A new but serious compulsion has been created in the Nepali film market. This practice has created serious confusion and suicidal contradictions in the entire film industry. In some cases, despite the excellent story and content of the film, the changing psychology of the market and the lack of original promotion do not result in the expected audience presence in the hall in the initial days. In such a situation, organizing grand special screenings to increase the dignity of the film and create excitement in the market, inviting artists, critics and audiences from home and abroad to show the film, and initiating positive debates are beautiful and healthy business practices.

However, recently a wrong trend has been established in the market. Despite the beautiful storyline of the film, the forced situation of having to buy tickets by the producer himself to fill the hall has begun to prevail. Now such a situation has become a difficult and artificial game for the creators of excellent films to survive in the market. In this way, the competition to buy tickets yourself and fill the hall may give some films a fake support or financial relief in the short term, but it is a vicious circle for makers who are completely honest and present excellent and original films. Instead of strengthening the film industry in the long term, it creates a kind of invisible pressure.

To break this situation, instead of putting all the attention and resources on the practice of buying tickets yourself, makers should focus on market management and creative promotion. Modern market management is not about artificially filling the hall seats, but rather about delivering the true essence and philosophy of cinema to the right target audience. Makers should work hard from the beginning on a strong conceptual part of the film, interactive digital promotion, and different community-centered promotion according to the genre of cinema. When the promotion strategy becomes creative and organic, then the audience themselves buy tickets and flock to the hall, searching for the story. And, no one needs to choose this suicidal path of compulsion.

The risk of ‘Bhojpuriization’
Cinema is a mirror of the geography, culture, psychology and civilization of that country. The Nepali film industry has faced many ups and downs while charting a long journey of more than 6 decades. However, today, Nepali cinema is at a serious crossroads between the globalization of the market and commercial pressure. A serious debate has come to the surface here – can Nepali cinema establish itself on the world stage while preserving its own unique identity? Or, is it just getting trapped in the maze of cheap entertainment, superficial presentation and commercial formulas and being pushed towards ‘Bhojpuriization’?

The Bhojpuri film industry is a large regional market, which has its own commercial success. However, from the perspective of artistic value, intellectual discussion and the global grammar of cinema, a large part of Bhojpuri films has become limited to fixed formulas, exaggerated acting and cheap entertainment. When a film industry abandons the depth and intelligence of art and makes only momentary applause and cheap market its goal, then its literary and cultural value becomes zero . To save the Nepali film industry from becoming so directionless and identityless, it is time for the state, audience, directors and artists to seriously introspect and reform its structures from their respective places .

The state plays the first and most protective role in this journey . One of the major reasons for the collapse of the Bhojpuri film industry and its decline in quality was the excessive entertainment tax imposed by the then governments . Producers were crushed by the burden of unreasonable taxes and were forced to cut investment in the technical and artistic quality of the film, which pushed the entire film industry towards decline . The Nepali government should learn a big lesson from this fate of the Bhojpuri film industry and protect and encourage indigenous cinema, not tax it.

Lessons from South Indian Cinema 
Along with this negative lesson of ‘Bhojpurikaran’, we also have a strong and contemporary example of positive transformation – the South Indian film industry. How did South Indian cinema earn its unique reputation and establish itself worldwide despite the huge market of Bollywood and the technical pressure of Hollywood? Its only strong backbone is – originality and a firm grip on the indigenous foundation.

South Indian makers did not blindly copy Hollywood or Western styles – they proudly made the myths, culture, folklore and indigenous psychology of their own land the main language of cinema. What they convinced the world was that the more local cinema is, the more global it can be. They did not sell their identity in a cheap guise of glitz and glamour, but rather made the indigenous characters of their own village and society the main protagonists of cinema. Today, because of this honesty towards patriotism and the indomitable confidence in telling stories, the whole world has become a fan of their stories.

Nepal is a beautiful country full of multilingual, multicultural and multi-ethnic diversity. Every 10 kilometers of our geography, a new culture, new love and new philosophy of life can be found. There is an ocean of stories here. In such a country, making a film on copied preparations or copy-pasted stories is an intellectual bankruptcy. Directors and writers should not sit in rooms looking for preparation formulas, but rather go to the ground level of society and their own surroundings to find stories. The stories of small human emotions, cultural conflicts and social experiences that are before our eyes but are overlooked can actually become unique and unique for world cinema.

