KATHMANDU: Last year, ‘Purna Bahadur Ko Sarangi’ achieved a record turnover of over RS 460 million, a milestone that inspired the entire film industry. However, when film producer Binod Paudel sensationally revealed that he bought tickets worth more than RS 1 million to run his film, ethical questions arose over this achievement.

He had written on his Facebook status, “Even if Chandre, Indra’s father, makes a film, one still has to buy tickets worth 2–2.5 million. We also bought tickets worth 1–1.2 million. Now buying tickets is also part of the marketing plan.”

On July 6, 2024, during an interaction on “Festival-Centric Films vs Domestic Market” organized by Kathmandu University, facilitator Prasun Sangroula asked, “What exactly do you mean by buying tickets?”

Producer Paudel laughed and replied, “This is reality.”

He argued that cinemas in Nepal rarely give multiple shows to films other than those considered “big,” and often remove films from halls within a day or two, so he had to buy tickets to ensure the film reached audiences. Sharing his experience from Australia, he added, “There, whether audiences come or not, the film runs in halls for the first week. Here, since films are removed within two days, there’s a compulsion to buy tickets to make sure audiences see the film in the first week.”

Tickets bought by producers in this way are called “invisible audiences.” Even when free tickets are distributed, some viewers do not attend the halls. Tickets issued in the name of audiences who are not physically present are a way of relying on “invisible audiences” to run a film. When films are run on the support of “invisible audiences,” most of the seats in the hall remain empty.

Prashanna Mali, who reviews films on YouTube, says he has often watched films alongside such “invisible audiences.” He says, “Many times, online booking shows houseful, but when we reach the hall, there aren’t even five viewers, and we have to leave without watching the film.”

In Nepal, every year many films are produced, but most struggle to attract audiences. According to the Film Development Board, out of 62 films released in previous Nepali year, only about 10 percent managed to recover their investment. Among more than two dozen films released in current Nepali year, only ‘Unko Sweater,’ ‘Mohar,’ and ‘Magne Raja’ achieved commercial success so far.

Indian film industry market expert Komal Nahta has said, “The film industry is a sector driven by perception (image/idea). Directors, producers, actors, and writers all want their films to be hits. But in reality, many films flop. That is why even manipulating the box office, they want their films to appear successful.”

As Nahta stated, the situation in India is quite similar to that in Nepal. In a glittering film world, box office statistics can determine a film’s fate. Based on these numbers, producers and actors often enter unhealthy competition to try to change their fortunes.

This kind of competition creates the illusion that most films are superhits, regardless of whether they actually succeed, in social media and news reports. The groups actively spreading this illusion are the filmmakers themselves and teams controlled by them.

From well-known producers to actors, many hide the actual box office collections and enjoy creating their own “fake box office reports.” There are numerous examples where films with average business are claimed to be superhits.

For instance, the gross collection of ‘Mohar,’ starring Paul Shah and released on August 8, was Rs 42.2 million by August 31. However, Paul shared on Facebook that the 23-day box office collection was Rs 54.2 million, spreading false information.

In Nepal, every year many films are produced, but most struggle to attract audiences. According to the Film Development Board, out of 62 films released in previous Nepali year, only about 10 percent managed to recover their investment.

The film ‘Hrashwo Deergha,’ released in the previous Nepali year and starring South Indian actors, also drew significant attention.

The film starred Nita Dhungana and Harihar Dhungana in lead roles. Nita Dhungana, who was also a producer, claimed on social media that the film’s 19-day gross collection exceeded Rs 100 million. However, according to the Film Development Board, the film’s total gross collection was only Rs 43.3 million. Her claim did not hold for long.

Many filmmakers, including ‘Jwai Saab’ and ‘Outlaw Dafa 219,’ have publicly inflated statistics on social media. For ‘Outlaw Dafa 219,’ which made a total business of Rs 14.5 million, producer Amit Agrahari and actor Sushil Shrestha created the illusion that it earned over NPR 20 million by the fourth day, whereas the total business was only Rs 14.5 million.

