse
  • "Film music" mostly covers Bollywood, so should be under some "Bollywood" section OR should cover other regional cinema too. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Understood and thanks for the review. I had some sources with me but actionable suggestion and clarity make things a lot better. JSR 0562 15:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Also,

  1. the table in Regional industries does not look good. It should be changed to prose. Also, it also makes sense to have a separate article on this topic and have the summary here.
  2. History section also should be a summary of a separate article on History of Cinema, which can discuss it in more detail.
  3. Awards section basically talk about Bollywood awards only. Awards for other industries also should be mentioned. Plus table should be avoided, tables are meant for multi-dimensional data, for one or two dimensions, it is better to use straight prose.--GDibyendu (talk) 18:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
One reason why I always favor tables is that they serve short descriptions and discourage edits such as these examples. In my view, greater mention of the regional industries is best done in their own articles. I, however, agree that this article is somewhat dominated by Bollywood, particularly in the awards and film music sections, and more needs to be done in order to correct this shortcoming. I am preparing to write for another article which I should save on Wikipedia soon and that has been taking up all my time. After that rewrite I can devote myself here fully to take care of the shortcomings. JSR 0562 20:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
"In my view, greater mention of the regional industries is best done in their own articles." - This is very biased view. Indian Cinema is not equal to Bollywood, it does not matter which point of view is used here: money, quality, awards, revenue, quantity anything. Those edits were there because you made a section on Bollywood and kept other industries in a table. Encyclopedia does not need to indulge in one-upmanship.--GDibyendu (talk) 20:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Dear GDibyendu, above is a new point that you have raised and it should be accommodated since you have raised concerns. Just remember that Bollywood has had the maximum number of films made and the maximum global exposure of all Indian industries. Amit Khanna cited in the article points to almost 300 films annually accounting for almost half the overall Indian cinema revenue. Why the Marathi industry dropped down to 10 films per year in 1996 would you still like a section for it? However, the last thing I want is to get drawn into India's regional rivalries and compromise on article stability so I won't argue further on this. But please try to be less passionate next time. Any error made by anyone can be corrected and editors like myself always try and accommodate but its important to not sour things for unpaid volunteers like you and me. JSR 0562 06:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I still remember that this article needs to be a lot more inclusive and more info on regional industries need to be added in some sections. Instead of taking my time I will try and speed things up a little and have an article that I'm sure GDibyendu will enjoy. Regards to all, JSR 0562 06:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks like user: Guru coolguy made a few edits and left me these compliments. His contributions clearly reveal that he likes adding Tamil cinema to the extent of creating a Hollywood of the east redirect for it. He has been warned on his talk page but I feel that too much energy will be wasted in arguments and such. These kind of messages further convince me that a break is needed. Since he has done what he thought was best and others are apparently all right with it I leave now and take a long wikibreak.
Regards to all, JSR 0562 18:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

All cinema industries made significant contributions to Indian cinema. 3 of them, Hindi, Tamil, Telugu are by far the largest in India by number of films produced, revenues, influence. It appears to me, that nobody had read these industry articles when the changes were made to this one. Hindi, Tamil and Telugu deserve special mention, others can be put in the table, although I prefer a no-table system. The article here looks like a Hindi film promotion article, not like a cinema of India article. --91.130.91.27 (talk) 08:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The Bengali and Malayalam industries also merit special mention. While not as huge as the three you mentioned, they are the most critically-acclaimed from all the Indian regional industries. I think the layout for the regional industries section is fine as it is, as it already has seperate sub-sections for the largest (Hindi, Tamil and Telegu) and most acclaimed (Bengali and Malayalam) industries. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 18:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

How about some criticism?

Redirected from a redirect deletion discussion, there is quite a deal of criticism of immaturity of India cinema. See here, 'Our cinema is immature' and here, Although, there is pressure from Hollywood and high cultural and western discourses that see Hindi film as unrealistic, immature and inferior due to their musical format, ----- and I am sure there is plenty more. --Like I Care 05:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC) wat the ****

Those criticisms are only directed towards Bollywood (Hindi-language cinema), not Indian cinema as a whole. Many people outside India often make the mistake of thinking that Bollywood represents all of Indian cinema, when in fact it only represents about a quarter of the films produced in India. Such criticisms belong to the Bollywood article, not the Cinema of India article, although they can be mentioned under the Bollywood section of this article. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 18:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Telugu cinema section

