"Slumdog" child star's Mumbai shanty home torn down *(great example of what's wrong)

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Dec 2, 2006
6,161
44
0
#1
"Slumdog" child star's Mumbai shanty home torn down *(great example of what's wrong)

MUMBAI (Reuters) - City authorities in Mumbai demolished the shanty home of a "Slumdog Millionaire" child star on Thursday, forcing his family into the streets months after the Oscar-winning film shot him to global fame.

Azharuddin Ismail, 9, played the character of Salim as a child in the film, a rags-to-riches romance about a poor Indian boy competing for love and money on a television game show.

Ismail's tarpaulin-covered home in a teeming slum was one of several shanties, illegally built along a drain, that were demolished by local authorities in Mumbai, India's financial capital and entertainment hub.

"When they came I was sleeping, they shook me awake and one policeman even threatened me," Ismail, surrounded by half-broken suitcases filled with clothes and utensils, told Reuters.

"What can I do if they have demolished my house? I will sleep out in the open."

A poster of "Slumdog Millionaire," signed by director Danny Boyle, fluttered from the only wall of Ismail's shanty still standing. Open sewers run nearby and it had no running water.

Authorities said the shanties had been demolished earlier but had sprung up again on the same spot.

"The shanties are all touching a drain that has to be cleaned before the advent of the monsoons," said U.D. Mistry, the local official in charge of the demolition drive.

Earlier this year, there was an outcry after pictures emerged of "Slumdog Millionaire's" child stars living in squalor despite the movie's box-office success and eight Academy Awards.

The film also sparked controversy for its name, deemed by some to be offensive to slum dwellers, and its treatment of the cast. Its depiction of the lives of poor Indians was dubbed "poverty porn" by sections of the media.

In February, the housing authority of Maharashtra state, of which Mumbai is the capital, said they would give Ismail and fellow child star Rubina Ali new houses. But Ismail's mother, Shameem, said the family is now at the mercy of the rains.

"We also heard that the government had promised us houses, but what happened? We are still homeless," she said. "My son has brought glory to the country, shouldn't he get some credit?"


this little boy starred in an oscar winning film but doesnt have a pot to piss in literally. the people behind this exploitation are the real devils of this country.a child in the u.s. wouldnt be exploited like this, they would end up on disney. what is wrong with this picture? and we wonder why terrorists hate us.
 
Dec 4, 2004
6,223
2,042
113
#2
okay it is a fucked up story but..


what do you expect? the child was paid to do a job, which was to act in the movie. the director nor anyone else had any idea how much the movie would make and if it would be a success or not. no one was promised the life of a millionaire in exchange for acting in the movie.

what is the exploitation you're talking about? this situation has nothing to do with the U.S. or terrorists wtf?
 
Jun 21, 2006
926
0
0
37
#3
Actually the film was produced by people in the UK, only the distribution was American, through Fox Searchlight pictures. I wouldn't say that they cheated those kids, this movie wasn't supposed to be anything special, it just turned out better than anyone could have hoped for. Should they be further compensated? Yeah they probably deserve a ticket out of their situation, but that wold be hard to do because of all the contractual obligations that go on with movies like this. It would take personal donations to get these kids up on their feet. So instead of pointing a finger at the media, why don't you make a difference in their lives and donate money to them if you feel so passionate about this issue?
 
Sep 5, 2008
1,995
27
0
49
#5
the real question is, why are these kids more important than the thousands of other kids on the street and the other people who had there homes torn down?

because they made a movie???

no thanks.

and they hate us because of our support for israel mainly...

and indians arent muslim.... so that line is completely irrelevant.
 
Dec 2, 2006
6,161
44
0
#7
i should have been a little more direct in my statement. the terrorists target our government because of the exploitation of the people. we are considered one in their eyes. you only have to look as far as your local wal-mart to see exploits in this country. but that is another subject.

exploits in this situation are pretty obvious. the producers of the movie are the bad guys. my bad for not being more direct.as far as being passionate about this situation, it's about what is right, bottomline. contract or not, these kids deserve to be compensated accordingly is my point.

they hate us and this yet another example of why. you can have your opinion, which is fine because i have mine. i'm not anti this or anti that. opportunity isnt supposed to be determined by your financial status, atleast that is what they tell us. we know the truth. i'm not hurting financially but will not forget the struggle.

there are millions of children that need help. unfortunately i cant help them all. as far as what i do because i'm passionate about the youth in general. here is an example. my son's football leagus has mandatory fundraisers. if you dont participate your playing time is affected. i feel it is bullshit. but what i do is take $1000 of my own money and make sure kids arent being catagorized because of finances, something i endured as a youth.although i coach i dont show favoritism towards my son. we all know(ones with kids in sports) how these politics work in the youth game.once again, it is about what is right.the better kids come from lower financial brackets. imagine that.

the exploitation i'm talking about is individuals making millions off the sweat of others.
 

V

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
5,308
137
0
40
#8
  • V

    V

and none of these producers/directors/actors wanna help the kid out???
 

V

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
5,308
137
0
40
#10
  • V

    V

^^people are greedy...making a heartfelt movies like those are thier beliefs but turnaround and leave a castmember homeless coz they don't wanna reach in thier own pockets...
 
Dec 4, 2004
6,223
2,042
113
#13
i should have been a little more direct in my statement. the terrorists target our government because of the exploitation of the people. we are considered one in their eyes.
actually alot of other countries love the U.S. but its our leaders and government they hate. As much as you want to believe it, the people dont make the decisions in how this country is run and who "we" attack or ally with.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#15
Actually, as far as I know, the child actors were given a decent amount of money and more so when as the film became increasingly successful, but it was secured in a trust that will pay for their education and become available once they graduate in order to protect the money from unscrupulous relatives.

If they just gave a nine year old money it would be a problem.



Yall know one of the child actors parents tried to sell them right lol

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/04/21/india.slumdog.watchdofg/
 
Sep 5, 2008
1,995
27
0
49
#18
when I say indians arent muslim it means the majority.
Is this 2nd grade reading comprehension? See the sentence preceding the statement would mean that the majority of indians are hindus.

...ill see you on that bus.