The Drive-In and The Multiplexes...the cinema structures, and their connections with the society of their existence!

In my opinion, both the types of cineplexes are a representation of the idea of westernisation and modernity of their era. Both fundamentally cater to the same idea of providing entertainment to the family audiences, but differ in their facilities, due to the period in which they started operations.

The structure of the drive in is very horizontal as compared to that of any multiplex, which is a tall building. Here again if we compare them on the basis of the rates which they charge, we can interpret the fact that the multiplexes look more exclusive, as opposed to the drive ins, which become more accommodative. These structures can be compared to the hierarchical structures in an organisation. The more vertical a structure, more is the hierarchy, and more the number of levels, more is the level of exclusivity. This very exclusivity is the basic positioning statement which the multiplexes use as a marketing gimmick.

Another aspect in the design, which highlights the same factor, is the openness in it. The open space in the design of a drive in is directly related to the openness with which the audiences are welcomed into the complex. The Sunset Drive In charges rupees thirty per person, while the rates in the multiplex vary anywhere between rupees ninety and one hundred and sixty, depending upon the show timings, and the movies playing.

The rates obviously convey that the drive in is more affordable to the common man, and is much cheaper. Also, the fact that the theatre charges the same amount of money no matter which movie is playing, indicates that there is a fundamental equality in every aspect of the functioning of this complex. Of course, there is much more marketing involved in the multiplex business, and every one involved in the business has their own share in the pie, of this additional revenue. So a simple way of considering these theatres can be the fact that one basically provides general entertainment, while the other does deliver the same on a much more exclusive platter. Again we come across the same distinction of exclusivity v/s accommodation.

Another very important design aspect here is the presence and absence of the escalators. These escalators signify a level of modernisation, luxury and a situation in the world today, where the advent of technology has led to further evolution of human beings and their needs. Another thing here which can be seen from the design of the escalators is that the multiplexes represent that stage of human evolution, which has emerged supreme by enslaving technology on one level and being enslaved by it on another. The presence of several other technology enabled media initiatives in the multiplexes, then be it televisions or the new media based touch points all indicate absolute pervasion of technological and marketing led influence on human life. Just like all other design aspects of the multiplexes, again here the usage of every possible touch point and the escalators in particular as marketing avenues can be seen. These elements of the design of the multiplexes, basically testify the fact that these complexes are a metaphor of the consumerist society. Every element in their design, every possible position is there, not just for entertainment, but has some business purpose to it, then be it the floor branding or the branded pop-corn tubs.

In this aspect, the drive in does look anachronistic for this modern era of marketing, with their laid back style of functioning. But they do have their own business aspects, which can be related to the time when they were functional as the icons of modernisation of their era. Today with the multiplex boom on, and accountability in the business gaining prominence, the computerized ticketing has enabled the movie-makers to lose out less on the revenues to black marketing, and under reporting. But these practices are still happening at the drive in, though, even the black rates there are way cheaper than the cheapest fares at the multiplexes. I purchased the tickets of the highly awaited movie Dhoom 2, on the release of its day, at double the original price for rupees sixty at Sunset while Fun Republic was charging a minimum of rupees of one hundred and forty for the movie.

In the previous era, the worth of a movie at the box-office was decided on the rate which the black marketers are able to command. Even today the stories of the black marketers at the Minerva theatre in Mumbai buying cars by selling tickets of the blockbuster Sholay in black, are always mentioned as a part of the stories which speak about the greatness of the movie at the box office. Till recently, we have also had on screen characters which have been from this profession, and Bollywood has used them in an endearing sort of way, like Munna in Rangeela.

Today, a Dhoom 2 manages to break all records in almost every circuit in the opening weekend itself, but the black marketers aren’t mentioned in the picture. However, another way of looking at the same thing is the fact that the original rates are so high, that they can’t be hiked further. In lieu of the Fanaa controversy, one can in a way interpret that with the corporatisation of the films on its way, may be on some level the black marketing has been legalized in the business, and the these modern day exhibition platforms are an integral part of the business, and also represent all its virtues. Also the exclusive premiere shows with extra premium rates, again represent the changes in the marketing methods of movies, and it is also related to the dissemination of media.

