Movies
Ficci seeks widespread benefits, exemptions for digital cinema
|
NEW DELHI: The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Ficci) has demanded various benefits for the digital cinema industry, including tax holiday under Income Tax, exemption from MAT and DDT, 100 per cent depreciation benefit, sales tax exemption and customs benefits. Topping the list of demands is a 10-year income tax holiday, just as is done in the case of various types of infrastructure development, including creation of trunking, broadband network and tax holidays multiplexes. The Ficci document has also strongly stressed the definite need for removal of service tax in the case of this “fledgling industry”,  |
|
It has shown that at various stages, from conversion of analogue images to digital and the time of being actual screening, the players – operators, distributors, rentals for service providers, etc. pay several times. “All the services described in the business model above attract a levy of service tax at 12% plus 2% education cess thereon, albeit under different service categories. It is submitted that for an industry in its infancy, a cost of 12.24% of its revenues will have a significant adverse affect on its prospects, if not serve to destroy it altogether,” Ficci has emphasised. The document spelling out Ficci’s budgetary wishlist says that digital cinema has tremendous benefits, not the least of which is less burden on the environment, which is the ground on which it has demanded 100 depreciation benefit for the sector. The document argues that analogue prints are made from polyester films and are destroyed by burning, which is a huge bio-hazard. Digital prints are mere digital files and can be simply erased from our server’s memory. Hence, film waste removal is taxing on the environment, because polyester films cannot be recycled. |
|
Ficci has suggested the development of digital cinema infrastructure that would benefit the industry hugely. It argues that this will increase box office collections, generate rural employment and curb piracy, as well create savings in foreign exchange and minimize wastage in print. “In India”, the document argues, “software piracy has assumed gigantic proportions. Ficci studies estimate that the Indian film industry loses almost 42 per cent revenue due to piracy. “In absolute terms this amounts to approximately Rs 2,000 crore on account of piracy. This is money on which the government earns neither Entertainment Tax nor Income Tax. “An early and widespread release of movies, enabled by digital cinema will act as an effective deterrent to piracy,” it says. Ficci also says that early migrants to the digital cinema system have reported more than 100 per cent increase in revenue collections by way of increased box office collections due to early screening of movies. “Needless to mention, this has also translated into enhanced collections of Entertainment and Income Tax,” stressed the document. Digital cinema makes niche cinema and regional language films more commercially viable. This will, in turn, generate employment for local artists and technicians and other regional film industry related infrastructural suppliers, holds Ficci. It has stressed that digital cinema infrastructure equipment, particularly the digital projector and digital movie compressor, which attract the peak rate of custom duty, be given exemption. “Since these items are not manufactured in India and are a very heavy cost burden to the provider these should be treated at par with hi-tech and information technology sector items with customs duty being reduced to nil,” suggests Ficci. Ficci has also recommended that the state governments give lease tax exemption to the new industry. Considering the way digital cinema infrastructure is poised to revolutionise the films and visual arts exhibition in the country, with multi-fold advantages to all the constituents of the society, (viz. the content owner, the theatre owner, the tax administration, and the general public as the ultimate consumer), it certainly deserves a whole hearted support from the Government of India, Ficci feels. “And as elucidated above, a strong Digital Cinema Infrastructure would, in the long run, pay back more than what it is requesting for now.” |
Hollywood
Did the ballet and opera controversy cost Timothée Chalamet his Oscar? Â
The actor’s ‘dying art forms’ comments may have danced away his Oscar chances.
LOS ANGELES: Last night, the 98th Academy Awards delivered a performance that wasn’t in the script, as Michael B. Jordan clinched the Best Actor statue, leaving Timothée Chalamet’s widely predicted win to pirouette away into the night. While Chalamet was long considered the frontrunner for his starring turn in Marty Supreme, many are whispering that a singular, ill-timed performance, not on screen but on the campaign trail, may have rewritten the finale.
For months, the narrative surrounding the race had a singular star, Chalamet, the critics’ darling and the bookies’ bet. However, the closing numbers saw a dramatic plot twist. Chalamet found himself upstaged not just by his fellow nominees but by the ghost of public opinion, following remarks he made during a Variety and CNN actor-on-actor conversation in February.
What started as a breezy discussion turned distinctly frosty when Chalamet, the conversation’s designated trendsetter, took aim at some classical institutions. “I don’t want to be working in ballet or opera, where no one is interested anymore,” he said, before branding them “dying art forms.”
The backlash was swift and, unfortunately for Chalamet’s campaign, star-studded. For the film industry, an establishment that often fancies itself as the glamorous custodian of the high arts, the actor’s comments didn’t just strike a bum note. They sounded like a discordant symphony. Academy heavyweights, including Jamie Lee Curtis, Whoopi Goldberg and Steven Spielberg, publicly voiced their disapproval. Spielberg himself countered that the “cinematic experience” and classical performance are bound by a similar dedication to audience engagement, effectively suggesting that Chalamet’s view was perhaps a bit too modern for its own good.
The conversation quickly became a media maelstrom. In a masterstroke of high-culture clapback, renowned ballerina Misty Copeland didn’t just issue a statement. The Academy even choreographed a surprise performance by her for the ceremony itself, a powerful, wordless rebuttal that many saw as a direct riposte to Chalamet’s dismissive claims. Even regional arts institutions joined the choreography. The Seattle Opera offered a cheeky “TIMOTHEE” discount, granting a 14 percent markdown to prove that people do, in fact, care.
Did this cultural counterpoint truly cost Chalamet his win? While some industry insiders argue that Michael B. Jordan’s complex dual performance in Sinners, a performance that also swept the SAG Awards, had simply built up too much momentum, the timing of Chalamet’s comments was undeniably poor. Coming as final Oscar voting began, they arguably soured his narrative and made a vote for him feel, to some, like a vote against artistic unity.
Even the ceremony itself wasn’t finished with the narrative. Host Conan O’Brien, whose sharp tongue is a celebrated feature of these galas, didn’t miss a beat. “Security is extremely tight tonight,” O’Brien jibed during his opening monologue, glancing toward the front row. “I’m told there are concerns about attacks from both the opera and ballet communities. They’re just mad you left out jazz!”
The laughter that followed was pointed, a final public curtain call for a controversy that Chalamet likely wished had closed weeks ago. Whether it was a case of genuine peer disapproval, a sudden surge in support for Jordan’s powerhouse performance, or simply a case of poor footwork on the campaign stage, the ballet and opera debacle has now cemented its place in Oscar history. Chalamet’s experience serves as a clear memo to future contenders. Even when you are the headline act, a solo performance can still fall flat if you forget to play to the entire house.
