Film: Indian C‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

India: Maharashtra / Mumbai / Cinema C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Maharashtra (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Mumbai (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Ok so there is definitely conflicting stuff on this. As we know we have based the cast ordering on the trailer glimpse video that came out a few days ago. However further looking at the videos we see that there is conflicting stuff present. Look at the video from Sony Music India's page [1] compared to the video from Dharma Productions' page [2]. We can clearly see that the orders in both of the videos are vastly different. For me I think we should stick to the Sony Music India's video on the cast order. Pinging editors that are frequently present on this page @Ab207, Sam0006, Fylindfotberserk SP013 (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SP013: Mr Bachchan won't agree. It's certain that he would get the top credit in the film too because Dharma re-uploaded the teaser on his demand. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I do agree to actually sort the order as per Sony Music India's video (since the said company, and Dharma Productions followed that cast order on the teaser, making it the first time it was basically uploaded on the Internet — meaning it's the principal order), I think that it's better to follow the order in Dharma's re-uploaded version of the teaser (which yes, was certainly to get Bachchan's name billed as the top credit) as it has been seen as a public change/update, and Dharma is the film's principal production company while the former serves as the music label for the film (not like it holds any less importance on the project and matters associated). Although, I would still be more aligned towards the previous cast order (and would like to stick to that if other and more editors are fine with it), as it's much more reasonable and sensible. Sam 16:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, pinging just incase. (SP013) Sam 16:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes now they are uploading stuff with keeping his name at top , but does it really make sense for even wikipedia to hold his name at the top . Film is completely marketed on the name of Ranbir Kapoor and Alia Bhatt . Bachchan's character is not more important than Ranbir Kapoor's role in any way Rhea786656 (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, I'm not sure how many would agree on it since I'm assuming, and it seems like a lot are editing the cast order on the basis of the re-uploaded video, I guess. — Sam 16:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC) [ talk ][reply]

“Bachchan Sir ko respect deni thi". I don't think they'll change it now. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we should move this to Brahmāstra Part One: Shiva as this is the correct name.Barnacles14 (talk) 23:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe we should move the page to "Brahmāstra Part One: Shiva", since that is the actual name of the film. Krishna Dahal (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s wait until the sequel release. Also many people know the film as Brahmastra, it is the common name of the film. Mehedi Abedin 21:49, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Csmartstarr, I understand and appreciate the fact that you added content stating about Prime Focus providing the film's VFX and it's citation that was added along, however, it's totally unneeded to add it in the distributor credits in the infobox—considering that only the distributor of the country of origin is mentioned i.e. Star Studios, while a note about Disney serving as the global distributor is cited right next to it. Which brings it to the matter that adding Disney's name below Star Studios and citing it with the Brahmästra link from DNEG's website is totally unrelated to the distributor section, as well as unnecessary in that part.

Coming to the mention of Prime Focus, I think it's more suitable to add it in the production section of the article considering that Malhotra and the company's names are linked and stated in the summary of the article, at the top of it, as well as are included in the producer and production company credits as they do serve as so on the project.

Please let me know if there's any issue or misunderstanding regarding my input.

—Sam (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I put it in the production section but you deleted that too!

It is very rare for Prime Focus/DNEG to actively produce and invest in a movie as they have 100s of massive project in film and TV to work on. This is the reason I have mentioned it.

Also Star Studios is only a subsidiary and brand name now. In all technical aspects the producers, owners, and distributors of the movie are Disney. When it is distributed across the world including India it will be registered under "Walt Disney Company". Csmartstarr (talk) 20:00, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see, no problem. Sam (talk) 22:13, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

change "and co-produced by Ranbir Kapoor and Marijke Desouza independently." to "and co-produced by Marijke Desouza independently." Bhaveshmadkar (talk) 09:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, You should cite reliable sources for this change. Also why you want to remove Ranbir Kapoor from the producers?. The official trailer of the film mentioned his name as a producer. Grabup (talk) 09:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Simon Franglen from Music by department 49.248.194.206 (talk) 12:20, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I added a source that verifies the statement. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab207 You recently increased the budget of the film by Rs.200 crores. The article you provided is only the 1 article present on this Internet. I've researched for 2 hours but not found any other OFFICIAL declaration from any other reliable websites/sources. Karan Johar officially told in an INTERVIEW it's 300+ (not told 500) 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 Please revert the edit and make it 300+ crores as early as possible

Also 🙏🏻 Please don't block me STAfizs (talk) 12:16, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@STAfizs: Why would you be blocked? You did the right thing by starting a discussion at the talk page.