I am thinking that the 4 subsections here should be merged/moved to the main article Cinema of Andhra Pradesh. Presently it is over-represented in this article compared to the others. Opinions or volunteers? BollyJeff || talk 17:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. Most was duplicated from the main. BollyJeff || talk 16:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Tamil vs Telugu warring and conflicting sources

Some "editors" only purpose is to say that Telugu is better than Tamil and vice versa. They keep changing the text to say that this is number 2 and that is number 3, over and over again. I am tiring of this. I tried to remove some of the unsubstantiated claims, but I have found conflicting sources and wonder what to do about that. The Telugu section says this "In 2006, the Telugu film industry produced the largest number of films in India, with about 245 films produced that year, to Tamil's 162.[1]", and the table shows more films in 2009 as well. However, the Tamil section uses this ref "[2]" which though is states that 135 films were produced in 2006, that Tamil is the second largest region. How can that be? One of these sources must be incorrect, right? I would rather that they both say that they are one of the top three and let the table speak for itself, but I know people will change it back, especially with that source there. Any ideas on how to stabilize this article? BollyJeff || talk 13:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I am not sure if I got the issue under question right. However, as far as I know Telugu filmland produces more movies than most other Indian language cinemas. Tamil, however, has more viewers than Telugu (although not more than Telugu). This means the Tamil film industry can expect more renew than it Telugu counterpart. This is what the articles point as far as I can see. --Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 15:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I will see if I can incorporate this into the text. However my question about the number of films in 2006 still stands, and I wonder how to keep people from changing the order all the time. BollyJeff || talk 15:51, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
The Telugu industry leads in annual film output, but the Tamil industry exceeds in the worldwide distribution and popularity meter. Telugu films don't have a fan base overseas. Secret of success (Talk) 18:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
The Telugu Films have much more fan base than Tamil films overseas, It is not true to say Tamil has more than Telugu. As an example I am I am posting information of the film Dookudu As of 2012, Dookudu had one of the largest worldwide opening for a Telugu film, releasing globally in 1,600 screens,

The film was released even in remote country like Botswana Telugu project to release in Botswana by the Telugu Association of Botswana. Dookudu was released over 79 theaters in the United States; the Los Angeles Times quoted Dookudu as "the biggest hit you've never heard of. Please see here to verify my informaton Cinema_of_Andhra_Pradesh

Kondakotaiah (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC) Please see the below information and decide whether Telugu cinema is second or Tamil is ? The history has to be taken into account; Second spot just because Tamil has produced more films than Telugu in 2010 is silly. Never except 2010 did Tamil industry produce more films than telugu, while Telugu produces more films than Tamil consistently every year, moreover Infrastructure wise Telugu industry is the best in the country, with highest number of theaters, highest number film studios, Largest film studio in the world, Largest 3D-IMAX theater which is also the most viewed screen in the world, the most guinness records set by any film industry in India. A majority of Tamil films are dubbed into Telugu because of the most lucrative market it offers to films, not just Tamil films but many other languages dub films into TeluguList_of_Telugu_films_of_2012, Telugu movies or other movie industries except rarely do not care to dub them into TamilList_of_Tamil_films_of_2012 as it does not offer such a big market, dubbing into Tamil is more hassle as it is not considered a money making event, the shortage of theaters in TN poses a challenge for movies struggling for screens to release.

