Metro In Dino Week One Box Office: Aditya Roy Kapur and Sara Ali Khan starrer is steady at low levels; Collects Rs 25 crore in 7 days
Metro In Dino collects Rs 2 crore on Thursday, touches Rs 25 crore in Week 1
Jointly backed by T-Series Films and Anurag Basu Productions, Metro In Dino started its journey with an opening of Rs 3.25 crore on Friday. It then collected Rs 5.75 crore and Rs 6.75 crore on Saturday and Sunday respectively.
On Monday, the Aditya Roy Kapur and Sara Ali Khan starrer witnessed customary drop in its business while fetching Rs 2.5 crore. It then recorded Rs 2.75 crore on Tuesday and Rs 2.25 crore on Wednesday.
Now, Anurag Basu's directorial has remained steady at low-levels. The new release minted Rs 2 crore on Thursday, bringing its first week net collection to Rs 25.25 crore.
Metro In Dino to lock horns with Aankhon Ki Gustaakhiyan, Maalik, and Superman
Metro In Dino will compete with three new movies at the box office starting from tomorrow namely, Aankhon Ki Gustaakhiyan, Maalik, and Superman. It is currently running parallel to Hollywood releases, Jurassic World: Rebirth and F1: The Movie.
Metro In Dino marks the sequel to Anurag Basu's 2007 directorial, Life in a Metro.
Metro...In Dino In Theatres
Metro...In Dino is playing in theatres near you. Have you booked the tickets for Aditya Roy Kapur and Sara Ali Khan's movie yet? Stay tuned to Pinkvilla for more updates.
Disclaimer: The box office figures are compiled from various sources and our research. The figures can be approximate, and Pinkvilla does not make any claims about the authenticity of the data. However, they are adequately indicative of the box-office performance of the films in question.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
27 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
The Taste by Vir Sanghvi: The mad, medieval, Raj-era dress codes of Indian hotels and clubs
Do you think clubs, hotels and restaurants should have dress codes? I suspect that the answer is complicated. Of course, any establishment has the right to choose how it wants its guests to dress, but the restrictions it imposes often tell you more about the hotels and restaurants in question than the hotels themselves realise. Also read | The Taste by Vir Sanghvi: Why James Gunn's Superman is the best since Christopher Reeve The unwritten dress codes in Indian clubs and hotels: A relic of the past or a necessary norm? (Freepik) Over a decade ago, my wife was refused entry into a club inside Dubai's Atlantis Hotel because the bouncer took exception to her top. It was a modest, and unremarkable top from Marks and Spencer so we couldn't see what the fuss was about. Of course, we always try and respect the sensitivities of every country we visit, so if the outfit had been vulgar or revealing, the bouncer's objections may have made sense. But that was not the case here. When we questioned him it turned out that it was not propriety that was his concern. Quite the opposite, in fact. His problem was that the dress seemed 'ethnic' and they only allowed people in western dress. There was nothing ethnic about my wife's top or the jeans she was wearing so he was wrong. But his objections raised a more serious issue: Was he saying that in Dubai they would refuse entry to anyone who wore anything that looked Arab to him? It turned out that he was saying exactly that. Would he have objected quite so much if a white person had worn the same top because then the effect would not have been 'ethnic?'( I wish I had kept a picture of that top; it looked roughly as 'ethnic' as Victoria Beckham.) Was he only objecting because, as Indians, we looked as though we could have been Middle Eastern? The answer to that question is clearly: Yes. He was reprimanded later, and Atlantis no longer has those kinds of policies. But my point is that he couldn't have been making it all up himself. Clearly someone had given him some instructions about not allowing Arab dress (in an Arab country!) and he had screwed up the implementation. Indians will not find this story hard to believe. For decades, dating back to the times when India's so-called elite clubs were founded by the British, our clubs have looked down on Indian clothes. Back in the 1990s, when I was editor of Sunday, a magazine published out of Kolkata, I would periodically hear stories about well known (and not so well known) figures being refused entry into Kolkata's 'elite' clubs because they were wearing kurta pyjamas. Indian dress was not allowed but fat guys in terylene singlets that strained to contain their paunches and were worn above low hung baggy trousers were welcome. Even at formal events you could wear a suit cut by Ashok Tailor where the jacket would not button up and the trouser legs stopped a few inches above the socks. That was fine. But a guy in an elegant bandhgalla would not be allowed in/ treated as a bumpkin/ mistaken for a waiter. Also read | The Taste by Vir Sanghvi: Delhi welcomes new eateries, but dining experience falls short I used to find all this deeply offensive and wrote angry articles about it. But nobody really cared; after all, I was the sort of man who wore kurta pyjamas to office! (I did. And I later discovered that I was referred to, behind my back, as either 'that santoor player' or mockingly