The domestic struggle of patriot cinema
A striking and fresh example of this is the fate of Nepali films ‘Red Suitcase’, ‘Shambala’, ‘Rajaganj’, ‘Bhutan’ (The Story of a Lost Home) and some other films that have gained worldwide recognition and appreciation in recent years. It is a very sad and ironic matter that these indigenous and intellectual films, which have reached the world’s most prestigious and top film festivals like Venice and Berlin and earned praise and raised the stature of Nepali cinema on the international stage, do not get the expected audience in the commercial theaters of their own country and even struggle to get it. In such a situation, the role of the state becomes the most critical.

There is a need for a unified and revolutionary step to save the Nepali film industry from the swamp of ‘Bhojpurikaran’, to get it out of the hustle and bustle of old movies and such market constraints of the recent times. The government should consider such films selected or awarded on the international stage as national heritage and come up with a special screening policy. There should be a legal provision to provide ‘mandatory minimum show’ and appropriate time for such films in cinema halls. To attract viewers to watch original films like ‘Shambhala’, ‘Red Suitcase’ or ‘Bhutan’, the state can completely waive the tax on tickets, so that the ticket price becomes cheaper and the general public is motivated to reach the theater.

The existence of cinema ultimately depends on the consciousness of the audience. There was a turning point in the history of Nepali cinema, where the entire film industry had become stagnant. At that time, ‘Loot’ did the historic work of not letting Nepali cinema stagnate and giving it a new life. There, such a magic of a completely original story, excellent writing and collective understanding worked that ‘Loot’ became a unique milestone film in Nepali cinema. But, irony! After that historic success, the films that were made again only absorbed its superficial themes (such as abusive language and cheap criminal culture) rather than understanding the inner beauty and deep essence of ‘loot’. As a result, the audience was disappointed and gradually forgot the way to the theater again. Now, in the name of that same patriotism, the tendency to indulge in cheap regionalism, unnecessary farce, budget imbalance and exaggeration of characters has started to dominate, which was the main reason for the decline of Bhojpuri cinema. The ideological clarity and collective responsibility of the

maker are the backbone of the
film and its ideological owner is the director. The biggest responsibility of saving Nepali cinema from the path of self-interest and breaking the syndicate lies on the shoulders of our directors. Directors should understand that cinema is not just a pile of dialogues or the technical brilliance of the camera, it is a poetry of visual language. Until the director establishes himself as a creator, cinema cannot attain its intellectual dignity.

Cinema is completely a collective work. However, another major disease of the decline of the Bhojpuri film industry was that the entire film revolved around the main actor or star. The tendency to give most of the budget only to the main actor and not to pay the other technicians, writers and supporting actors who enrich the film prevailed. When a large part of the budget is spent on the main star and the character actors and small role actors who bring the character to life on the screen are not paid a fair price for their labor, then the foundation of the film becomes weak.

To strengthen the Nepali film industry, it is necessary to abandon the tendency to depend only on the main actor and develop a culture that judges the work and remuneration of every member, big or small.

The Mirror of ‘Elephant in the Fog’ and the Future Path
If ‘Elephant in the Fog’, which received a historic and prestigious honor like the Jury Award at the Cannes Film Festival, does not find an audience in its own country’s commercial theaters and has to give up its life due to market management, it will be a shameful defeat not only for Nepali cinema but also for the entire state apparatus. When it reaches such a point, where did the state go wrong? Where did its cultural policy fail? And, how did the Film Development Board become just an administrative rubber stamp? A serious and historical question will arise.

A unified and revolutionary step is now needed to save the Nepali film industry from the swamp of ‘Bhojpurikaran’, to get it out of the hustle and bustle of old movies and such market constraints of the recent times. Writers and technicians should be given the highest position, respect and fair remuneration in the film industry. Without a script with a strong and ideological foundation and a satisfied team that is paid according to the work, no matter how many established stars are put in, cinema will remain weak. The media and cinema critics should also abandon the practice of only singing the praises of established films or getting involved in unnecessary fund-raising and create intellectual advocacy, correct reviews and creative debate in favor of excellent films.