Image by AFP/Getty Images via Daylife
I'm probably one of the few people on the planet who has not sat through an entire viewing of the Oscar winning movie
"Slumdog Millionaire."When I first saw a trailer for the movie "Slumdog Millionaire," I was very excited. It looked very interesting and since the story was about street children, I was looking forward to seeing it. So when I saw the film was on the lists of movies available on my flight to the US, I eagerly set up the video player to watch it.
I majored in Communications TV/Film and I remember one of my professors explaining that what you feel about a movie about ten minutes into it is pretty much going to be your lasting impression of the film. I have found this to be a pretty accurate way to gauge if I am going to like a movie or not.
About ten minutes into "Slumdog Millionaire" I was extremely uncomfortable and was not enjoying anything I was watching. I had read articles about the film and knew that the children used in the film were not professional child actors, but real children from real slums in India. I felt very uneasy about what I was watching and about the subject matter involving children who had never worked on a movie production before. I know that my impression might be considered extreme to the average viewer, but I have spent a lot of time working with street children in Ukraine so I was feeling sensitive towards the children. As I watched the film, I knew that these children were most likely re-enacting situations from their own lives. I knew that their parents, being poor and probably promised money from the producers for letting them use their children, were most likely not in a position to stand up to or have a say in how their children were being used in the production. (Per California's law regarding minors working on a production, a minor must have a parent or guardian with them at all times and their job is to look out for the child's welfare.) About fifteen minutes into the film, I gave up on the movie.
I don't know the details of the production of this movie or why the producers and directors made the choices that they did in making it, so I am not trying to villify them. But I do wonder if it would not have been a better choice to use professional child actors instead of using children they were depicting in the film. They may have saved money and gained an authenticity by using the children from the slums, but apparently their attempts to compensate them for making the film are turning into something that looks more like exploitation of these children.
While the producers maintain that they have adequately "paid" these children for their services, including trust funds,
a trip to Hollywood, and
have donated money to a fund to help other children who live in India's slums, it is interesting that these children's standard of living has not changed and that they are still living a squalid existence,
some are even losing their homes and
being offered for sale by their parents. A trust fund for college won't help them much if they cannot go to school, are sold by their parents, or die in trying to survive to adulthood.
What do you think? Have you seen the movie? Did you like it? Do you think they should have used professional actors or children from the slums?