Similarly, the director of ‘Jwai Saab,’ Basanta Niraula, posted on social media that a film with a total business of Rs 13.1 million earned over Rs 30 million in the first week. The Film Development Board’s records show that the film only made Rs 13.1 million.

Even when such facts can be cross-checked with the Development Board, our producers, directors, and actors, like politicians, do not hesitate to lie publicly. These are just a few examples of unhealthy practices in the film industry.

Although positive buzz about a film does not guarantee audiences will go to the theater, the industry believes it increases the possibility. Filmmakers also believe that sponsored social media rumors about a film’s success create a psychological effect on viewers, making them feel they must watch the film before missing out.

Producers buying tickets

In terms of a film’s business, Friday and Saturday are the most important days. During this period, if audiences are attracted, the investment can be recovered; if not, the number of shows may be reduced or the film may be removed from halls. Films made with a low budget face an even higher risk.

If a film receives strong word-of-mouth early on, its box office performance tends to grow steadily. Box office figures are particularly important for a film’s digital rights and overseas sales. For this reason, filmmakers go to great lengths to make a film appear “hit” even if audiences do not attend. The tactic of producers buying tickets themselves to keep the film running in halls and boost audiences is part of this strategy.

When a producer buys tickets for their own film, 50 percent of the money returns to the producer’s pocket. That is why they are willing to gamble an additional RS 2–2.5 million on a film that has already cost RS 20–30 million.

When producers buy tickets to show a film as “houseful,” it gives the general audience the impression that the film is performing well. Nowadays, it is common practice to buy at least 10–20 tickets per show across halls nationwide. Pradeep Udaya, former president and current advisor of the Film Association of Nepal, says, “Not all, but most filmmakers buy tickets to send audiences to halls.”

Big Movies’ operations manager, Dipesh Baniya, also acknowledges this. “Looking at the counter, 200–300 tickets may have been sold, but the actual presence of people is often less than half,” Baniya says. “A difference of one or two people is one thing, but a large gap between tickets and actual viewers is proof that the film team itself bought the tickets.”

Experts express concern that such practices have increased significantly after COVID-19 and have recently taken on a distorted form. Even before ‘Purna Bahadurko Sarangi,’ there were talks of buying tickets to run a film. However, after that, running films by buying tickets under the name of a “marketing plan” has started becoming normalized.

Still, not all films for which tickets are purchased by producers turn out to be “lucky” like ‘Purna Bahadur’s Sarangi.’ While records may show tickets sold at counters, even with free tickets, people often do not come to halls.

Distortion under the pretext of “hold-over”

The background of producers buying tickets themselves is linked to the practice of “hold-over.” Before the advent of multiplexes, films were released through the “queue system.” At that time, even well-performing films were often removed from halls as soon as a new film was released. Dissatisfied producers raised their voices against this. After prolonged protests, on August 8, 2003, an agreement on “hold-over” was made between the Nepal Film Association and the Nepal Producers Association. According to the agreement, a film could not be removed from a hall if at least 15–25 percent of seats were occupied. Director Deependra Lama says, “Since then, the practice of producers buying tickets themselves to maintain hold-over started.”

At that time, the Bishwajyoti Hall in the capital was the first choice for screening Nepali films. After the start of hold-over, producers began buying tickets on Friday to increase attendance on Saturday. By buying tickets over the weekend, a film could run for a full week.

Director Tulsi Ghimire agrees. “When audience numbers were low, the film would be replaced, so producers bought tickets on Wednesday and Thursday to keep the film running until Friday and Saturday,” he admits. “During initial screenings of ‘Dakshhina,’ 1,000–1,500 tickets were purchased by producers to maintain hold-over.”

Samipya Timalsina, president of the Film Critics Society, says, “At that time, many films were run in halls by producers buying tickets under the pretext of hold-over.”

Some films celebrated 51 or 100 days of screening by relying on hold-over. Pre-booking has now replaced the older hold-over system.

In 2002, digital shows began in Nepal for the first time. With the arrival of multiplexes, it became possible to screen the same film on multiple screens nationwide simultaneously. This changed the way tickets were bought. Now, using apps like Khalti or eSewa, tickets can easily be purchased online. With mobile ticketing, producers or artists can buy a large number of tickets at once and send audiences to halls more easily.

