The slate

Ranked adverse first, then watch, then the tests that came back clean; within a class by the finding’s figure as a share of the company’s revenue for the period, largest first. A balance sheet that does not tie, or a company no rate is held for, outranks any share.

One company, so every row is one of Sixteen Frames Films’ pictures, a term on one of them, or a month of the account with the platform. A picture over budget, a released picture not recouped, a participation the books provide less for than it earns and a released picture that has collected nothing are adverse; a term with no signed agreement, receipts the rights register cannot account for, a funding register that does not tie and a month the platform disputes or has not reported are watch. Within a class the rows rank by the finding’s figure as a share of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026.

The registers on this screen — the production register, the approved budget by department, the rights contracts, the recoupment waterfall, the participation terms and the funding register — hold no period. They are read as they stand on the day the screen is read, 12 Oct 2026, and the month in the bar moves only the strip, which reads the monthly summary.

Tested for Aug 2026: every picture’s projected final cost against its approved budget; every released picture’s net pool; Kaanal’s participations against what the books provide, where the ledger answered; every released picture for collections under a signed deal; every participation term for a signed agreement; every picture’s gross receipts against its rights register; every picture’s funding against its spend; and every month of the streaming account against the platform’s statement. Adverse, then watch, then clear; within a class by the finding’s figure as a share of the company’s revenue for the period.

The ledger dates no spend to any picture, so cumulative cost against schedule is not drawn: the register's figure for what a picture has cost carries no month, and the ledger's does. The bullet against approved budget is what stands instead, and the two registers are left as they are — the register's spend is not reduced to what the ledger can date.

Terms with no signed agreement on pictures where no share has yet arisen, so no row carries them: Lead artist on Kaanal (verbal); Featured artist on Kaanal (assumed). Each carries the dagger wherever it is used, and getting it in writing is the same decision whether or not the picture pays out this year.

One check did not run: Kaanal’s participations against what the books provide — Sixteen Frames Films’ ledger holds no line on the account the terms name — 2170 — so there is nothing to compare against. Anything it would have found is not here; the read is named under Data quality.

Six rows at most, in two columns, adverse first: what needs acting on before what needs watching, and a clear row only where a test ran and found nothing. The rest is under Data quality at the foot of the screen, so the face never grows past what a reader can act on in a glance.

Kaanal over budget · Sixteen Frames Films · 32.9% of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026. Kaanal projects a final cost of 2,784 lakh against an approved budget of 2,498 lakh, 11.4% over; the projection rests on the production’s own estimate of the cost to complete. Projected final cost is spend plus commitment plus cost to complete, and spend to date is never the hero figure.

Kadalkarayil over budget · Sixteen Frames Films · 15.5% of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026. Kadalkarayil projects a final cost of 2,374 lakh against an approved budget of 2,240 lakh, 6.0% over. Projected final cost is spend plus commitment plus cost to complete, and spend to date is never the hero figure.

Ottakkaran over budget · Sixteen Frames Films · 4.5% of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026. Ottakkaran projects a final cost of 1,999 lakh against an approved budget of 1,960 lakh, 2.0% over. Projected final cost is spend plus commitment plus cost to complete, and spend to date is never the hero figure.

Kadalkarayil not recouped · Sixteen Frames Films · 40.5% of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026. Kadalkarayil is released and its recoupment has not reached a positive pool: gross receipts of 2,165 lakh against 2,517 lakh charged before the pool leave it 352 lakh short. No participation arises on a loss, and the whole of the shortfall stays with the producer.

Thirike not recouped · Sixteen Frames Films · 5.8% of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026. Thirike is released and its recoupment has not reached a positive pool: gross receipts of 1,365 lakh against 1,415 lakh charged before the pool leave it 50 lakh short. No participation arises on a loss, and the whole of the shortfall stays with the producer.

Platform statement unreported · Sixteen Frames Films · 26.2% of Sixteen Frames Films’ revenue for Aug 2026. The platform has not reported the instalments received for Aug 2026; our books carry 227 lakh. Nothing is netted against a figure nobody has given, so no difference is stated until the statement arrives.