The Popularity of Cinema of Andhra Pradesh is evident on Wikipedia also, just type cinema in the wikipedia search bar at the top of your page and you will see suggestions of Cinema of Andhra Pradesh a regional cinema among the top suggestions of wherein international country cinemas like cinema's those of india, usa and uk.
Telugu is definitely second largest and Tamil has the Third positionKondakotaiah (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I retract my statement about Telugu films having a meagre popularity overseas. Recently, I found instances of several articles talking about piracy of Telugu films in UK (the film Panjaa in specific). What I really wish to convey is that we cannot decide on our own, which is leading and which is not. The content and accuracy of reliable sources cannot be disputed by us merely on the grounds of original research. Simply saying that "Telugu film industry" is second largest without further details would literally sound meaningless. That is why we mention the criterion used in the source in order to provide a more clearer picture to the reader. And of course, the updated sources should always overwrite the older ones. Secret of success · talk 13:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
What do you mean by using the term original research ? I have not generated this data for the annual film production, I have provided valid citations to speak of the data. In terms of revenue, films produced annually, infrastructure and past record it is clearly evident that Telugu film industry is the second largest. And since this information is not original research, I suggest this information regarding Telugu industry's second position be mentioned in the article. Kondakotaiah (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
That is what I'm talking about. "Clearly evident" isn't good enough — you need sources to say that the Telugu film industry is second largest in terms of revenue, infrastructure and past record (right now, we have sources only for the no. of films produced annually) — the very explicit term needs to be mentioned in a source. Secret of success · talk 12:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Based on information in regards to Annual film production - current and past record Telugu is greater in size than Tamil.
  • Infrastructure based on the information like studios and Theaters it is clear that Telugu is greater in size than Tamil.
  • Revenue - Larger Annual film production has to be supported by a larger audience, it is far to difficult to ignore the amount of dubbed films from Tamil to Telugu as Telugu is clearly a larger market than Tamil.

Telugu enjoys and affords films dubbed from various languages; unlike Tamil which has very few dubbed films and has small choice of films made mostly in original Tamil. All this speaks of market capacity. Providing all these valid data and valid citations backing the data it can be concluded that Telugu is second in the country and Tamil third. One needs valid citations to back his data and based on it one may derive to logical conclusions, but if you are looking for conclusions to be used as citations which have been compiled by someone else's logic which may or may not be true is not the right way to go. I can provide all the citations for the data I provide and I will conclude accordingly. Kondakotaiah (talk) 20:45, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I must add that TN govt. levied very high Taxes on dubbed films, to save the Tamil industry, while AP Govt. does not levy such high taxes because The Telugu industry is larger in size and can afford to have dubbed films coming in and still have its own Film industry surviving and running without any problems. Kondakotaiah (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Annual Film Production

According to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) figures, the following data for the top three Film Industries in India is as in the table below

Year Hindi Movies Telugu Movies Tamil Movies 1st Position
2005 248 268 136 Telugu
2006 223 245 162 Telugu
2007 257 241 149 Hindi
2008 286 175 Telugu
2009 235 218 190 Hindi
2010 215 181 202 Hindi
2011 206 192 185 Hindi

a sentence that makes me laugh aloud

a silent film in Marathi... how come a silent film is in marathi... kaay re....?

silent films have title cards with representations of dialogue. Active Banana (bananaphone 22:49, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Mentioning the imp. persons in Industry sections

Srsly, do we have to mention all the directors from the industry? Even if it is neutral it really isn't necessary. It only occupies more space. Compared to other industries, the Tamil Cinema section can be neat enough if those are removed. Please state your opinions. Thanks a lot! Secret of success (Talk) 19:04 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it looks bad, but its not just the Tamil section. Telugu has an even bigger list, and Kannada has a smaller list. And for sheer length, Malayalam beats them all. However, I wouldn't change anything here myself, because all of the silly rivalries will compel people to revert it back. Good luck to you if you want to tackle this issue. It might help if don't focus on one, but change them all at once, and make the ones with similar sized industries to have similar sizes here. BollyJeff || talk 13:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, I am not really sure about the description of other industries, but definitely there is no need to mention it for the Tamil industries. I guess it is enough for each industry to be described like the Marathi film industry with just a few points. The reason for Telugu and Kannada industries for being described in such a manner is that in the main page itself, those names form a major section. Secret of success (Talk) 16:58 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, please find that adding a highly significant contents with genuine factors being true, legitimate, and correct data is a important one in article construction. Just simply citing its very long, unnecessary shows degrading its present form & reducing its core value --- which cannot be accepted. Please understand the importance behind and realize to yourself its inclusion on this very important sub-section of the article. ---- Ungal Vettu Pillai (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
If it is that important, then it should be added to other sections as well, not only in Tamil, Telugu and Kannada and till those are added these should be removed. Secret of success (Talk) 12:05 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Better to keep each section here very short and just point to main articles. BollyJeff || talk 13:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
The Tamil cinema section lists a number of directors. I feel the list can be reduced to a greater extent since listing almost all directors who worked for the industry isn't necessary. --Commander (Ping Me) 06:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. It looks about the same or worse since we started talking about this. Have you given up? It's like graffiti in a bad neighborhood; you clean it up, but it keeps coming back. Come on people, why can't we keep each section here very short and point to sub-articles? On the sub-articles you can add all the highly important films, directors, and actors that you want. All that detail is just not needed here. BollyJeff || talk 15:22, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Also the Telugu cinema section looks like end credits. It would naturally irritate the reader. --Commander (Ping Me) 17:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