Director Lama comments on the irregularities that increased with the digital shift: “It is bad if producers buy tickets themselves but there are no people in the hall. If a film is shown for free using bought tickets and turns out to be bad, audiences develop aversion to Nepali cinema. Even good films suffer losses because of this.”

Free tickets, free films

On 7 March 2025, Al-Jazeera.com published a long article titled “Bollywood’s Dirty Secret: Paid Reviews That Are Killing the Industry.” The article detailed collusion among India’s major news outlets, entertainment portals, social media reviewers, and content creators to run films successfully.

These arrangements are said to be part of a “package,” stating, “The film’s poster, trailer, songs, and box office projections are made discussion-worthy on social media to make them trending. Deals include live-tweeting from halls on the day of release, giving the film high star ratings, writing positive reviews, and making it trend on social media via hashtags and memes.”

In Nepal, similar collusion has also been alleged—from songs and trailers to reviews published after the film’s release. Large amounts are spent in media to make teasers, trailers, and songs trend. Often, journalists who operate films online or on YouTube act as media coordinators for the film.

The director of ‘Jwai Saab,’ Basanta Niraula, posted on social media that a film with a total business of Rs 13.1 million earned over Rs 30 million in the first week. The Film Development Board’s records show that the film only made Rs 13.1 million.

Journalist Jiban Parajuli, who has worked as a media coordinator and media executive for dozens of films, is the publisher of ThuloParda.com. He states that for commercial advertisements, 1–2 million RS is spent on film-specific media. He says, “If the media doesn’t get paid, they may leak information or even blackmail. If money is spent as requested, media costs alone can reach 10 million RS.”

Media that receive advertising aggressively promotes positive buzz about the film. Media that do not receive advertisements often aggressively produce negative commentary.

When a film is released, audiences are mobilized through actors’ teams who appear during filming, hostel associations, PABSON, colleges, educational consultancies, sports organizations, dance academies, and film colleges. For message-based films, students are gathered; for sports-themed films, audiences from the sports sector are mobilized.

For example, on March 19, 2025, an evening show at EyePlex Baneshwor was filled with athletes. The film, based on the story of Anjila Tumbampo Subba, captain of the Nepali national women’s football team, was shown in a booked hall for the players. In such booked halls, directors, producers, and actors request maximum social media buzz.

It has been revealed that such tickets are distributed via private WhatsApp, WhatsApp groups, Messenger, or email to individuals or institutions. During reporting, some sources (who requested anonymity) said they received free tickets to films such as ‘Outlaw Dafa 219,’ ‘Agastya,’ ‘12 Gaun,’ ‘Chiso Manchhe,’ ‘Tel Visa,’ ‘Laj Sharanam,’ ‘Jhilko,’ ‘Anjila,’ ‘Ke Ghar Ke Dera: Ghar No. 2.’ Sometimes such tickets reach your circle of friends or acquaintances. Free tickets to films like Anjila and ‘Outlaw Dafa 219’ have even reached us.

When audiences who receive such tickets attend, halls appear crowded; when they do not, halls are empty. Currently, both extremes are visible in theaters. In this context, CDC hall operator Jiban Shakya expressed his concern on Facebook: “Gone are the days when people queued to buy tickets; now producers distribute tickets via WhatsApp…?”

This competition to buy viewers has increased distrust among hall operators and distributors toward filmmakers. The limited revenue that Nepali cinema earns from actual audiences is also declining.

The ‘politics’ of premieres and special shows

It is an old practice to hold premiere shows to “celebrate” and gauge audience response before the film reaches general audiences. But premieres often result in praise that is more decorative than genuine. Nowadays, when premiere hype is insufficient, additional shows are organized under the name of special shows. These special shows increasingly invite social media influencers and even political leaders. Filmmakers use such shows to minimize potential critical reviews or negative commentary.

Interestingly, politicians who are slow to restrict creative freedom in the film industry also attend these premieres or special shows and discuss Nepali cinema at length.