Coming to the budget, as per this source: Uday Shankar, Chairman of Star and Disney India When asked about the film being mounted on a budget of Rs. 300 crores, he refused to give away a number but said, "Just to tell you, it is way more than that."

For content, we mainly follow WP:Secondary sources, although official (WP:Primary) sources are also helpful in some cases. The only official source here is Uday Shankar; Karan Johar did not make any statement on budget, afaik.

Therefore, I did not increase the budget of the film by Rs.200 crore, I only added an upper estimate of 500 crore, which is perfectly inline with Shankar's statement. -- Ab207 (talk) 12:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But uday also didn't say it is near 500 crores, way more than 300 can mean, 330 ,340 , 350 also. 500 crores is very high limit , Ranbir Kapoor has not even Charged any money since he is one of the producer . 300-350 would be the right choice Rhea786656 (talk) 20:10, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We already have another source saying 500 crore budget. Uday Shankar's statement only favours that figure. No idea from where you got that 350 cr, avoid WP:Original research. -- Ab207 (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Khiladi King, please go through the above discussion. We have conclusive evidence to believe that the budget is way over 300 cr. Therefore, the majority sources argument doesn't cut it here. In fact, we should look for an updated budget figure rather than deflating it back. Thanks -- Ab207 (talk) 18:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only one source mentioned the budget to be 500 crore INR but majority reported the budget to be 300 crore. Khiladi King (talk) 04:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Khiladi King You're not entirely wrong but the studio executive clearly disputed the 300 crore figure, so we must look for better sources. Also, 500 crore is the latest figure possibly including cost escalations due to delays not factored in old sources, so it carries more weight. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Khiladi King The latest official budget as per Bollywood Hungama is 410 crore. Perhaps it's better to go with this one in infobox. -- Ab207 (talk) 13:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sam0006, what do you think? -- Ab207 (talk) 15:38, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab207 Well, various sources state different estimations, the most common one and even in press releases I assume, is the 300+ crores one. But at the same time, it has been said that its 'way over' said amount. It's best to keep it at 300+ or the '300–500 crores' estimation, unless a number is confirmed by various publications.

– Sam | he/him (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sam0006 The 300 crore figure is refuted by studio executive himself, telling it's "way more than that." So we must look for newer and better figures. Since 410 crore is the latest one and it is quoted by sources within the production, it might be close to the actual figure. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hello, Khiladi King. I've removed 300 crore estimate as well (since 500 crore was also removed), it's clearly an outdated figure refuted by studio. 410 crore is the latest update followed by majority of new sources. WP:AGE MATTERS applies here. Regards -- Ab207 (talk) 07:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to request to add a section "Astra (weapons)". Explaining the weapons and it's origin. 27.56.252.79 (talk) 13:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For example, Nandiastra, whoever hold it receives power of 1000 nandi's etc. Also Ranbir Kapoor doesn't posses any astra he is himself a astra of fire element. Kindly edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.56.252.79 (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

claim that this is one of the most expensive film in Indian history till date is false, as RRR is 500 crores and this is just 400 crore. Discuss here first Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 04:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, firstly, saying stuff that I'm engaging in PR or promotional purposes towards the film is false. Secondly, I'm not trying to claim this as the most expensive Indian film, instead its one of the most expensive Indian films. I wasn't the first one to add that actually though, and the film's budged it also considerably notable. – Sam | he/him (talk) 04:28, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RRR is 500 crores, and there are many films in most expensive league and not worth of adding that 'it is ONE of the MOST EXPENSIVE file TILL DATE in INDIA' in Wikipedia , as amount is already mentioned (400 crores) and not even close to RRR which is 500 crores. Information should be a information and not for film promotion and boosting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ningalonnichpovuka (talk • contribs) 05:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing this. How can be a film's budget become promotion? This film's budget according to sources reveals to be 400 crores putting it him expensive film along with many others (RRR). That is where in English Grammer, we use "ONE OF THE MOST" indicating it is not the most expensive film of India but it is among expensive FILMS in India. Vikenviksingh (talk) 07:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to add that you can't label everyone's edits in this part as PR. Sam | he/him (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest adding IGN India's review of the film as well:

Rayan Sayyed of IGN India also criticised the romance between the film's leads and wrote that "the mythology and its computer-generated portrayals are the only reasons to watch this film." Unexpired2513 (talk) 14:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Plus, that opinion has been reflected already by Anna M. M. Vetticad of Firstpost(romance) and almost everybody else(mythology and cgi) Aaron Liu (talk) 11:44, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

why aree you highlighting reviews from pages like the week which are not even popular 122.50.195.240 (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews are mostly negative Adamstraw99 (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is negative review from The Hindu, pls add that. I also request to remove any tabloid outlets such as filmfare which is also a magazine article and has no bearing in stating it's review among the reputed critics and also the reviews in whole become mixed when reputed critics rated and reviewed mostly from mixed to little positive to more negative. Seabirdie (talk • contribs) 02:53, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reviews from reliable wiki sources Indian Express, Zee News amd Taran Adarsh have been negative. The overall review can be summarised as "mixed to negative". However one user has repeatedly indulged in edit war and made it "positive" adding inconsequential references. This page has been vandalised by some users with disruptive intent. It os requested that some admin takes notice of this. Ankitsalsa14 (talk) 06:43, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zee News is positive. The overall critical reception is somewhere between mixed and positive and sources that reflect this are cited in the article. The personal opinions of Adarsh and the Indian Express cannot be used to determine critical consensus. Rotten Tomatoes also shows a 63% approval rating based on 16 reviews, pretty much in line for mixed to positive. That the film has been hit by propaganda from right-wing outlets (refuted, obviously) is not a ground for Wikipedia to be indulging them. DeluxeVegan (talk) 07:57, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change "The film received mixed reviews from critics." to "The film received mixed to negative reviews from critics and fans alike." SOup178 (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The film polarised the critics, so "mixed reviews" is appropriate. No bias. Neurofreak (talk) 17:54, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shah Rukh Khan - Vanarastra 37.186.34.64 (talk) 17:51, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please add review of a renowned film critic, it'll help audience and readers. Review: Taran Adarsh gave 2 out 5 stars, tweeted that this film have VFX but it do not have content. Also added that its second half is bad, it "nosedives" in it. He is disappointed with this film. Source - [3] Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 19:51, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reviews from reliable wiki sources Indian Express, Zee News amd Taran Adarsh have been negative. The overall review can be summarised as "mixed to negative". However one user has repeatedly indulged in edit war and made it "positive" adding inconsequential references. This page has been vandalised by some users with disruptive intent. It os requested that some admin takes notice of this. Ankitsalsa14 (talk) 06:45, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ADD BOX OFFICE COLLECTIONS AND HOW LOVE STORY AND ROMANCE KILLED THIS MOVIE. THERE ARE LESSER CHANCE FOR PART 2 DEPENDING ON FINANCIALL FATE OF THIS FILM. 2604:3D09:1380:6A0:48A9:8881:F44D:E41A (talk) 20:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:37, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Post the release, multiplex-chains INOX Leisure and PVR Cinemas have combinedly faced a loss of over ₹940 crore in the market capitalization.[177]" This isn't because of brahmastra But rather multiple flops Like Shamshera and lal singh chadda. Whether brahmastra is a loss or not is not yet decided and pvr s investment in the movie is still hideen. This looks more like a internet fluke than an actual Statment. Please remove it Lord kai07 (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change The movie received mixed to positive reviews from critics to The movie received mixed to negative reviews from critics.

This is because the movie was praised for its vfx and cgi but failed to deliver a good story or plot and was lagging in many areas. Many of the Indian magazines have it a low rating due to the peppy screenplay and direction. SOup178 (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. This is a duplicate of your prior request, please discuss there. Ravensfire (talk) 00:44, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

37.50 Crore On Day 1^[1] AK965 (talk) 02:08, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Brahmastra Worldwide box office collection till date (September 18) is 332 crores. SahilSpidy123 (talk) 04:27, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change from

• Shah Rukh Khan as Mohan Bhargav, a scientist and a member of the Brahmānsh who wields the Vanar Āstra (cameo appearance)^[1]