That's what I meant; all of those industry sub-sections should be short and to the point, not a huge list. BollyJeff || talk 18:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
User:Keyan20 has re-inserted a list of film directors and says that they have made significant contributions to Tamil cinema. I don't agree with him because they have directed only four/five films. Of course, they have won a lot of accolades but that doesn't mean they have contributed more to the industry. --Commander (Ping Me) 07:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Film directors mentioned in the lead

There is a statement in the lead: "The country also participated in international film festivals, especially Satyajit Ray (Bengali), Mrinal Sen (Bengali), Ritwik Ghatak (Bengali), K. Balachander (Tamil), K. Viswanath (Telugu), Adoor Gopalakrishnan (Malayalam), G. Aravindan (Malayalam), Mani Ratnam (Tamil), and Girish Kasaravalli (Kannada)." Why K. Balachander and K. Viswanath are included in the list? They are not internationally recognized filmmakers and only one or two of their films were screened at an international film festivals (that too at a single film festival). But for others in the list, almost all the movies were shown atleast at 20-30 major international film festivals. I was reverted by User:Vensatry when I removed the names of two directors from the list. They may have won numerous national film awards (as said by Vensatry) but that doesn't matter here. We cannot simply include these little known filmmakers when many legends like V. Shantaram, Jabbar Patel, Shaji N. Karun etc are not even mentioned any where in the article. -- Arfaz (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't the one who included those two names. I just reverted back when it was removed without proper explanations. All those names mentioned in the para are great people, no doubt in that. But how about this guy, G. Aravindan, he has won multiple National awards, but has he won any International honour, never heard about him. You cannot say K. Balachander and K. Vishwanath are little-known filmmakers. They are well known film directors in India, and they mostly don't experiment films often like Malayalam and Kannada film-makers because of the commercial trend that exists in Tamil and Telugu film industries. If only International film festivals matter, I'd like to include Kamal Haasan's name in the list. --Commander (Ping Me) 12:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
The sentence begins like this, The country also participated in international film festivals, especially.... So only international international film festival participation matters here, right? And about G. Aravindan. He is the one of the best known filmmakers from India and all his films have won awards at various international film festivals. I am planning to improve his wiki article soon by also including those details. I din't mean K. Balachander and K. Vishwanath are little-known filmmakers, but what I said is they are not in the league of the directors like Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak or G. Aravindan and cannot be included in the list of internationally acclaimed filmmakers. Also, please expalin why do you want Kamal Hassan to be added in this list. Has he directed any movies? -- Arfaz (talk) 12:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
That's okay! I agree that none can be compared with Satyajit Ray. But you have to give some details about films directed by G. Aravindan that were screened at various film festivals. And regarding your last statement, haven't you heard about Hey Ram and Virumaandi? --Commander (Ping Me) 12:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I have added a reference which says something about Aravindan's international acclaim. But that says only a little and I will try to find a better article on the filmmaker. -- Arfaz (talk) 12:48, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I agree with User:Arfaz, who is now indef blocked. All the directors mentioned in the lead are some people with lot of their films screened at several film festivals. If you include K. Vishwanath (just 1 or 2 films screened at IFF) then some editors might also want to include their favourite directors. Then it will be a never ending list. --Commander (Ping Me) 16:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Collapse disruptive thread based on comments from a blocked account

Hii vensatry, you are wrong, four films of K. viswanath participated and 2 recieved awards in international film festivals. I have published sources on this. Why would everyone include their favourite ones??? How many filsm of girish kasaravalli have participated in IFFI???? you have sources??? then Thats fine. The issue is about sources and neutral view point and not favoritism. (183.82.193.202 (talk) 17:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)).

Following the consensus

Hii I have made changes following the consensus discussed. (183.82.193.202 (talk) 18:32, 4 August 2011 (UTC)).

