The Fight for Visibility: Show Timings and the Future of Indian Cinema in Theaters

Anurag Kashyap never hesitates when there’s something glaring that needs pointing out. This time it wasn't about reviews or box office numbers. It was about show timings. Something much more fundamental for any film trying to survive in theaters.

He posted these comments on Instagram stories, calling out multiplexes. They were upset about prime-time slots being snagged by Hollywood junk stuff like Obsession while Indian films, his own Bandar , Imtiaz Ali’s work, and others got pushed into less desirable spots. It reopened that old argument in the exhibition business: how do domestic movies fight when a massive international release owns the best screens and the best times?

It's not just one filmmaker being mad about one movie. This is bigger. It’s about visibility . Access . The shrinking space for Indian theatrical releases that aren't built to be opening-weekend monsters. A larger battle happening behind the scenes.

---

What Kashyap was actually saying

Kashyap focused on scheduling. That was the core of his frustration. Obsession is doing well, big numbers across the board. It keeps getting prime evening and weekend slots. Meanwhile, Indian films get fewer shows. Worse timings.

He argued he got the demand for Obsession . But why couldn't it just keep running with a few less shows? His real point was simpler: if Indian movies aren’t given the right chance to be seen, how are they supposed to grow?

Timing really matters. It decides everything sometimes. A 7:30 or 8:30 PM slot on a Friday or Saturday actually gives people a shot. Working professionals, friend groups they can fit it in. But a 9 AM or 11 PM showing? That’s not just inconvenient. It can quietly kill a film's word-of-mouth before it even starts moving.

For something like Bandar , which has solid reviews and a gritty feel, poor visibility is a real handicap. Good buzz needs air. In theaters, that air is screen count. Prime timing. Simple as that.

---

Why the Timing Fight Is So Crucial

The streaming world changed everything in the theatrical space. Windows are shorter now. Brutal. A film can’t afford weeks of slow audience discovery anymore. If it doesn't grab attention early, screens vanish fast. Fewer screens mean fewer viewers find it. Less discovery means failure before word-of-mouth even kicks in.

Filmmakers keep talking about timing because a film might technically be "running," but if the shows are scattered at weird hours? Its chance to actually make money disappears.

Prime time slots? They’re premium real estate in those theaters. Evening shows, weekend afternoon slots that's when ticket sales naturally spike. That’s where you test actual demand. Without those times, even a good film can look weaker than it is.

This hits the heart of Kashyap’s complaint. It isn't about Obsession being successful. It’s about its dominance squeezing out space for Indian films that desperately need time and accessibility to build momentum.

---

The Hollywood Advantage in Urban India

Exhibitors don’t feel it emotionally. They feel it commercially. Multiplexes are businesses, right? They put screens where the money is. When a Hollywood blockbuster hits hard, they double down. It’s lower risk. Immediate revenue.

Hollywood films carry an advantage. Spectacle value. Urban curiosity. International marketing momentum. In big cities, these event films pull crowds. People pay more for IMAX or 4DX if it’s a late-evening show. That makes the math easy for theatre chains. One film fills premium seats and brings in high per-show revenue. They keep giving that film the best slots.

Smaller Indian films? Even good ones? They look riskier. The market ends up favoring the biggest spectacle. It's a marketplace where the strongest thing keeps getting stronger, and everything else struggles for oxygen.

Hollywood’s grip on these urban theaters is huge now. Superhero stuff, franchises, big action flicks they built this audience. Hollywood just feels like the default big-screen experience for many city dwellers.

But that doesn't mean Indian audiences stop supporting local cinema. Star films still draw massive attention across the country. The problem is in the middle ground. That space? That’s where a lot of interesting stuff lives dramas, thrillers, indie stories, social themes. They don't open like blockbusters. But they rely on conversation and discovery. If you deny them good timings, their entire release plan crumbles.

---

The Reality for Mid-Budget Cinema

Films like Bandar or Main Vaapas Aaunga aren’t built to be instant monsters. They need people to talk about them. They need that slow burn. That interest needs accessible slots. A viewer who likes the film should easily find an evening show nearby. If they only see early mornings or late nights? People just give up. The film loses not because audiences rejected it, but because they never got a convenient chance to watch it.

This is why Kashyap’s complaint echoes wider. It shows that theatrical success isn't always pure audience rejection. Sometimes films fail simply because they don't get the visibility they need.

The post-pandemic shift made this even nastier. The ecosystem changed completely. Audiences are choosier now. Ticket prices are up. Streaming trained everyone to wait at home. Multiplexes? They’re more cautious, chasing immediate returns.

This squeezes mid-budget Indian cinema hard. Before, a film could breathe slowly over weeks of word-of-mouth. Now? One weekend to prove itself. If it doesn't hit numbers fast enough, the shows get cut. Once they are gone, failure sticks.

Blockbusters benefit from this speed because there’s urgency built in. People have to see them now. Smaller Indian films rarely get that advantage unless they have a massive star or some viral hook attached.

---

The Bigger Picture for Theaters

This isn't just an India versus Hollywood thing. There's friction inside the domestic market too. Big pan-India releases push smaller Hindi ones aside. Regional cinema struggles outside its home states in multiplexes. Independent films get overwhelmed by big stars. The real fight is about scale. Event cinema versus everything else.

Kashyap’s critique matters because it forces a look at what kind of theatrical culture we actually want to build here. Should cinemas just chase the biggest immediate earner every week? Or should they nurture a space where different types of films can find an audience?

If they only chase spectacles and franchises, then theaters will become dominated by them. If they focus on variety action, romance, drama, horror, everything then exhibitors and producers need to start working together. They need release models that don't just discard smaller or mid-sized cinema after the first flicker of doubt.

Indian cinema has always been varied. It can handle action, romance, political drama, thrillers, comedies. But variety doesn't survive on paper alone. It needs actual showtimes. And right now, those timings are being fought over.

Kashyap’s complaint isn't just about Bandar versus Obsession . It’s the fight for visibility in Indian theaters. Blockbusters are getting bigger and stronger in the city centers. Exhibitors want revenue. But if they don't protect space if they allow those who rely on thoughtful scheduling to get pushed out then the market assumes there wasn't demand.

Timing isn't just a schedule anymore. It’s survival.