4 of 6 released recouped; Kaanal 11% over budget. One row a picture: what it was approved to cost, what it will cost, that as a share of the budget, what it has collected under a signed deal, the net pool the recoupment comes to, the return on what it had to get back, and what is still to collect.

Pictures in production first, largest projected cost leading, then the released, deepest shortfall first — the order somebody deciding what to chase reads them in. The state column reads the books’ own status and, for a released picture, whether its recoupment has reached a positive pool: “in recoupment” is not a status anybody records, it is a released picture whose pool is not yet positive.

A picture with nothing entered against a column shows nothing rather than a nought: a picture still shooting has sold no rights and holds no order of repayment, which is not the same as having collected nothing.

What is contracted and what is still to collect count signed deals alone. A deal nobody has signed is what somebody expects to get rather than an amount anybody is bound to pay, so it is an estimate, carries a trailing e, and is never added into either.

What a released picture actually cost cannot be followed month by month, because the ledger stops tagging a picture’s spend to it at release; the budget beside the title is what it was approved at, and its projected cost is its spend.

The production register of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime.

The approved budget by department of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime.

The rights contracts of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime.

The recoupment waterfall of Sixteen Frames Films.

The participation terms of Sixteen Frames Films.

The funding register of Sixteen Frames Films.

The headline of a picture’s cost is projected final cost — spend to date, plus what is committed, plus what is left to complete. Spend to date leads nothing here: a picture that has spent half its budget and committed the other half is fully committed, not half spent, and a cost report that makes spend the hero figure is the one that lets an overrun arrive as a surprise. On a picture with nothing committed and nothing left to complete the projection is simply the spend.

The reader’s first question is which picture, and this is where they choose: a title is an address link, the chosen row says so, and every panel beneath the cost bullets draws that picture. The full recoupment — gross receipts, each charge as the books label it, the pool, the participations, what the producer retains, the unsigned estimates and the company’s share of the funding — is under Detail, as the old slate carried it across the row.

Production cost is capitalised: every figure of it is added to work in progress and carried as an asset until the picture is released, and what is charged against revenue is the amortisation of a released picture. None of a picture’s cost is a cost of revenue and none of it reaches profit or loss while it is shooting — so its cost, at any size, changes the result by nothing.

Kaanal, Malayalam: gross receipts —; net pool —; participations —; retained —; return —; unsigned estimate none; company funded 55%; projected cost 111% of budget.

Vellaripravu, Malayalam: gross receipts —; net pool —; participations —; retained —; return —; unsigned estimate none; company funded 75%; projected cost 94% of budget.

Kadalkarayil, Malayalam: gross receipts 2,165; production cost recouped (2,374), finance cost recouped (142); net pool (352); participations —; retained (352); return (14)%; unsigned estimate 76; company funded 71%; projected cost 106% of budget.

Thirike, Malayalam: gross receipts 1,365; production cost recouped (1,335), finance cost recouped (80); net pool (50); participations —; retained (50); return (4)%; unsigned estimate 48; company funded 71%; projected cost 94% of budget.

Mazhavillu, Malayalam: gross receipts 2,611; production cost recouped (2,305), finance cost recouped (138); net pool 168; participations 34; retained 134; return 7%; unsigned estimate 91; company funded 51%; projected cost 86% of budget.

Pathiravu, Malayalam: gross receipts 3,051; production cost recouped (2,714), finance cost recouped (163); net pool 174; participations 35; retained 139; return 6%; unsigned estimate 107; company funded 51%; projected cost 87% of budget.

Ottakkaran, Malayalam: gross receipts 2,461; production cost recouped (1,999), finance cost recouped (120); net pool 342; participations 8; retained 334; return 16%; unsigned estimate 86; company funded 71%; projected cost 102% of budget.

Neelakkurinji, Malayalam: gross receipts 2,352; production cost recouped (1,804), finance cost recouped (108); net pool 439; participations —; retained 439; return 23%; unsigned estimate 82; company funded 71%; projected cost 97% of budget.

1,824 is still to collect under a signed deal across the slate, and a further 490 sits against deals nobody has signed.

