Comments on: ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ child star Rubina Ali’s slum home is destroyed too

By: Mairead

Mairead — Thu, 21 May 2009 20:27:20 +0000

You defeated the monster – yay!

I see where you’re coming from, and unfortunately I daresay you’re right.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: RAN

RAN — Thu, 21 May 2009 19:20:06 +0000

Hi Mairead…I’ll respond to you as soon as I’m released from the moderation monster.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: RAN

RAN — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:34:53 +0000

Hi Mairead, I’m only making assumptions based on what my Indian friends tell me about wealth and status in India. Even if those kids were paid a nominal amount of money by U.S. standards, and even if the money went to the parent’s and not the children, there should STILL be enough money from this movie and residuals, for them to live decently for a little while. I don’t see that happening – in fact I just see desperate poverty. While I completely agree that the government should be held accountable for the terrible level of poverty, these kids should have made enough money to improve living conditions.
That’s what brings me to the probable lack of decent agents for these kids. From where I’m sitting, it doesn’t look like anyone took care of the children’s best interests.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Mairead

Mairead — Thu, 21 May 2009 12:14:31 +0000

@ RAN. To clarify, I said that I don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes to let this situation get to this point. But I do think that a government has a duty of care to its citizens, which is over and above anything an entertainment company has.

Out of curiosity, where did you find out what everyone else who appeared on the film was being paid? Are we relying on the assumption that the established actors got UK Equity rates, or the Indian equivalent and that we’re hoping that their agents were savvy enough to secure a clause guaranteeing a share of future profits?

If this is not the case – should we not also be grumbling that more money should be given to Dev and Frieda at least as their part in the film was even more pivotal? (Ok, I’m being a bit facetious, but their parts were bigger)

I let my subscription to IMDb Pro lapse ages ago so I can’t check it through there.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: JackieSA

JackieSA — Thu, 21 May 2009 11:39:50 +0000

Carrie: What do the Jolie-Pitts have to do with these children? What a daft thing to say! This movie has made millions and some of the money should be going to these children.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: RAN

RAN — Thu, 21 May 2009 11:20:37 +0000

I have to disagree with your last comment, Mai. I would see this as everyone from that film having made a tremendous amount of money – especially the producers and directors – except for those children. Those kids were plucked from the slums of India without an agent and without any knowledge of they type of money everyone else was getting. For that reason, they were probably paid a pitiful amount of money to perform in the movie that made millions of dollars and won numerous accolades. The fact that no one from the entertainment company has attempted to balance their rip off and abuse of these children is pathetic and disgraceful.

In India, a man who makes $50k a year is considered rich. If these children were paid even the minimum salary in the entertainment industry, they would be well off in India. It’s obvious from their living conditions that they’ve been used and tossed aside.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Mairead

Mairead — Thu, 21 May 2009 07:47:22 +0000

Well, alecto, I don’t know about anyone else – but I’m here. What is your point? Personally I’m cautious of swallowing every single report that comes from this story because the details change constantly.

We don’t know what’s happening out of the media spotlight. Perhaps the production company has completely stopped all payments to the families and to the trust. Perhaps they have found the bureaucracy too much to deal with. Perhaps they don’t give a rats bollocks. Or perhaps it’s more complicated than we think?

One very tenuous comparison that comes to mind is the set of Ryan’s Daughter. That was built on commonage land for the film. David Lean was all for leaving it intact for the people of the area to use as a tourist attraction; but with the one stipulation that it cause no argument or complaints that one family was benefiting more than the other. Well, human nature being what it was, it did begin a lot of strife so David Lean gave the order to demolish it – only the school-house remains.

But more to the point where is the Indian government who also said that because of how proud they were of the children that they would rehouse them in a flat? Surely their own government has more of a responsibility to them than an entertainment company from the other side of the world?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: rocket

rocket — Thu, 21 May 2009 03:18:34 +0000

Please someone help these small kids great actors from Mumbai, they deserve better in life than what they are going through right now.

I would give a donation but I’m unemployed right now, but at least I have a roof over my head.

God Bless anyone who can help these poor talented souls.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Lou

Lou — Wed, 20 May 2009 23:30:48 +0000

I will never watch a movie directed or produced by those greedy bastards. How much did the kids get out of the millions the movie producers made?
This is beyond disgusting.
Don’t rent slumdog.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: alecto

alecto — Wed, 20 May 2009 20:51:11 +0000

Where are all the people that were slaming me for defending the little girls father when he was accused of trying to sell her? The ones that said that it wasn’t the producers job to take care of these children? Where are you?

Report this comment as spam or abuse