(Person) Percentage - Sabanci University Research Database

The Asian Media & Mass Communication Conference 2010 Osaka, Japan
public opinion and technology … facilitated … ‘undoing of the ban’ through the steady
streaming of Indian audio-visual material into Pakistan (2003).
“Usurping” also points to the location of an “enormous complex [for the] sale of foreign cinema
and video material at Karachi’s Rainbow Centre”. The Centre is one of a kind in Asia, but the
sellers pay no heed to intellectual property right issues of the DVDs (2003). The marketer openly
sells them to public and cable TV operators for home viewing either directly or via cable
channels.
The cable operators are prohibited to screen pirated films, but Pakistan Electronic Media
Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) fails to implement the law. As mentioned in “Usurping,”
PEMRA ignores to enforce the law for the fear that the “cable operators will lose financially, and
the public will switch over to Indian videos and films on cassettes and CDs” (2003). Considering
the levels of piracy and Indian film viewership in Pakistan, the switching fear appears
unjustified. It also points to the failure of frequent bans on Indian films to develop its national
cinema. As stated in “Usurping,” the “ban on Indian films has failed to develop Pakistani
cinema, [or] the quality of the film industry, and [many] cinema houses have steadily closed
down business” (2003). This closure points to serious quality issues with films due to business
shortage, hence, budgetary constraints in the past decades. Rizvi and Mandviwalla explain:
Ayub’s 1965-ban on Indian films isolated Pakistan from the competition by closing six times
larger Indian markets for its films (2010). The markets and film budgets were further reduced
due to the loss of East Pakistan, the Fall of Dhaka in 1971.
Incidentally, the acclaimed golden era of Pakistani films (1965-1977) is shaded with deficit
pointing to, what Mandviwalla calls, the progression of price cutting practices that shaped
copying trends and a compromise on originality and quality (ca. 2007). This situation gave rise
to the import of cheap, sex based films by 1974 that Z. A. Bhutto’s government tried regulating
through the formation of National Film Development Corporation (NAFDEC). During Zia
regime, NAFDEC’s monopoly, unchanged ticket prices, heavy taxes, and the induction of VCR
with pirated films for home audience phase gradual shutting down of foreign film cinemas
(Mandviwalla, ca. 2007). The big budget English and Hindi films reached every viewer, causing
the failure of low budget Urdu films on the big screen (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6). The Indian film impact
was so strong that the loyal audience kept away from the local and foreign cinemas, reducing the
production of both Urdu and Punjabi films to bare minimum (Mandviwalla, ca. 2007). The
collapse accelerated due to piracy and an inconsistent Entertainment Tax policy despite protests
by filmmakers and exhibitors.
The exhibitors realistically oppose and the filmmakers religiously support the ban on Indian
films from the platforms of different organizations. The artists offer divided opinions full of both
patriotism, but also origin free love for films (Ramzi, 2004a; Ramzi, 2004b; Ramzi, 2007).
Shaan, the enigma of Lollywood, seems “visibly displaced from the jhatkas and matkas [body
movements and dances] of Lollywood” (Isani, 2005), but he performs for the man on streets who
is happy despite strong disapproval of the present quality of Pakistani films by the legendary
elite.
38