63% of the slate’s funding is the company’s own money.

3 of 8 over budget; Kaanal 11% over. One bullet a picture: projected final cost as the bar against the approved budget as the rule, every picture on the slate, over budget in the signal ink.

The headline of a picture’s cost is projected final cost — spend to date, plus what is committed, plus what is left to complete. Spend to date leads nothing here: a picture that has spent half its budget and committed the other half is fully committed, not half spent, and a cost report that makes spend the hero figure is the one that lets an overrun arrive as a surprise. On a picture with nothing committed and nothing left to complete the projection is simply the spend.

Kaanal’s projection rests on the production’s own estimate of the cost to complete, so it and the variance built on it are estimates and carry the mark.

Vellaripravu’s projection rests on the production’s own estimate of the cost to complete, so it and the variance built on it are estimates and carry the mark.

The approved budget by department of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime. Budget, spend, commitment and cost to complete by department, summed a picture. Projected is spent plus committed plus cost to complete.

The bar is projected final cost and not spend, because spend is never the hero figure of a picture: a picture half spent and half committed is fully committed, and a cost report that makes spend the hero figure is the one that lets an overrun arrive as a surprise. For a released picture the two are the same figure, and its bar is what it cost.

Production cost is capitalised: every figure of it is added to work in progress and carried as an asset until the picture is released, and what is charged against revenue is the amortisation of a released picture. None of a picture’s cost is a cost of revenue and none of it reaches profit or loss while it is shooting — so its cost, at any size, changes the result by nothing.

Kaanal: budget 2,498, spent 1,464, committed 554, to complete 766, projected 2,784, 11% over.

Vellaripravu: budget 1,780, spent 466, committed 318, to complete 890, projected 1,674, 6% under.

Kadalkarayil: budget 2,240, spent 2,374, committed —, to complete —, projected 2,374, 6% over.

Thirike: budget 1,420, spent 1,335, committed —, to complete —, projected 1,335, 6% under.

Mazhavillu: budget 2,680, spent 2,305, committed —, to complete —, projected 2,305, 14% under.

Pathiravu: budget 3,120, spent 2,714, committed —, to complete —, projected 2,714, 13% under.

Ottakkaran: budget 1,960, spent 1,999, committed —, to complete —, projected 1,999, 2% over.

Neelakkurinji: budget 1,860, spent 1,804, committed —, to complete —, projected 1,804, 3% under.

Kaanal, by department: Art direction and sets budget 268, projected 380; Camera, grip and lighting budget 204, projected 208; Cast — lead and featured budget 720, projected 720; Contingency budget 194, projected 55; Costume and makeup budget 98, projected 97; Director and technical crew budget 210, projected 233; Finance cost on production loan budget 84, projected 105; Music and background score budget 112, projected 112; Post — edit, grade, sound budget 186, projected 242; Production and unit budget 290, projected 394; Visual effects budget 132, projected 238.

Art direction and sets, visual effects and production and unit account for 76 per cent of the overrun on Kaanal.

What Kaanal collected and what each step of the recoupment charged against it, in contractual order.

No recoupment order is held for Kaanal. Without the order in which money is recouped there is no net pool to compute, and no participation to solve against it.

The recoupment waterfall of Sixteen Frames Films. The order is contractual and the amounts are computed from the collections. In contractual order.

The net pool at the foot of the steps is what they come to and not a step of its own: nothing here stores a total, so the figure cannot disagree with the rows above it, and it opens all of them rather than any one. It is the figure every participation is a share of. The opening gross sits on the baseline because that is what a total is; every step after it floats from the running figure.

A picture that has not recouped ends at its pool: a participant takes a share of profit and does not fund a loss, so no share is solved against a negative pool — a negative pool divides perfectly well and would tell each participant they owe the picture money.

No rights have been sold on Kaanal. Until a right is sold there is nothing to collect, and no recoupment to run the collections through.

Kaanal: 4 terms, no pool to divide. One bullet a participant on Kaanal: what the term earns, solved in closed form, as the bar; what the books provide for it as the rule; the row in the signal ink where the books fall short. A verbal or assumed term carries the dagger.