You have unilaterally taken a decision by yourself and had made mass changes without consensus. I'm reverting back your edits, since no one has agreed with you. --Commander (Ping Me) 10:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I didn't see consensus for either version, but this page is gonna get locked soon if you guys don't stop edit warring. Talk it over here instead. BollyJeff || talk 15:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure this is the IP sock of User:Sreekar akkineni. --Commander (Ping Me) 16:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
How do you say that? Secret of success (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

There is no consensus happening, except for senseless disruptions from vensatry Original included , sourced material is being disrupted by this person (183.82.193.202 (talk) 16:50, 5 August 2011 (UTC)).

Oh then is there a consensus to inlcude Mr. K. Vishwanath's name in the list. Do you know what "consensus" means? --Commander (Ping Me) 16:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
You are the one who is making disruptive edits. You are definitely a sock of User:Sreekar akkineni. If you agree with Bollyjeff then why do add k. Vishwanath's name again and again. Dont think that they'll support you if you say that "I agree with them". Yours arguement doesn't make any sense. --Commander (Ping Me) 17:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Please don't involve me in this. I am more inclined to agree with a well established user, than an IP. BollyJeff || talk 17:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I've removed K. Vishwanath's name from the lead section. Two users – IP and Arfaz who were involved in this issue are blocked. Please share your thoughts whether to include the names of K. Balachander and K. Vishwanath or not so that we can come to a conclusion. --Commander (Ping Me) 07:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

RFC on Second Largest Film Industry in India

Please comment on the which Film industry is considered Second largest in India on the Talk page of Talk:Cinema_of_Andhra_Pradesh. RTPking (talk) 15:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit war in Malayalam cinema page spill over

Edit by IP 208.95.148.1 has inserted an unfounded phrase "Thiruvananthapuram and Kochi" as base of Malayalam movie industry. It contradicts the citations that exists with it.

This is a spill over of Edit war in Malayalam cinema page. Please check [Malayalam cinema Talk (Click to see)] for more details.

Attempt is to to glorify Thiruvanathapuram by inserting a claim about Thiruvanathapuram as a hub of Malayalam film industry in Malayalam cinema page, contradicting all available news reports from independent media. Citations of these can be seen under Malayalam cinema section of Indian cinema.

All the news paper reports available as citations and for a long period wiki pages like South Indian film industry states Kochi as the base of Malayalam cinema. Thus a group of users 69.47.228.36, 183.90.103.156, 203.117.37.213, Aarem, 208.95.148.1 and a few others are on an editing spree on all pages like Indian Cinema, South Indian film industry to suit their design for Malayalam cinema page. ChroniclerSanjay (talk) 20:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Malayalam film industry is not centered around one place. It is a false statement to show Kochi as base. You know that already. Please correct it. You are compromising facts with regional politics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.47.228.36 (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

The above comment by 69.47.228.36 is his own opinion without any basis. Dozens of media reports in last 7 years state that Kochi is the hub of Malayalam cinema. This can be checked to be correct by clicking on the citations next to the statement, all of which are newspaper reports from Times of India, The Hindu, New Indian Express, Deccan Chronicle, Passline Business Magazine, Malayala Manorama, Mathrubhumi, Deshabhimani - most widely read English and Malayalam dailies. Discussion on this has been extensively done in [Malayalam cinema Talk (Click to see)] page already. 69.47.228.36 is someone who cannot digest Kochi featuring prominent anywhere, which is against his agenda of glorifying Thiruvananthapuram. Prathambhu (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Help Please!

I have started creating the article Indian film series. Since there a lot of them I need your help in adding more series. Since there a lot of film series consisting of 2 films, my opinion is that only those film series with 3 or more films should be added (all of which have been released only). Please feel free to come and add more and do the required corrections. Once fully created, this list will be highly informative. I can add only those films in Hindi and Malayalam and that too not many. Members from other language communities are also invited. All future opinions and comments here or on my talk page only please since I would not be watching this talk page. - Jayadevp13 07:19, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

>> Star suicides: Grim reality of Indian cinema (Lihaas (talk) 15:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)).

Page locked

I've locked this page so folks can take a breath and discuss which directors etc. should be on the page rather than tussle over it. Make a list of who and why below and then vote on it if you must. I have no problem with another admin unlocking the page if they feel progress is being made. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Ummm, so no discussion? At all? Right, I will unprotect as it has been several weeks and we'll see what happens. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2014

Mani Ratnam is widely credited with having revolutionised the Tamil film industry and altering the profile of Indian cinema - [[3]],http://www.timesofoman.com/News/Article-25466.aspx. He has had international acclaim and a very important filmmaker coming out of India. I was surprised that his name is mentioned as a passing reference in this article.

