Producing Bollywood: Inside the Contemporary Hindi Film Industry (62 page)

Hindi film: consumption of,
286–89
,
291
; as entertainment,
46–47
,
55
; as tool for modernization,
47–48
; as tool for social change,
56
,
68

Hindi film industry,
6
,
13
,
176
; A-list of,
27
; assumptions about audiences,
87
; as aural work culture,
222–25
; “black”economy of,
225
; “black money” per-ceivedlinks to,
181
,
375
n. 37; creation of,
40–43
; developmentalist discourse about,
64
; disdain toward,
7–9
,
14–16
,
77–79
,
90
,
240–41
; disorganization of,
259–65
; disrupting logics of late capi-talism,
18–20
; as economic enterprise,
53
,
63–73
; ethnographic research on,
25–27
; family networks in,
146–47
,
199–204
,
218–20
; flexibility in,
225–26
; as fragmented,
176–80
,
183
,
190
,
229
–
31
,
261
; funding for,
11–12
,
180–83
,
186
,
253–59
,
260–70
; gendered access to,
195–96
,
385
n. 23; gendered space of,
32
,
123–24
,
134–37
; gentrification of,
4–5
,
17–19
,
36
,
77–83
,
315–17
; hierarchy in,
202–7
; as “independent,”
176–77
; industry status granted to,
65–67
,
69
; intermarriage within,
197–99
; links to the underworld,
66
; low-budget films in,
364
; magical rites in,
247–51
; as “middle-class,”
122
; neoliberal economic policies impact on,
18–19
,
59
–
63
; as oral work culture,
222–25
; perceptions of,
14
,
34
,
46–47
,
59–63
,
68
;

production culture of,
21–22
,
229–33
; respectability of,
16–17
,
34–35
,
70–75
,
121–33
; social networks in,
31
,
191–97
; social norms in,
21
,
203–5
; social rela-tionsin,
155
; state ambivalence about,
49–50
; state policies toward,
17–18
,
33
,
42–55
,
64
; state support of,
51
; state taxation of,
52
,
54–55
; stigma attached to,
124
; structures in,
213
; success in,
114–15
,
302–3
,
350–51
; symbolic sig-nificanceof,
62
,
69
; technological fetishization in,
235–36
,
239
; uncertainty in,
9–12
,
244–47
; understandings of consumption,
286–89
,
291
; use of technology in,
235–36
; video tech-nologyimpact on,
72
,
94
; work culture of,
156
,
215–16
,
225–27
.
See also
corpo-ratization

Hindi filmmakers,
4
,
368
n. 6,
368
n. 9; social status of,
148–50
,
185
; social worlds of,
103–9

Hindi film set,
27–28
,
202–8
; ethno-graphicsketch of,
156–74
; and hier-archy,
123
,
202–5
; as quasi-public space,
29
,
217–21

hits/flops,
191
,
276
,
285
,
313
.
See also
box-officeoutcome; commercial outcome

Hollywood: contrasts with Bollywood,
236–41
; film production norms in,
176
; Hindi filmmakers understanding of,
237–39
,
311
; in Indian mediascape,
62–63
,
377
n.2; interactions with Bolly-wood,
216
,
359–63

Hum Aapke Hain Koun!
(What Do I Meanto You!),
90–98
,
100
,
257–58
,
378
nn. 17–18; box-office outcome inter-pretations,
114–15
,
287–301
,
325
,
341
; commercial success of,
20
,
93
; distribution strategy of,
287–88
,
379
n. 20,
389
n. 9; as first Hindi film with four-track optical stereo sound,
236
.
See also
Bar-jatya, Sooraj

Indian state.
See
state

industry status: announcement of,
41–43
,
65–67
; impact of,
69–74
,
121
,
225
,
265
,
357

intersubjectivity,
33
,
79
,
117

Johar, Karan,
81–82
,
103–8
,
203–4
,
220
–
23
,
352–357
,
359–62
. See also
KuchKuch
HotaHai; My name is Khan

Khan, Aamir,
81
,
143–47
,
199
,
218–19
,
229–30
,
238
,
286
,
365
,
386
n. 30. See also
Lagaan

Khan, Shah Rukh,
1–2
,
88–92
,
101–5
,
116
,
141–45
,
194–95
,
239–40
,
286
,
359–65
.See also
Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge;
My Name is Khan

Khanna, Amit,
63
,
84
,
140
,
261–63

kin networks: in Hindi film industry,
194–202

knowledge: as industry ideology,
245
,
347–49

Koirala, Manisha,
138–39
,
145–46

Kuch Kuch Hota Hai
(SomethingHap-pens),
104–5
,
396
n. 6,
398
n. 25.
See
also
Johar, Karan; Khan, Shah Rukh

Lagaan (Land Tax),
81
,
227–29
,
328
,
386
n. 30; as first Hindi film shot in syn-chronoussound,
236
; global success of,
388
n. 17.
See also
Khan, Amir