The account Director and Co-producer name — 2170 — carries no line anywhere in this company's ledger, so there is no provision to compare against and none is claimed in either direction. An empty read against this picture would look the same and would mean something else entirely: a provision not yet posted. This is an account the books do not post to. The check that would have compared them is named under Data quality as one that could not run.

2 of the 4 terms are not documented — Lead artist is verbal, Featured artist is assumed — so those terms are what this application has been told rather than what a signed agreement says. Getting them in writing is the decision this panel asks for, and it is the same decision whether or not the picture pays out this year.

The participation terms of Sixteen Frames Films. Each term’s party, rate, basis and provenance, and the ledger it names where it names one.

The ledger of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime. What is provided is a creditor balance at the account and party each term names, read against this picture — the account and the party are not picture-scoped, so the picture is. A second read asks the same accounts across the whole company, because an account the books never post to answers empty for every picture and that is not a shortfall.

N = P × (1 − Σ before-basis rates) ÷ (1 + Σ after-basis rates). Each after-basis participant takes rate × N and each before-basis participant takes rate × P, so the identity N + Σ(r·N) + Σ(r·P) = P must hold — and it is not solved, because no net pool is held.

A term naming no ledger is not nought provided: nobody has said where the provision would sit, so the books have not been looked in. The comparison is live and nothing here is signed off: post the entry and the difference goes to nil on the next read, and it can come back later without anybody touching that entry, because a rise in collections lifts the pool and the computed share with it. A provision is not an agreement, so a term stays marked verbal after its provision is posted.

Neither is an account the books never post to. A read scoped to one picture answers empty whether the provision is still to be posted or the company does not carry participations at that account at all, and the two are not the same finding: the first is owed to somebody, the second is a question about the chart of accounts. So the account is asked for across the whole company before any figure is compared, and where it holds no line the panel states what the terms earn and compares nothing. No shortfall is claimed and no clear is printed, because a clear needs rows examined.

Lead artist (Lead actor): 10.00% after all participations, verbal, no ledger named.

Featured artist (Featured artist): 2.50% after all participations, assumed, no ledger named.

Director (Director): 5.00% after all participations, documented, ledger 2170 · Director; no provision posted at this account.

Co-producer (Co-producer): 8.00% before any participation, documented, ledger 2170 · Co-producer; no provision posted at this account.

Funded 1,464 lakh; nothing back yet. One bullet a funder of Kaanal: what it put in as the bar, what comes back to it as the rule on the same scale, the nature and what that figure is beneath the name.

Co-producer is in both panels: 293 of capital here, and the participation that capital earns in the participations.

The register comes to 1,464, which is what the picture has spent: it ties.

The funding register of Sixteen Frames Films. Each funder, its nature, what it put in and the rate it contracted where it lent.

What each funder put in and what comes back to it. The three natures do not come back alike and the panel keeps them apart: own funds take the residual — the pool after every participation — a contribution takes the participation its capital earns, and borrowing takes the charge the recoupment makes for it at the rate it contracted for, before the pool rather than out of it. A rate is stated only where one was contracted, and there is no one return across the three: a rate contracted on a loan, a share of profit and a residual are three different measures, and one figure over all of them would be the flattening this panel exists to avoid. A fixed fee is not here: an actor or a director paid an agreed amount is production cost, inside the approved budget in Cast and in Director and technical crew.

Own funds that do not come back carry the signal ink and the loss beside the name, because a bullet has no negative space and a rule below nought would be a rule off the track.

Co-producer: contribution, put in 293, 20% of the funding, nothing back yet.

Production loan: borrowing, put in 366, 25% of the funding, nothing back yet, contracted at 14% a year.

Sixteen Frames Films: own, put in 805, 55% of the funding, nothing back yet.

55% of Kaanal’s funding is the company’s own money.

Streaming 862 lakh short; the widest gap. One bullet a right across the slate: what has been collected as the bar against what was contracted under a signed deal as the rule, the widest gap in the signal ink. What Sixteen Frames Films has sold, window by window, and what has come back against each.

Streaming is 862 short of what it contracted, the widest gap of the 7 rights sold.

