Hollywood Inc. - the movie industry meets globalization
We've heard it a million times: the Hollywood rags-to-riches story. Thousands of actors flock to Tinsel town to make it big, where those with the talent and charm to become stars become rich and famous. However, as Hollywood meets globalization, there is a slight twist in the ending. Hollywood's trend in choosing native actors to give movies a more realistic feel is perhaps for an ulterior motive: to make a profit off of these actors' destitution and lack of education to make a few bucks. It seems that Hollywood can be just as guilty as other businesses of exploiting workers.
Take, for example, the movie "Slumdog Millionaire." The story follows Jamal Malik, played by the British Dev Patel, from his beginnings in the squalid slums of Mumbai, India, to his hard-earned win on India's version of "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?"
The movie itself is a rags-to-riches production. Its projected cost was only $15 million, but it has since made more than $120 million, accumulated numerous awards and was nominated for an enviable 10 Oscars.
Despite the overwhelming success of the film, at least two participants in the film have not been well paid. Rubina Ali and Mohammed Azharuddin Ismail, the two memorable child actors who play Latika and Salim, respectively, still live in dire poverty in the slums. Azhar's family lives in a makeshift tent, and Rubina lives in a hut by an open sewer, hardly the abode of movie stars.
When the startling truth was revealed, Fox Searchlight responded with a press statement using such justifications as "the children were paid three times the average local annual adult salary." What it did not mention was how much the children were paid, which was a meager £1,700 ($2,454) for Azhar and £500 for Rubina ($722); obviously, three times the average local salary isn't much.
The Slumdog story has interesting parallels with Nike, Wal-Mart, and other business giants that similarly make large profits by paying workers meager wages. Many economists, including Princeton University economist Paul Krugman, defend this business measure as being a positive consequence of globalization. They glorify sweatshops. Krugman writes: "The average apparel worker earns $13.10 per day (at the Kathy Lee Gifford sweatshop), yet 44 percent of the country's (Honduras') population lives on less than $2 per day."
No comments:
Post a Comment