For the premiere of ‘Gorkha Warrior,’ directed by Milan Chams, Prime Minister and CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli and former Minister of Culture, Tourism, and Civil Aviation Sudan Kiranti were present. Kiranti also attended the premiere of Gaun Aayeko Bato, directed by Naveen Subba.

It is an old practice to hold premiere shows to “celebrate” and gauge audience response before the film reaches general audiences. But premieres often result in praise that is more decorative than genuine.

Former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai and leader Hisila Yami are also active in attending films. They attended premieres such as ‘Rajagunj’ by Deepak Rauniyar, ‘Jaar’ by Furba Chhiring Lama, and recently ‘Cetaamol’ by director Raj Bahadur Sane.

Rastriya Prajatantra Party Chairman Rajendra Lingden also regularly attends premieres. He participated in the premieres of ‘Pujar Sarki’ by Dinesh, ‘Unko Sweater’ by Nabin Chauhan, among others. The list of leaders attending ‘Shambhala’ by Min Bham is even longer, including Nepali Congress General Secretary Bishwprakash Sharma, CPN-UML Deputy General Secretary Pradeep Gyawali, and Rastriya Swatantra Party leader Sumana Shrestha.

It is positive that policymakers watch films and encourage artists, but the purpose of showing films to leaders is clearly more tied to publicity and buzz.

News following premieres often highlights the presence and reactions of leaders in headlines and photo features. For example, an online headline read: “From Baburam to Amresh at the Premiere of Rajagunj.”

After watching director Dinesh Raut’s ‘Prakash,’ leader Rabindra Mishra even commented, “I cried seeing the film for the first time.”

The premiere of ‘Unko Sweater’ was also no less interesting. Lead actress Miruna Magar watched the film in the front row until intermission, then moved to sit with former Deputy Prime Minister Lingden in a seat at the back. It is not difficult to guess that her relocation was part of the film’s publicity strategy.

Whether a premiere or special show, the main goal appears to be generating positive reviews on social media and in the media. This includes not only mainstream films but also so-called “art house” films.

Even during regular shows, producers sometimes book seats to allow guests to watch the film for free. A few days after the premiere of ‘Gaun Aayeko Bato,’ over 50 special guests, including writers and politicians, were invited to watch regular shows.

During premieres and special shows, social media influencers, celebrities, writers, intellectuals, and politicians are prioritized. Filmmakers ensure that they speak about the film and take photos with actors. What they say is then widely discussed on social media and in the media, overshadowing genuine feedback and reviews.

Reviewer Mali notes that after COVID-19, producers have increasingly invested in social media influencers. Large-budget films like the ‘Kabaddi’ and ‘Chhakka Panja’ series spend heavily on promotion, whereas smaller films such as ‘Ainaa Jhyalko Putali’ and ‘Aankha’ cannot match this. He concludes that this has increased divisions in the film industry.

After watching director Dinesh Raut’s ‘Prakash,’ leader Rabindra Mishra even commented, “I cried seeing the film for the first time.”

Director Ghimire connects producers buying tickets to a desire for films to reach genuine audiences. He believes that buying tickets to extend a good film for a few days is reasonable, but for a poor film, no number of tickets will make it successful.

He adds that if the state and halls provided support to Nepali cinema, producers would not need to buy tickets themselves. “In India, regional films in Bengali, Odia, Marathi, and Gujarati get state priority. If the state supported the Nepali film industry, producers wouldn’t need to buy tickets themselves.”

Reviewer Mali asserts that the film industry should not follow the practice of buying tickets to run a film. He says, “This practice creates the narrative that a film will succeed no matter what, which is not healthy for the industry.”

Some film associations are concerned about these unhealthy practices. Surendra Thapa, General Secretary of the Nepal Film Association, says this issue, now an “open secret” in the industry, is being taken seriously by the Nepal Film Association, Nepal Film Distributors Association, and Nepal Film Producers Association. According to him, multiplex operators are also taking it seriously and have begun inquiries regarding multiple tickets purchased from a single server.

Pradeep Udaya, advisor to the Film Association, says, “Such suggestions may cause discomfort, but there is no legal pressure to follow them.”