The route explored in the movie

According to the Motion Picture (Production, Exhibition and Distribution) Act 2026, prepared almost 55 years ago during the Mahendra period, the Nepali film industry has had to limit itself to policy contraction until the current situation. Due to this, filmmakers are facing many levels of political disruption. In the meantime, although the National Film Policy 2071 has been passed, according to the changing times, the need for a progressive and contemporary policy has been realized for the qualitative development of the Nepali film industry.

After a long time of tug-of-war between stakeholders, the draft of the 'Film Bill 2080' for the constitutional guidance of Nepali films has been prepared and the cabinet of the previous government has given a theoretical agreement. For reference, some important questions raised during the drafting of the proposed Film Act have been discussed in this article, focusing on the concept that Nepali film policy should be made service-oriented rather than government-oriented.

movie board restructuring question

In the proposed film bill, it is proposed that 'the board will be a self-governing and organized body with unbroken succession and it will be a fully autonomous body after acquiring legal personality'. But in the proposed bill, government intervention is also expected in many places from the appointment of the chairman of the board to the removal from the post. On the one hand, envisioning complete autonomy in the proposed Act and on the other hand, expecting the active presence of the government and the ministry in the board's operation process has become politically contradictory. The question of making the

board fully autonomous is itself a question of political will and commitment, which has not even been debated within the new and old parties of Nepal regarding the implementation of that will. Even the new generation MLAs are not seen to think beyond taking photos and expressing happiness on social media when they meet artists. Parties and leaders who do not have the ability to give planned interest about the strategic benefits that can be achieved by the Nepali film industry will show generosity to easily grant complete autonomy to the board by considering the sentiments of film workers. The filmmakers have realized that the structure of the board built in the context of

2057 itself is insufficient. As a result, the proposed law is silent on the matter, even though there is a voice that the current structure of the board should be abolished and the film commission should be formed.

There is little discussion in the media about the policy bottlenecks of Nepali films and due to the state's control-oriented nature, the question of complete autonomy written in the proposed law is being overshadowed by itself. Apart from writing in the proposed law and making a strong request by holding a film meeting, there has not been a united stand and a strong voice on behalf of the filmmakers regarding the benefits that will be achieved when the board is fully autonomous. The government's interest in radically transforming the structure of the board, which is being used as a platform to provide jobs to their loved ones, is very inadequate and one-sided. redefinition of

sensor board

After the implementation of the Film (Production, Exhibition and Distribution) Act 2026, it seems that the trend of censoring has started in Nepal. Since the senior generation of Nepali filmmakers were initiated in India, the practice was started in Nepal by forming a film screening committee in the same style as practiced in India during the colonial period. Some time ago, the filmmakers have made public their opposition to the question of the extremely narrow procedure put forward for debate by the Film Screening Committee.

However, despite the idea that the film screening committee, i.e. the Censor Board, should be abolished and replaced by a film certification committee under the full control of filmmakers, this sentiment has not found a place in the proposed law. Instead of curbing the proposed certification board, the voice that should be advanced as a body to promote the interests of filmmakers has also been raised with strength.

In paragraph 3 of the proposed act, a completely independent and autonomous board was envisioned economically, administratively and academically, and in paragraph 5 of the same bill, it was proposed that a film expert and a representative of the ministry appointed by the ministry as the chairman of the film screening committee became contradictory to the question of complete independence and autonomy. is The provision that experts appointed by the ministry should be the chairman of the examination committee gives a clear impression that the way of political appointment has been opened rather than a person with expertise can come from healthy competition. In the process of certification of films, the government has voiced that representatives should be selected from among the film industry.