6 deals worth 490 are estimates nobody has signed — Dubbing — Telugu and Tamil — and are in no total of what is owed.

What is contracted and what is still to collect count signed deals alone. A deal nobody has signed is what somebody expects to get rather than an amount anybody is bound to pay, so it is an estimate, carries a trailing e, and is never added into either.

The rights contracts of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime. Every right sold across the slate, contracted against received. Unsigned deals are in neither.

One chart and one measure on it: the bar is what has come in and the rule behind it is what was contracted, so the gap between them is the drawing rather than a second series of the same thing. A chart that drew contracted and received as two bars would be the table again, in colour.

The order is the one a Malayalam picture is sold in, Kerala theatrical first. A deal nobody has signed is what somebody expects to get rather than an amount anybody is bound to pay, so it sits in its own count and is in neither figure.

Theatrical — Kerala: 6 deals with Direct release; contracted 5,548, received 5,548, still to collect —.

Theatrical — rest of India: 6 deals with Vyshak Films; contracted 1,469, received 1,351, still to collect 117.

Theatrical — overseas: 6 deals with Phars Film, Cinemaya, Aurora; contracted 3,100, received 2,728, still to collect 372.

Satellite: 6 deals with Regional satellite network; contracted 1,632, received 1,159, still to collect 473.

Streaming: 6 deals with Primary streaming platform; contracted 3,590, received 2,728, still to collect 862.

Music and publishing: 6 deals with Sixteen Frames Music (related party); contracted 490, received 490, still to collect —.

Dubbing — Telugu and Tamil: 6 deals with In negotiation; contracted —, received —, still to collect —; unsigned estimate 490.

Neelakkurinji best at 23%; 2 of 6 below the line. One mark a released picture: what it collected against what it spent, and the dashed line is where the two are equal — the point of recoupment. Kaanal and Vellaripravu are in production, have sold nothing, and are named here rather than drawn at nought.

Together the 6 released pictures have returned 5% of what they had to get back, from Neelakkurinji at 23% to Kadalkarayil at (14)%.

A picture with nothing entered against a column shows nothing rather than a nought: a picture still shooting has sold no rights and holds no order of repayment, which is not the same as having collected nothing.

The recoupment waterfall of Sixteen Frames Films. Gross receipts a released picture, against its projected final cost from the approved budget by department.

A picture that has not recouped is the exposure this screen exists to show, and a mark below the line is one. The return is stated as a percentage and never as a multiple: a multiple hides a loss — 0.54 does not read as having lost 46 per cent of what had to be got back — and the percentage does. The slate’s own return is the two totals divided, never the pictures’ returns averaged: an average would weight a picture that cost a crore the same as one that cost ten.

Kadalkarayil: spent 2,374, gross receipts 2,165, net pool (352), return (14)%.

Thirike: spent 1,335, gross receipts 1,365, net pool (50), return (4)%.

Mazhavillu: spent 2,305, gross receipts 2,611, net pool 168, return 7%.

Pathiravu: spent 2,714, gross receipts 3,051, net pool 174, return 6%.

Ottakkaran: spent 1,999, gross receipts 2,461, net pool 342, return 16%.

Neelakkurinji: spent 1,804, gross receipts 2,352, net pool 439, return 23%.

What Sixteen Frames Films has recorded against Primary streaming platform, month by month, beside what the platform has reported: the licence fee, the instalments received and the tax withheld at source. twelve months.

4 items are open: 1 the platform reports differently, 15 in our favour, and 3 it has not reported at all — instalments received for Jul 2026, Aug 2026; tax withheld at source for Aug 2026, which cannot be quantified until a statement arrives.

A month the platform has not reported carries no difference: nothing is netted against a figure nobody has given.

The running account with the principal of Sixteen Frames Films, read from Tally Prime. Our side is what the books carry for the month; the platform’s is what its statement says.

A line the platform has not reported is left out of the total beside it rather than counted as nought, and the difference on a line is stated only where both sides have answered for every month of it. Disputed is money to argue for; unreported is a statement that has not arrived.

Every month the account holds is on the face.