To

• Shah Rukh Khan as Mohan Bhargav, a scientist and a member of the Brahmānsh who wields the Vanar Āstra (special appearance)^[2] Saaki2804 (talk) 03:50, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: "Cameo appearance" is a better fit. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 07:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One user has repeatedly edited the reviews as "positive". However many reviews like Taran Adarsh and Zeenews have passed negative reviews. We have to go beyond personal bias and come to a consensus for benefit of this informative platform Wikipedia. Going through all the data in open domain, it can be certainly agreed that the reviews are "mixed". Request the changes be made and plagiarism not be allowed. Ankitsalsa14 (talk) 04:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Plus the response in India section states that Times of India and DNA India gave it positive reviews and cited two articles, one from each, in that statement. But the articles are not reviews at all, one is on projected revenue of the movie on box office day 1 and the TOI one discusses the leak of the movie. This statement is misleading and the citations do not in any way match up to those claims. 103.160.128.40 (talk) 13:22, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Answered= no Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 15:41, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Brahmastra Box Office Estimate Day 1 Rs. 37.50 crores

Source: https://www.bollywoodhungama.com/news/box-office-special-features/brahmastra-box-office-estimate-day-1-ranbir-kapoor-alia-bhatt-starrer-collects-rs-37-50-crores-record-non-holiday-opener/

Please Update this 103.136.200.165 (talk) 05:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change The movie receives mixed to positive reviews from critics to The movie received mixed reviews to negative reviews from critics.

Reason being so, the movie was praised for its vfx and cgi but almost everyone who watched the movie including critics and fans, criticized the movie itself and the etchy and lagging screenplay. The movie collected a mere 36 crores despite being a huge magnum opus. SOup178 (talk) 07:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hate won't save your biased argument Boycott gang isn't allowed here. Most people liked the story as well Lord kai07 (talk) 13:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cite sources for any statement you make: can you cite a review that speaks well about the story? 103.160.128.40 (talk) 13:24, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DanCherek (talk) 02:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Post the release, multiplex-chains INOX Leisure and PVR Cinemas have combinedly faced a loss of over ₹940 crore in the market capitalization THIS NEWS IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE , EVEN CEO OF PVR HAS CALLED OUT IT ON TWITTER , ATLEAST CHECK THE SOURCE FROM WHERE YOU ARE TAKIN INFORMATION BEFORE WRITING ANYTHING , NOTICING SO MANY NEGATIVE AND FAKE INFORMATION ON PAGE 146.196.39.116 (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what is first day box office collection? 2405:201:1007:F228:4187:D079:D6C8:BA10 (talk) 07:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In country collection should only show first. Gujaratikanudo (talk) 18:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  " | gross          =    " to "| gross          = ₹75 crore [1]" please add this MPGuy2824. Thank You  103.136.200.165 (talk) 11:29, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: This is now an outdated number — DaxServer (t · m · c) 08:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ljgv (talk) 14:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian Express Brahmastra box office collection day 1: Ranbir Kapoor-Alia Bhatt film grosses Rs 75 crore, eyes Rs 100 crore weekend 10 hours ago

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DanCherek (talk) 02:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please add categories Category:2020s Hindi-language films, Category:Films scored by Simon Franglen and Category:Films directed by Ayan Mukerji to the article. Mehedi Abedin 14:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 14:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The two day collection of brahmastra is 79 crores. Please add that in the Box Office section. Vasusen25 (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DanCherek (talk) 02:07, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of fan editors are removing critical reviews by Film analyst, reviewers because they are not propagating their views. Wikipedia should be neautral see WP : NEUTRAL, if someone is not gave review as you wish then it doesn't mean it have no value WP: POV. Taran Adarsh gave his review, he have millions of followers and many years experience in film analysis field. India's one of the biggest news outlet India Today^[1]published his review means he have value. Admin should have look in to it. Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 15:50, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia also doesn't need to cite every review in existence, much less a one-word review made on Twitter. DeluxeVegan (talk) 19:39, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DeluxeVegan:, most of the fan or paid editors of this film are avoiding critical reviews. But the review of Taran Adarsh is in public domain and he is not just anathor reviewer he have millions of tweeter followers. It's totally unfair, users here not allowing a single line of his review which is reported by leading newspapers of India, such as Times of India, Hindustan Times. The review was published of physical issues of these 🗞️.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are 8 positive reviews, 8 mixed reviews and 8 negative reviews in the relevant section. For a film that has received mixed reviews, that's about as neutral as it should get, Taran Adarsh or not. Wikipedia has included full-length reviews by Adarsh in numerous other articles, but a review constituting a single sentence from Twitter is not the kind of content an encyclopedia should entertain as critical reception, especially when there are other viable options available. The man is no Roger Ebert for his words to qualify as a standalone source. DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:37, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DeluxeVegan: That man is standalone source or not, let decide readers, you don't need to work behalf of them. India's top newspapers wrote article on his 3 line reviews. The account have blue tick. Source I provided is 2ndry reliable source. I don't get your logic where your balancing quantity of reviews. Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 15:00, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The logic was to refute your first sentence at the start of this discussion. Maybe editors are removing new reviews not because of their biases but to keep the sprawling section of 24 reviews from ballooning into more. I see no reason to give special preference to a self-published tweet from Taran Adarsh over a review in any other published reliable source. In any case, you need to gain WP:CONSENSUS for this addition. DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with DeluxeVegan. The reception already has plenty of reviews covering various points. There's no value addition by accommodating Taran Adarsh's Twitter review. -- Ab207 (talk) 04:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TILL 11 AUGUST, FILM HAS COLLECTED 225 CRORES , PRODUCERS HAVE POSTED THI

