International
Eros International inks multiple film deals in China
MUMBAI: Eros International has inked as many as three deals with China’s state owned film and entertainment companies to promote, co-produce, distribute and unlock value in respective intellectual properties for Sino-Indian films across all platforms in both the countries.
After signing a co-production deal with China Film Group Corporation (CFGC), Eros has now signed Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with Shanghai Film Group Corporation (SFG) and Fudan University.
The collaboration with the Shanghai Film Group Corporation incorporates exploitation of intellectual property rights owned by each party in their respective markets, development, co-production and distribution of film projects for both India and China. The treaty paves the way for Eros to become the preferred Indian film partner in China.
Eros has also entered into an association with Fudan University, which includes the ability for Eros to license Fudan’s IP for remakes or co-productions in India. Fudan will also assist Eros in obtaining publishing licenses for the promotion and distribution of the films from the Eros library in China across various platforms including dubbing them or remaking them to suit local audience tastes.
The MoUs were signed by Eros International managing director Sunil Lulla at the recently concluded India-China Business Forum in Shanghai, attended by Indian Prime Minster Narendra Modi.
Lulla said, “This is a very proud moment for us at Eros to be associated with the biggest and most-respected Chinese media companies. We are humbled by the gestures that make us the most preferred partner in the field of media and entertainment and we are committed to helping both countries expand their market and audience instantly to over 2.5 billion people. We are really excited about the possibilities and the potential and making films together is just the tip of the ice-berg as we hope to extend these partnerships across all platforms including online.”
China Film Group Corporation chairman La Peking said, “Wish India and China collaboration will be more and more fruitful.”
Shanghai Film Group Corporation president Ren Zhonglun added, “Eros is a very respectable company, which we always looked forward to working with. This strategic partnership MoU between Eros and SFG fits into the general background of the collaboration between two countries – India and China. It is also the fruit of collaborative effort on resource sharing by filmmakers from two countries. China and India together have 2.5 billion population with great market potential. As Asian countries, we share a lot of similarities in terms of culture, religion and art. There is big space in movie co-operation. We expect to visit back to India and Eros in the near future to further our collaboration.”
As was reported earlier by Indiantelevision.com, Eros International signed its first ever Sino-Indian co-production deal with Chinese state owned production company CFGC to co-produce the movie Da Tang Xuan Zang (Monk Xuan Zang) based on the life of a Chinese monk.
The Chinese movie market is sized at $4.8 billion, second only to the US, and grew 34 per cent in 2014. China produced over 600 films in 2014. The number of theatre screens in China has also quadrupled since 2010 with 5,397 screens added in 2014 alone, taking their screen count to 23,600. As per industry projections in the next five years, China is expected to surpass the US to be the world’s largest box office. In comparison, India’s widest release to date has been across just 5,000 screens.
LOS ANGELES: Acting has never been an easy profession, but in recent years, it has acquired a new existential anxiety. Artificial intelligence can now mimic faces, clone voices and, in theory at least, speak any language it is fed. The fear that actors may soon be replaced by algorithms no longer belongs exclusively to science fiction. And yet, despite the rise of digital inauthenticity, some performers remain stubbornly resistant to replacement. The reason is not celebrity, nor even talent. It is language.
On paper, this should not be a problem. AI can translate. It can imitate accents. It can string together grammatically correct sentences in dozens of languages. But acting, inconveniently, is not about grammatical correctness. It is about meaning, and meaning is where AI still falters.
Machine translation offers a cautionary tale. Google Translate, now powered by neural AI, has improved markedly since its debut in 2006. It can manage menus, emails and airport signage with impressive efficiency. What it struggles with, however, are the moments that matter most: idioms, metaphors, irony, and cultural shorthand. Ask it to translate a joke, a threat disguised as politeness, or a line heavy with emotional subtext, and it begins to unravel. Acting lives precisely in those gaps.
This matters because film language is rarely literal. Scripts, particularly in independent cinema, rely on figurative speech and symbolism to convey what characters cannot say outright. Pedro Almodóvar’s Volver is a useful example. The film’s recurring use of red operates on multiple levels: grief, desire, repression, liberation, and memory. These meanings are inseparable from the Spanish cultural context and emotional cadence. A translation may convey the words, but not the weight they carry. An AI-generated performance might replicate the sound, but not the sense.
This is where multilingual actors gain their edge. Performers such as Penélope Cruz and Sofía Vergara do not simply switch between languages; they move between cultural logics. Their fluency allows them to inhabit characters without flattening them for international consumption. Language, for them, is not an accessory but a structuring force.
Beyond European cinema, this becomes even more pronounced. Languages such as Hindi, Arabic and Mandarin are spoken by hundreds of millions of people and underpin vast cinematic traditions. As global audiences grow more interconnected, the demand for authenticity increases rather than diminishes. Viewers can tell when a performance has been filtered through approximation. Subtle errors, misplaced emphasis, and an unnatural rhythm break the illusion.
There is also a practical dimension. Multilingualism expands opportunity. Sofía Vergara has spoken openly about how learning English enabled her to work beyond Colombia and access Hollywood roles. But this movement is not a one-way export of talent into English-speaking cinema. Multilingual actors carry stories, styles and sensibilities back with them, enriching multiple industries at once.
Cinema has always thrived on such hybridity. Denzel Washington’s performances, for instance, draw on the cultural realities of growing up African American in the United States, while also reflecting stylistic influences from classic Hollywood and Westerns. His work demonstrates how identity and influence intersect on screen. Multilingual actors extend this intersection further, embodying multiple cultural frameworks simultaneously.
At times, linguistic authenticity is not merely artistic but ethical. Films that confront historical trauma, such as Schindler’s List, rely on language to anchor their moral seriousness. When Jewish actors perform in German, the choice is not incidental. Language becomes a site of memory and confrontation. It is difficult to imagine an automated voice carrying that responsibility without hollowing it out.
This is why claims that AI heralds the death of language miss the point. Language is not just a delivery system for information. It is a repository of history, humour, power and pain. Fluency is not only about knowing what to say, but when to hesitate, when to understate, and when to let silence do the work. These are not technical problems waiting to be solved; they are human instincts shaped by lived experience.
AI may one day improve its grasp of metaphor and nuance. It may even learn to sound convincing. But acting is not about sounding convincing; it is about being convincing. Until algorithms can acquire memory, cultural inheritance and emotional intuition, multilingual actors will remain irreplaceable. AI may learn to speak. But it cannot yet learn to mean.
In an industry increasingly tempted by shortcuts, language remains stubbornly resistant to automation. And for actors who can move between worlds, linguistic, cultural, and emotional, that resistance is not a weakness, but a quiet, enduring advantage.