Be it the changing mindset of the audiences or the legalization of the black marketing or simply a changing representation of the spending patterns of the society, the multiplexes represent the virtues of the current society, one may label it consumerist, materialistic or simply a bunch of people who are willing to pay for their needs. But like all other aspects, even in this case, the multiplexes target a segment of society, as they cater to and represent a portion of the entire mass. They can’t represent an entire nation, at least in the current context, which a drive in probably can. There is exclusive car parking for the rich, while the ones who do not have the cars can sit in the auditorium and enjoy the same movie. Here we can see that they represent a sort of an equality in the society, where the individual differences of the people aren’t ignored, but aren’t used as a discriminating factor either. Be it the car owners, or the front benchers in the open air auditorium, both are in a way placed at the same level, similar to the horizontal design of the structure.

Today when customisation is the in thing in any marketing driven activity, one can see that the drive ins offer self-customisation as opposed to the multiplexes which offer mass-customisation. One has the choice whether to choose the car, the open air theatre, the lawn, or the auditorium, of which besides the car, all others are charged equally in the drive in, while the multiplexes offer two classes, and individual prices, but the customisation can be seen in the offerings of the movies. One can catch a Dhoom 2 at both the places but Page 3 won’t feature in the play-list of the drive in.

The logistics in the design and thereby the restricted show timings, and thereby the lesser number of shows in the drive in as opposed to that in the multiplexes, speaks volumes about the mass-customisation. Metaphorically it is a comment on the individualistic nature of the society.

Also, another comparison here would be with respect to the flexibility v/s the rigidity in the style of functioning. One can justify here that the rates charged are in proportion to the facilities offered to the customers. Again other issues like hygiene etc. can be brought into the discussion, which basically convey the convenience offered to the payers. All these eventually do give the same conclusion about the consumer being the king, and the face of the society changing as a whole.

Another aspect of the customisation is the fact that the design of the drive in, with the skyline in the background does have different effects on different movies, which isn’t the case in the same closed setting and more private viewing experience of the multiplexes. An instance which I would like to narrate in this context is while I was watching the movie Omkara at the Sunset. During one of the romantic songs between the main couple in the film, which was set in the open farms, a bird flew across the screen, which did enhance the whole feel of the same song. Had the same bird flown during the climax, it would have definitely diverted my attention from the screen, and not to any positive effect. For the lack of softer words, I’d say that the drive in can either enhance or kill the experience of viewing of a film.

A movie which the Sunset ruined for me was Dhoom 2, because of its laidback style of functioning. For starters, the huge mass of people and the free flowing dust due to the open air experience had already set the mood for the film. The lack of dust in the multiplexes is a metaphor for an advanced life, and advancement in the technology, which is again a key feature of the new age civilization. Then of course, the movie began precisely forty five minutes after the scheduled time (which was 10:45 pm already) to accommodate the crowds before the show, and had an interval which took forever (as usual). In the end, I did hate the film as a whole. A partial second viewing in an enclosed cineplex made me realise that the film wasn’t that bad. This was my first ever experience of watching such a big movie with so much crowd. It was conducted as a part of this study, as I wanted to study the different semiotics on the release day of big film across cinema halls. I contrasted it with the release of Don which I experienced at Wideangle.

One of the striking differences here was the monopoly which the big film commands in the minds of the people. Owing to the multiplex phenomenon, not every one in the theatre is out to watch the same movie, and so the hype and feel did get reduced to an extent. Also, the fact that another biggie Jaan-E-Mann released with Don diluted the equity to an extent. Here we can say that in the drive in the individuality of the movie is restored to a greater extent. But at the same time, a contention here would probably be related to the kind of audience members which the theatres cater to. As mentioned earlier, drive in would screen mass movies, and usually, in my opinion these are films, which are capable of selling well only by using the traditional media, without the excessive hype built by the additional media, which is more of a feature of the multiplexes. So it operates in a circle, for both the places.