The traditional taboo-oriented concept that can be controlled by political appointees and ministry technocrats is proposed. This type of restriction plays a role in interfering with the creative freedom of filmmakers and restricting expression by suppressing government commentary. As a result, an environment is created where a single person holds the lens of government laws, rules and procedures related to film screening and always doubts the conscience of filmmakers. It will be necessary to consider the fact that Nepali filmmakers are looking for timely creative freedom, not restriction, with the proposed law. It seems as if

movies have been introduced as a genre to be controlled or curbed under the Ministry of Information and Communication in the style of the Panchayat era. Thus, in the current situation, it seems that the film industry has not played a solid role in moving the question of transformation to the forward direction. National investment in

movies

The proposed film bill has put forward a policy of encouraging and supporting the private sector to produce quality films with original identity including artistic, historical. If we look at the international practice, there is provision for significant national investment in films in many countries of the world, including neighboring countries India and China. Although Nepali filmmakers have advanced the idea that the concept of film investment fund should be implemented as soon as possible and the government should also play a role in film production, this has not been clearly discussed in the proposed bill. Although words such as encouraging and promoting Nepali films have been repeated many times in the proposed bill, the state has remained silent on the question of direct investment in film production.

The proposed bill is silent on the question of what will be the equal efforts of the state for the development of original and mother-tongue films, even though it has been mentioned that development, protection and promotion will be done for this type of film production. Apart from this, the bill has not expressed its views on the issue of public-private partnership for film production. There is also an obscene neoliberal thinking that encourages only the private sector but that the state withdraws from its role.

There is a danger that filmmakers who are creative but do not have sufficient socio-cultural capital may flee without being established. In the current situation, the state has not been able to play the role of guardianship as there is only one recovery without investment in Nepali films. Due to the immaturity and short-sightedness of the major parties in looking at movies and filmmakers, there has been silence on the issue of national investment in movies in the presented bill. Apart from this, there is less discussion in the political and bureaucratic circles about the national investment made in movies by other countries around the world. Co-production agreement on

movie The co-production agreement between the two countries in the

film embraces values ​​such as equality, diversity, access and reciprocity. Various countries have widened the quality of their film industry and the size of the market by entering into co-production agreements with other countries in film production. Nepali filmmakers have been debating in various contexts that if Nepal is able to sign co-production agreements with other countries, an easy and legitimate legal way to bring foreign currency into Nepal to produce films will be opened. If this happens, the way of policy provisions for the investment of 'game changer' big films will be opened. But with the formal co-production agreement between the two countries, it seems that they should be ready to provide other facilities such as tax exemption for filming in Nepal, respecting values ​​such as equality and reciprocity. If there is an agreement on the

co-production agreement, the content of the film, the production process, the question of quality, sales distribution and marketing will help each other. The presented film bill does not seem to mention such issues that have far-reaching implications for the nation. The proposed bill should pave the way for those who want to bring in foreign currency for film production by going to international competitions and showing their talent.

Very little discussion on the overall film bill, the bureaucratic system that was created to suppress the film in the classical nationalist way, and the fact that the film bill making process itself is opaque and focused on a group are some of the imperfections of the bill making process. Although the Minister of Information and Communication of the previous government promised to pass the bill as soon as possible, the new government is confused in the process of passing the proposed bill.

The heads of the government, who are used to appointing the chairman of the film development board every time with a well-known face, do not seem to have the minimum knowledge about what kind of institutional structure and leadership is needed to provide a qualitative leap in the Nepali film sector in the current situation. It is a rare coincidence to excel as an artist and to have the political knowledge and dynamic ability to lead the highest institution of cinema. There is no connection between such a coincidence and such and such characters holding the center of power in the current situation.

Once again handing over the reins of the Nepali film industry to the hands of characters who are unable to contemplate the national and international situation associated with the Nepali film industry, it will be an unforgivable crime for the film industry. .

Balkot, Budhanilkanth and Khumaltar running with a loud face, clinging to the leadership and taking selfies, the current government's mindset is to give the leadership of the board to Boxis in the style of the Rana period, considering the friction as the criteria for becoming the board chairman. This government can understand the reality that the policy and institutional transformation sought by the Nepali film industry in its 6-decade long journey is comprehensive, dynamic and epoch-making.