Lamhe
(Moments),
84–85
,
94–96
,
301–13
;commercial outcome of,
86
,
300
; inter-pretationsof,
284–85
,
306–8
,
342

liberalization, economic,
18
,
43
,
58
,
202
,
368
n. 7

Love Sex aurDhokha
(Love, Sex, and Be-trayal),
364–65

love story,
92–93
,
306
; filmic representa-tionsof,
99
; perceptions of,
159
,
162
.See also
Hum Aapke Hain Kaun; Lamhe

Luimère Brothers,
59–61

mahurat
: as magical rite,
248–50

Malinowski, Bronislaw,
247–48
,
250–51
,
389
n. 3 mass audience,
7–8
,
95–96
,
296
,
300
,
314
,
355–58

mass media: role in state projects,
42–43
; state policies toward,
17–18

media anthropology,
21–23
; Hindi film industry as research site for,
25–27
mediascape,
18
,
62–63
; Bollywood’s distinctiveness in,
252–53
; in India,
96
,
106
,
324–25
; transformations of,
2–3
,

57–58
,
93–96
,
110
,
372
n. 3.
See also
film, television, video

middle class,
17
,
94–97
,
124
,
141–44
; con-trastedwith “filmi,”
142
; norms in India,
120
; as respectable,
4
,
16–17
,
120–21
,
150
; as social status,
141–44
,
185
.
See also
respectability

middle-class identity,
17
,
73
,
118
,
121–22
,
150
,
380
n. 5

morality,
284–90
,
306–8

multiplex theaters,
71–72
,
110–17
,
328–40
; class composition of audiences at,
345
; commercial success of,
345–50
; construction of,
73
,
376
n. 42,
376
n. 45; difference from U.S. multiplexes,
25
; niche audience creation by,
111
,
316
; significance of,
340–44
; symbolic value of,
348–49
; ticket prices,
10
,
313–16
,
356–57
,
369
n. 17

music.
See
songs

My Name is Khan,
359–62
,
398
n. 25,
399
n. 3.
See also
Johar, Karan; Khan, ShahRukh

National Conference on Challenges Before Indian Cinema,
41
,
63
,
372
n. 4

National Film Archives,
61–61

National Film Development Corporation (NFDC),
51
,
60–61
,
69

nationalism,
21
,
43
,
46–47
,
62–63
,
74
,
106–7
,
358

Nehru, Jawaharlal: attitude toward film,
47–49
,
373
n. 13; policies toward film,
42–43
,
48–55

neoliberalism,
15
,
42–43
,
74–75
; impact on Hindi film industry,
18–19
,
59–63
,
357–58
; and the middle class,
122
,
150

non-resident Indian (NRI),
15
,
370
n. 27.
See also
disaporic audiences

overseas markets.
See
diasporic film markets;Overseas Territory

Overseas Territory,
10
,
186–90
,
291–95
,
319–28
,
341
,
350–55

Patil Report,
177–79

Peepli Live,
275
,
364–65

Phalke, DhundirajGovind,
43–44

piracy,
24–25
,
82
,
93–94
,
384
nn. 11–12

postcolonial,
8
; condition,
19–20
,
105
; time,
50–51
,
59
,
64

production culture,
6
,
21
,
90
,
313
; disdain and,
121
,
356

production fictions,
12
,
35
,
115
,
246–47
,
257–59
,
276–78
,
343
; explanatory rubric of,
245–47

production process,
34
,
183
; audience imaginaries in,
23–24
; as intersubjec-tive,
79
; orality of,
222–25
; stars’ cen-tralityin,
34–35
,
208–9
,
223
.
See also
Hindi film industry; scripts

proposal-makers,
34
,
216
; disdain for,
182–83

Rai, Aishwarya,
136–37
,
253
,
381
n. 19

Rajabali, Anjum,
98–99
,
194–95
,
209
,
297
,
312–13
,
318
,
339
,
350–54

regimes of value,
33
,
42
,
74–75

Reliance Big Entertainment,
6
,
140
,
243–44
,
361
,
399
nn. 7–8; Big Cinemas as exhibition division of,
332–35
,
347
,
376
n. 42

respectability,
5–6
,
132–33
,
150
; discourses of,
137–41
; educational attainment and,
144–50
; gendered dimensions of,
123–33
,
136–37
; middle-class forms of,
4
,
16–17
,
120–21
,
150
; perfor-mancesof,
133–37
. See also gentrifica-tionmiddle class

risk: managed through kinship,
199–202
; managed through stars,
271–74

Roshan, Rakesh,
96
,
146
,
211–12
,
225
,
234–36
,
299–300
,
349

satellite television,
3
,
24–25
,
62
; as educating audiences,
318–19
; impact on film distribution of,
189
,
384
n. 12; impact on filmmaking,
93–95
,
325–27
; perceptions of,
106
,
117
,
368
n. 7.
See also
television

scripts,
223
,
231–33
; vs. “bound scripts,”
215–16
,
223

Shroff, Shravan,
69
,
77–78
,
94
,
106–8
,
266–67
,
271
,
337–38
,
348
,
392
n. 32

Shroff, Shyam,
94
,
201
,
262–63
,
338–40
,
347–49
,
377
n. 3,
396
n. 7