Another interesting aspect of the theatres is the situation of the lavatories. At Sunset, there are two of them, one set right on the two corners of the screen and one near the staircases. The ambience in both is dark, dingy and fragrant. As opposed to these, the ones in the multiplexes are slightly cleaner, and brightly lit. The point I want to mention here is that an advanced civilization is basically about caring more for the fundamental amenities in life, which is precisely the case. Since it has been a tradition in India, all positive things in life can be attributed again to the western influence on our culture. Even the position of the lavatories, right next to the screen, gives them a lot of attention, and one can not, not notice them. However, in the multiplexes, one can figure out mere symbols and directions in the main lobby, while the actual rooms situated in the corner. The rationale here could probably interpreted as a more individualistic approach, especially towards the private things in life, in the modern social life, and the placement of the rest-rooms is one of the many examples that one can trace as similarities in the actual beliefs in human life, and their reflection in the constructions. May be an overdrawn observation in this context was the difference in the physical distances between the male and female lavatories in the two structures. Somehow the proximity of the positioning of the two in the multiplexes can be linked to the openness in the equations and dynamics of the genders.

Another observation was that, I hardly notice any representation of the female population in the open air seating of the drive in. Usually the front benches are dominated by the male population. But today, it isn’t a rare sight to find the females sitting right in the first row, and going crazy over a hot hunk like Salman Khan in Salaam-E-Ishq in Fun Republic, as I noticed, and they have no issues in openly expressing it the way the male audience members do it for may be a dance number by Madhuri Dixit. This open sexual assertiveness would probably not happen in a setting like Sunset. In this respect I guess the traditional structures have yet to be liberated from the clutches of patriarchy. I distinctly remember two of my colleagues actually planning to lift a standee which was promoting the film Dhoom 2 only because they thought Hrithik Roshan looked hot in it, form Fun Republic. These women would squirm in their seats if they would be asked to sit and watch the same film in the front benches of Sunset. Here, the exclusivity factor of the multiplexes can be interpreted as the reason for more freedom and assertiveness, to the gender which was termed to be the weaker one till recently. I personally have no issues on this matter, and have been to both the theatres pretty often, but wouldn’t want to go the Sunset with my female friends. May be this is one of the biases which I have as an individual, but the changing dynamics of society are more suited in the changed set-up itself in my opinion, and thus the multiplexes become more conducive in this context.

Another aspect of the changing population dynamics of Ahmedabad is evident from the language of communication. Be it the show timings or the announcements, or the advertisements, Sunset has all its communications in the vernacular languages, largely Gujarati and in some places, in Hindi. The exclusive usage of English along with these two in the multiplexes indicates the trend towards the cosmopolitanisation of the city, and also the acceptance of English in a big way as a common communication platform. At some other multiplexes in other cities which I have observed, then be it PVR in Delhi or E Square and Inox in Pune, the only language of communication is strictly English for the messages, even of the films aren’t. This speaks about the fact that Ahmedabad is gradually journeying towards a more cosmopolitan state. The presence of institutions like MICA, which are an integral part of the knowledge city within the city of Ahmedabad are fuelling the growth of such a culture.

The location of both the multiplexes which I have conducted my observations is on the SG Highway, which in itself represents the post modern consumption in the city. the surroundings have malls mushrooming all over, and is fast becoming an entertainment gateway into the city, while the surroundings of Sunset have residential buildings. Thus, the location of the multiplexes is a sort of a statement on the lifestyle of the city which is changing.

In its journey from Relief road, to Ashram road, to CG road; to finally SG road as its main lifeline, the city has undergone a metamorphosis and the constant influx of the newer entertainment avenues stands testimony to this fact. At the same time, one can observe that the city is losing out on its individual existence. I can shop at the same store called Lifestyle even in Mumbai, but the presence of Dhalgadwaar is very unique to Ahmedabad itself. Similarly, Sunset is the only functional drive in Asia, as opposed to the hundreds of multiplexes, which are now found at every corner, in every city; and with the advent of digital cinema, would soon percolate in the rural areas as well.

This evolutionary change in the cinema viewing habits in the city of Ahmedabad is similar to the evolution of the new age human race, where every person is like a clone to everybody else, because of the same habits, similar creative and intellectual pursuits, or even hobbies for that matter. This doesn’t come as a surprise, especially at a time when all the biotechnologists are trying their best to successfully create clinical human clones. The situation and prominence that the multiplexes have in the modern day life is merely like a drop in the ocean, but is definitely an integral part of the ocean.