as 'sarod master.') The Kolkata clubs seem to have dispensed with all that nonsense now. I went back a year or so ago to speak at the Bengal Club and was relieved to see that it was full of normal people in normal dress and not overrun by the boxwallahs of old who ordered chhotta pegs and pretended that they were at White's or The Athaneum in London. With hotels, it's a different story. There was a time when Bangkok's The Oriental had rigid dress policies. Around 15 years ago they relaxed them recognising that it was silly to insist on shoes and socks in the humid Bangkok heat. The hotel's flagship restaurant Le Normandie has thrown out its jackets-at-lunch policy and its two great Michelin starred local rivals, Cote by Mauro Colagreco and Blue by Alain Ducasse have a much more relaxed attitude to dress. In India, hoteliers have decided that their job is really about toes. (Would that make it a toe job?) You can wear Hideously inappropriate sneakers or trainers to formal restaurants and no one will mind. But showing your toes? Perish the thought! To some extent, I can understand their reservations about flip flops. But even India's hoteliers, ignorant as they are of global trends, ought to know that fine leather sandals keep showing up in the summer collections in Paris and Milan. They are meant to be worn with suits and with elegant separates. Of course, nobody in hotel management knows any of this because they are too busy to read newspapers or magazines. (Or even things on the internet.) As far as they are concerned there is no distinction between hawai chappals and high fashion sandals. A relative of mine was recently refused entry into Vineet Bhatia's Ziya at the Gurgaon Oberoi on the grounds that he was not wearing closed shoes. He was with a friend, a top Dubai chef and restaurateur who was horrified. 'Can't you see they are Hermes?' he asked plaintively. Last Sunday I got thrown out at tea time of the ground floor bar/ lounge at the Delhi Oberoi because I was wearing sandals. All I wanted was a coffee so I just moved to Threesixty next door where no one minded. A few months ago they tried to move me out of the restaurant at the Chambers at the Taj in Delhi for wearing the same sandals. I explained to the manager that I was not wearing chappals or flip flops but proper sandals that were fastened from behind. He let me stay. But somebody who runs a hotel chain will have to explain to me one day what purpose the no sandals rule serves. These guys are running establishments in India not in some mythical Mayfair of their dreams. (And in the real Mayfair, in any case nobody has ever objected to my sandals.) Why not recognise that this is a hot country and must make its own rules. (Bizarrely, if you wear sports shoes without socks to dinner, no Indian hotel objects.) We run some of the 21st century's best hotels. Why spoil them by imposing dress codes from the 18th century? Foolishness and ignorance, I reckon.
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
IND vs ENG: Hilarious! Arshdeep Singh, Dhruv Jurel react to shirt worth Rs 3 Lakh in England market
Arshdeep Singh and Dhruv Jurel (PTI Photo) NEW DELHI: Indian cricketers Arshdeep Singh and Dhruv Jurel had a memorable boys' day out in England that turned unexpectedly hilarious when they stumbled upon a shirt priced at a jaw-dropping Rs 3 lakh at the Bicester Village market. The duo, currently touring with Team India , took a break to explore the upscale shopping destination, and Arshdeep documented the outing on his YouTube vlog. The six-minute vlog showcases the two strolling through the luxury marketplace, enjoying a scoop of gluten-free ice cream, browsing high-end sunglasses, and indulging in a casual lunch. But the highlight of the video — and what's gone viral — is their reaction to the exorbitantly priced clothing. Arshdeep Singh: The Poet Who Bowls Thunder | Stories from His Father & Coach Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel. SUBSCRIBE NOW! While browsing, they spotted a designer shirt with a price tag of Rs 3 lakh. Arshdeep's hilarious reaction has since caught fans' attention. '3 lakh ki t-shirt? Matlab, kyun?' (Rs 3 lakh for t-shirt? But why?), he exclaimed. He followed up with a witty one-liner: 'Toh hum vaha pe 17 seconds ruke, rate dekhke nikal gaye.' (We stood there for 17 seconds, saw the price, and walked away.) Later in the video, Arshdeep admired another shirt he liked, only to be reminded by Jurel why they skipped buying it. Poll How often do you go shopping at luxury markets? Frequently Occasionally Rarely Never 'Bhai 50 hazar ki shirt thi, kaun leta hain? ... Abhi ek shirt pehen leni hain, do-tin chalegi fir gayab,' (Bro, it was a ₹50,000 shirt — who buys that? You wear a shirt a couple of times and then it's gone!) Jurel quipped, drawing laughs. Adding to the charm of the vlog was a surprise cameo by teammate Kuldeep Yadav , who joined them briefly after exploring the area with fielding coach T. Dilip. The lighthearted banter and genuine reactions offer fans a refreshing peek into the off-field camaraderie between young Indian players — and a gentle reminder that even stars can be stunned by designer price tags! Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
