Saturday, January 24, 2009

Is Hollywood Responsible for "Slumdog" Child Actors?

My sister just sent over an interesting piece about the child actors in "Slumdog Millionaire." As it turns out:

Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail, who plays the youngest version of the main character's brother Salim in the film, lives with his parents and siblings in a makeshift plastic tent, pitched on a half-finished government park.

Besides friends and neighbours, he has a big garbage dump and armies of mosquitoes and flies for company.

Ten-year-old Azharuddin's mother says they have been homeless for a while: "We have been squatting on this government park since the time our hutments were demolished over a year ago and despite showing the right documents to the authorities we have not been allotted our room [a one-room tiny flat]."

Rubina Ali - who portrays the youngest version of the leading lady Latika in the film - is playing with Azhar and other children.

Their faces glow in the rays of the fading sunlight. They greet the BBC team with coyness. Ask them to pronounce the film's title and they fumble amid nervous smiles. "Aslum dog minaire," says Rubina. "No," Azhar tries to correct her, with his own incorrect version.

Here is a question I am pondering: do the producers of "Slumdog Millionaire" have a responsibility to help these child actors out of poverty? Especially when that same poverty was used to entertain millions? I'd like to hear your thoughts.

By the way, you should see "Slumdog Millionaire" - it's excellent.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

reminds me a little of this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/movies/04kite.html