It makes a good headline, doesn't it?. But it's no different to any other industry; 'labour' is sourced at the lowest price to maximise profit. It's somewhat unusual within the percieved glamorous film industry to see a star paid so little. But I've no doubt that other areas of the industry are outsourced to gain from cheap labour. For example DVDs are, I'm sure, made in far away prices.
And it's something you can't escape. Any product or service you buy will be, in part, financed by what most would consider as exploitation. The demands of the consumer and the power of market ecomomics means that costs are minimised. You don't always see this, so when the star of a blockbuster film is paid pennies, you sit up and take note. In this particular case, it's a shocking tale from both sides. On the one side the star is clearly worth more, on the other the sums paid to actors is, well, extravagent.
People should always be paid what they are worth. What value they add. Our current gloabal economic model means that people always profits at the expense of others. People are privalidged to be born in a certain country, or area of a country. Is it the only model? No. But then throughout any system through the ages, it's always a group of people that profit over others. I wish it were not true, but it's the way of the world.
On the flip side - I read recently that Titanic stars Winseltt and DiFacto helped with the fund for one of the original survivors with staying in her nursing home. She was six weeks old when it went down. So said Sky news.
We have lots of organisations that aim to foster responsible less exlpoitative modes of consumption and production - like meat that was treated better when it was alive, animal testing stuff - lots more.
I think we need a group that aims to foster ethical film making - anyone heard of that??? ( goes to google)
They are keen to go on about no animals getting hurt in whatever, what about the people ?
Globalisation isn't new. You could argue that the world was more global at the turn of the previous century. And with that particular brand of globalisation came imperialism. That certainly wasn't an egalitarian society. Indeed, Victoirian Britain was an extremely divisive era.
I would stand by my assertation that the world has always been unequal. People have only profited at the expense of others in order to become rich. Altruism is the reserve of the few. And true altruism rarely exists. It's the way of the world. Is it right? No. But it's what's always happened. People are rich because other people are poor. Obviously that's a truism (people can only be 'relatively' rich), but people profit at the expense of others.
Take a look at the label on the clothes you're wearing. I'm betting they were made in a country where the wage is lower than our minimum? I'm betting the chap that made your t-shirt doesn't have the so called luxuries we take for granted. Are we making a conscious decision to keep him poor? No really, but that's why 'we' are rich. And to him, we're wealthy.
So in my mind, yes, it has always happened and will contine to happen. Like it or not, as a part of a western country you are profiting at the expense of others. We may argue otherwise, but that's the simple truth.
Diecrimination and crass inequality should never be exsued as merely inevitable- thats rather depressing.
As for my clothes - I go to some lengths to avoid the more flagrent abusers, but it's a good point and precisely why there are legions of organisations - and un resoloutions - to attenpt ot resolve these problems.
Most of my clothes purchases are from charity shops - a deliberate eschewing of the vulgarity of the fashion industry and it mens i can spend more on cameras... lols.
So ethical film making anyone ? Do any groups aim to foster it ?
I am going to start by buying more w allen films...
" Q: Is it an honor that some of the best actors out there still want to work with you?
WOODY: I'm not surprised because they only work with me if they're between desirable jobs. If I call and actor or an actress and someone else like a Steven Spieberg or Martin Scorsese is calling them; they're fine directors and are offering them substantial money, they have no interest in me at all, but if they just finished a picture and they've earned their 10 million dollar salary and they have nothing to do till August and I call them in June and they like the part, you know, they say why not? "