AND YOU CANNOT PUT BUDGET AS 410 CRORE WITHOUT ANY RELIABLE SOURCE , MEDIA ARTICLES HAVE PUT MANY FAKE NEWS ABOUT BRAHMASTRA SO YOU CANNOT TRUST IT 146.196.39.229 (talk) 07:16, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The box office figures are compiled from various sources. The figures can be approximate and Bollywood Hungama does not make any claims about the authenticity of the data. However they are adequately indicative of the box-office performance of the film(s). Box office figures are not official and under scrutiny.

references: https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/brahmastra-box-office-why-there-are-different-figures-for-the-film-everywhere-101663031644806.html https://www.outlookindia.com/art-entertainment/-brahmastra-box-office-figures-are-70-percent-fake-claims-kangana-ranaut-news-222576 https://www.msn.com/en-in/entertainment/other/people-wonder-if-brahmastra-box-office-numbers-are-fake-claim-theaters-are-running-empty/ar-AA11Ie0l https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/bollywood/brahmastra-box-office-success-reports-box-office-fake-or-not-pvr-inox-ceo-book-my-show-numbers-earnings https://www.seelatest.com/bollywood/are-brahmastra-box-office-collection-fake-here-s-the-truth https://www.telegraphindia.com/entertainment/brahmastras-box-office-is-roaring-despite-controversies-made-rs-17-2-crore-on-day-4/cid/1886342 https://www.pixstory.com/story/brahmastra-box-office-collections-fake/142094 https://newsable.asianetnews.com/gallery/entertainment/brahmastra-box-office-collection-real-or-fake-here-s-what-kangana-ranaut-has-to-say-rba-ri14c5 https://www.koimoi.com/bollywood-news/brahmastras-box-office-numbers-are-60-70-fake-figures-kangana-ranaut-reacts-to-its-not-just-ego-its-coke-ego-claims-says-thats-a-new-low/ https://www.bollywoodlife.com/news-gossip/brahmastra-box-office-collection-fake-visuals-of-empty-theatres-and-availability-of-tickets-on-booking-app-of-alia-bhatt-and-ranbir-kapoor-starrer-spark-debate-entertainment-news-latest-bollywood-upd-2183165/ BollywoodHungamaa (talk) 22:57, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done It isn't clear what the change you are suggesting is. That the box office is fake or to include Ranaut's statement? DeluxeVegan (talk) 04:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some reports say it's 400, some say it's 410. And does it included promotional budget, which they spent in Advertising? Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 05:11, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's 410 cr as per Bollywood Hungama excluding Print and Publicity expenses. Promotional budget is generally not included in infobox. Only production budget. -- Ab207 (talk) 05:31, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab207: I was quoting hindusta Times writer in that article not Kangana. The author said the actually budget is not known. If your following bollywood, you known that producers don't disclose actually budget. Various outlets reported different budget. I think we should write it. 410 is not final, budget could be more than this.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 08:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are able to find a new source which claims that budget is so and so, then it can be accommodated. Until then, we have to follow what we have. Wikipedia is not obligated to wait for any official confirmation. -- Ab207 (talk) 08:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should WP:Ping while replying/ mentioning a user.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 09:16, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly the movie collection 265 Crores that you have listed is not something the film has yet collected, then why are you putting all fake collection numbers and fooling the public? Try to get your information from the reliable source and then update the correct information. 68.71.73.134 (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The current box office figure is reliably sourced. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the cast section, it is written that Shahrukh Khan reprises his role as Mohan Bhargava from Swadesh movie and a citation is also provided। However, as per that reference, the name just a reference to Khan's role in Swadesh film.