She was the highest-paid actress in Bollywood, Rajesh Khanna's ‘right hand', left it all at 28: ‘His family said I couldn't work…'
Leaving a Flourishing Career Behind Accepting the Reality of an Actress's Career Span Adapting to a New Life and Traditions Facing Turmoil Within Her Marriage Coping with Betrayal and a Momentary Escape A Brief Return to the Screen and Final Goodbye She was at the top of her career, with box-office hits such as 'Aap Ki Kasam,' 'Khilona,' 'Do Raaste,' 'Roti,' etc. to her kitty, charging as high as Rs 7.5 lakh per film. Yet Mumtaz didn't think twice, when she bid adieu to Bollywood and decided to focus on home and hearth after she tied the knot with Ugandan businessman Mayur Madhvani. In an old interview with ETimes, the actress explained why she took such a drastic decision to step away from a thriving said there was a pragmatic reason why she made the decision to marry at the peak of her career. She firmly believed that there's a right time for every woman to settle down, and when her moment arrived, she embraced it. Looking back at her contemporaries who remained single, she acknowledged that her path was different. Having found a partner who truly cared for her, she made the decision to leave the film industry behind. At that point, she had grown weary of the demands and chaos of the film world and felt ready for a quieter chapter in life.'I found a good man who loved me, so I chucked it all. I was fed up with films,' she told frequent on-screen collaborator, Rajesh Khanna, with whom she delivered multiple blockbusters, mourned the loss of his number one leading a chat with Pinkvilla, she said that when news of her retirement broke out, Rajesh Khanna lamented, 'I lost my right hand!' She added, 'Kaka was too proud a man to say it to my face.'Incidentally, each of their films struck gold at the box-office. 'None of my films with Kaka flopped (from Do Raaste to Prem Kahani between 1969-1975). We didn't give a single dud. Shayad hamare sitare milte the (Maybe our stars aligned). We were lucky for each other,' she the peak of her career, Mumtaz was the highest-paid actress in the industry. Yet, when her future in-laws expressed their disapproval of her continuing to act, she gave it all up. The Madhvani family made it clear that acting would not be part of her future, and she complied with their wishes. At the young age of 28, while commanding a fee of Rs. 7.5 lakh per film—a sum few others could claim—she walked away from the glamour of cinema. It was a monumental decision, but one she took willingly in favor of building a family life.'At the time of my marriage, the Madhvani family said that I couldn't continue working. So I quit my job and got married at a time when I was the highest-paid actress…' she family, particularly her parents, supported her choice and helped her see the realities of the profession. They reminded her that actresses often have a limited shelf life in the industry, and as age sets in, roles become scarce or stereotypical—often limited to playing a mother or aunt. Unlike families who press their daughters to keep working for financial reasons, hers allowed her to leave when she chose to, despite her enormous earnings. She valued their understanding and unselfishness part of a conservative Gujarati household came with its own set of changes. Mumtaz had to learn to adjust to new customs and take on domestic responsibilities. She taught herself to prepare traditional dishes like dal-dhokli, khandvi, and undhiyu, and gradually became an accomplished home cook. However, her journey into motherhood wasn't smooth. Before welcoming her daughter Natasha, she endured multiple miscarriages. One pregnancy was so difficult that she spent half a year confined to bed. These struggles made her role as a mother all the more the sacrifices, Mumtaz's married life wasn't free from challenges. At one point, her husband's involvement with another woman shook the foundation of their relationship. Though deeply hurt, she chose to remain committed. She believed a single lapse shouldn't destroy a lifelong bond. She defended her husband, acknowledging that while he was handsome and made a mistake, it didn't define their relationship. Instead of abandoning him, she decided to stand by him.'I was not going to give up a marriage because of a stray incident. My husband is not a flirt; he's a good-looking man. He made a mistake. Rather than dumping him, I chose to be by his side,' she the interview with Pinkvilla, she said, 'It's quite common for men to have affairs discreetly; at least he only had one…'In another candid moment, Mumtaz reflected on how her husband had openly admitted to being fond of someone in the United States, though he assured her that he would never abandon their marriage. She appreciated his honesty. Still, the betrayal left her emotionally wounded. In response to her loneliness, she returned to India for a while and, during that vulnerable period, found temporary companionship in another man. It wasn't a lasting connection, just a brief emotional detour that soon after stepping away, Mumtaz attempted a return to acting with the 1990 film Aandhiyan. However, the film didn't perform well commercially. The disappointing reception led her to retire from films permanently, closing the chapter on a celebrated yet voluntarily abbreviated acting career.