Please change the below to reflect the above:

A number of Indian films from different regions, from this era are often included among the greatest films of all time in various critics' and directors' polls. At this juncture, Telugu cinema and Tamil cinema experienced their respective golden age and during this time the production of Indian folklore, fantasy and mythological films like Mayabazar, listed by IBN Live's 2013 Poll as the greatest Indian film of all time,[82] and Narthanasala grew up. A number of Satyajit Ray films appeared in the Sight & Sound Critics' Poll, including The Apu Trilogy (ranked No. 4 in 1992 if votes are combined),[83] The Music Room (ranked No. 27 in 1992), Charulata (ranked No. 41 in 1992)[84] and Days and Nights in the Forest (ranked No. 81 in 1982).[85] The 2002 Sight & Sound critics' and directors' poll also included the Guru Dutt films Pyaasa and Kaagaz Ke Phool (both tied at #160), the Ritwik Ghatak films Meghe Dhaka Tara (ranked #231) and Komal Gandhar (ranked #346), and Raj Kapoor's Awaara, Vijay Bhatt's Baiju Bawra, Mehboob Khan's Mother India and K. Asif's Mughal-e-Azam all tied at #346.[86] In 1998, the critics' poll conducted by the Asian film magazine Cinemaya included The Apu Trilogy (ranked No. 1 if votes are combined), Ray's Charulata and The Music Room (both tied at #11), and Ghatak's Subarnarekha (also tied at #11).[80] In 1999, The Village Voice top 250 "Best Film of the Century" critics' poll also included The Apu Trilogy (ranked No. 5 if votes are combined).[87] In 2005, The Apu Trilogy and Pyaasa were also featured in Time magazine's "All-TIME" 100 best movies list.[88]

Some filmmakers such as Shyam Benegal continued to produce realistic Parallel Cinema throughout the 1970s,[89] alongside Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, Mrinal Sen, Buddhadeb Dasgupta and Gautam Ghose in Bengali cinema; Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Shaji N. Karun, John Abraham and G. Aravindan in Malayalam cinema; Nirad Mohapatra in Oriya cinema; K. N. T. Sastry and B. Narsing Rao in Telugu cinema;and Mani Kaul, Kumar Shahani, Ketan Mehta, Govind Nihalani and Vijaya Mehta in Hindi cinema.[59] However, the 'art film' bent of the Film Finance Corporation came under criticism during a Committee on Public Undertakings investigation in 1976, which accused the body of not doing enough to encourage commercial cinema.[90]


Akk13790 (talk) 11:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please note we have an article on Mani Ratnam and he is already mentioned in this article, so further mentions of him will require good reason, and should be in context, not just adding his name to another list. - Arjayay (talk) 12:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cinema of India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:52, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cinema of India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

table of films censored 2014

i happened to notice that the numbers of celluloid films censored in punjabi and kannada, which are next to each other in the original table cited in the article, were reversed! i made the correction just now, and i adjusted the addition and hence the totals, but I did NOT go through and check all the numbers, even the digital numbers for those two languages. If I don't get around to it--I can't at the moment (pardon), this probably should be checked. David Farris (talk) 14:31, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

The phrase "Indian film"

In parts of the Arab world, and maybe elsewhere, the term "Indian film" (Arabic: فيلم هندي) is used as a term for overly convoluted , complicated, or otherwise unbelievable story, often mentioning acts of heroism.

Example:

  • Person 1: Yesterday I was walking on the street, a gang of five burly men surrounded me. So I jumped the leader and knocked him out. Then took out the rest. [in addition to telling the details of this fight]. I went home without a scratch.
  • Person 2 to person 3: That's some Indian film!

Is there a place (on this article or elsewhere) for this information? ¬Hexafluoride (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

== Silent film in Marathi? == What's a silent film in Marathi? How can a film be in Marathi (or any language) if it is a silent movie? <small><span style="font-family:Courier New;color:#C0C0C0">Contact [[User:Basemetal|</span><span style="color:red">Basemetal</span>]] [[User talk:Basemetal|<span style="color:blue">here</span>]]</small> 08:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Basemetal 23:31, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Cinema of India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Cinema of India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cinema_of_India/Archive_2&oldid=1256653275"