Kindly change from Khan reprised his role from 2004 film Swades. to The character's name is a reference to Khan's previous role in 2004 film Swadesh.

Thank you, 2405:201:402D:909F:3860:F165:F248:7C65 (talk) 13:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thank you for pointing it out. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The marketing section clearly says that the above mentioned platform is Brah'ra streaming partener. I wrote same thing in release section that it'll be release on Disney+ Hotstar, someone reverted it? I want to declare that it'll be released in D+HS in release' section.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 06:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This movie has crossed 300 crore 2409:4050:2DCA:680B:0:0:7449:E407 (talk) 04:49, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its 287 crores right now. See Bollywood Hungama. --Yoonadue (talk) 03:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SahilSpidy123 (talk) 04:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC) I think Brahmastra Box Office Collection Is 332 Crores Till Today And The Wikipedia Is Showing Only 287 crores collection which is a mistake so I request you to edit this and do the collection till 332 crores[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ab207 (talk) 05:12, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Brahmāstra has collected over 332 crore not 300 crore, so please make it correct, thank you. 103.216.80.197 (talk) 05:52, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Blazin777 (talk) 07:30, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To change from second highest grossing to the highest grossing indian movie 43.230.47.94 (talk) 09:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ab207 (talk) 16:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You do realise you are adding any amount in the budget right now ? So now if any media will say budget is 1000 cr without any reliable sources or confirmation , you will put upper limit of 100 crores ?Media reports thousands of fake news , atleast read whether its news is reliable or not .all these 600 crores budget speculations have happened after kangana's statement , komal nahata clearly said in the budget of 400 cr , around 325 cr is for only part 1 , remaining is for whole trilogy , so the budget you should write is 325 crores-400 crores 146.196.39.46 (talk) 21:35, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. Akshaypatill (talk) 01:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You did 400 cr - 600 cr 146.196.39.46 (talk) 05:52, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

movie is not released in 4DX 3D format , so remove that 146.196.39.46 (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• As per Komal Nahta, astronomical budget of Brahmastra should be looked at as an investment for its three-part universe." and "Rs 400 cr, a part of the budget is for the future film and that the makers aren’t foolish to invest a heavy amount with the hope to recover its entire sum from just part one."

Now this is a statement of opinion and a pure speculation on his part. Doesn't explain why and how the budget is exported to future film when the they haven't even begun filming. Even if that is true, the cost incurred on this part comes under this part's budget only, regardless of how they use for future parts.

• Hindustan Times is simply subtracting the speculated VFX budget of this film based on director's assertions. This again is shoddy because whatever VFX cost they incurred is part and parcel of the budget of this film.
• Other sources like Andhra Box Office and Kangana Ranaut's social media posts claim the film’s budget is ₹650 crore" Both of them are unreliable, besides ABO simply said that the has gross 650 crore to recover it's budget, not the budget itself is 650 crore. This again shows that the author who wrote the HT article clearly doesn't have the required comprehension skills, making his analysis unreliable.

Bollywood Hungama is the best source among these. It clearly states the budget incurred of Brahmastra is 410 crores excluding marketing. That's basically all we need. Regards -- Ab207 (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You guys added something about Hindu nationalists but not anti-nepotism "gang". As a part of the non-Hindu members of the boycott "gang", I feel left out. I contributed a lot to the boycott as someone against concentration of power and influence (political or financial) within the nepotistic industry. Can you please add "uneducated, uncivilized, anti-nepotism "gang" also participated in the boycott?" Thanks a ton! :)

Oh and of course, of course, we always need citations. Here is a German one. I thought it'll come across as more elite. ^[1] Danke, merci.

2A01:E0A:911:1070:18C9:4CA2:565:E1F4 (talk) 12:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]