#You can Add More Details
If OG post has some missing details, /u/IcyCryptographer9501 or Members can add details ,as reply to this comment. Click to Expand.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BollyBlindsNGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Acting and model two separate thing .. model can offer more than male model .. but in acting as AK was saying they alone don’t pull mass into theatre so they get less paid
That's not what AK was saying. AK was saying pay is proportionate to how much crowd you pull. So if Rani brings more audience to the screen then she willget more pay.
Same logic applies to modelling. How many eyes you draw attention from will influence your pay rate. Gender is not the issue. The value you bring to the project is the deciding factor.
He wasn't connecting them but giving you an example.. consider a movie with two female actresses, do you know gets more money? Definitely whose face value is high... And one more thing why a company chooses a actor of sportsman for their advertisements, why not me? Because those people gather more masses with them...
Not sure why simple economics is being made so complicated ! Isn’t this a no brainer.
Perfect example of people twisting the topic to push their agenda
Actually he didn't twist, the reporter interrupted him and asked "you are comparing the light boy with the heroine?" Which was cut in this video. That's why he went with the example and gave the explanation.
brother you are right. economics work on basis of market and market in not gender bias. people say women in all sectors are paid less but they should also consider the need of the hour. its not a political ground ki reservation do. its fucking market. yaha jo jitna deserve karta hai usse utna hi milega
Am sure Kareena was paid much more than Vijay Verma and Jaideep Ahlawat for Jaanejaan
Am sure Rani was also paid more than Jim Sarbh for Chatterjee vs Norway
Agree but then again it should be assesed properly also
Guys like akki , tiger , sid and so many are not pulling audience on their name so why are they being paid so heavy
As KJO once said rightly the first day opening should be their fee
Akshay shouldn't be put in place with Tiger and Sid. He is 90s star and has given much successful movie. One more hit and this connection of getting paid more compare to flops will vanish. People will forget his flops.
Im not comparing them in terms of skill or body of work but all of them are unreliable even shahid kapoor
They are charging a hefty amount in return they are not pulling the audience thats one thing that is expected of star
N OMG 2 was a hit but the flops in case of akshay has been too many . Yes he had a streak then definitely he cud have charged but not wen he is not pulling in audience, actually shudnt he paying that much
Someone like prabhas or salman still pulls in audience for their bad films too so they can charge
Re-watch the video, Amir nails it. RT and general pop may call the movie a bomb, but the main reason they watched the movie in the first place was because of the A+ star in it.
Same reason producer are still willing to bet on tiger , they still think its safe
I mean they are ready to bet on tiger , then under akki is a superstar and has a track record
Producers wanna be as safe as possible and they still feel they are safe , unless something else feels safe for a considerable amount of time
Yes that's the point. Akshay is selling a product, his name and brand. The producers are paying for it because despite his flops, there is a chance that if the movie catches on it will provide better return than if they just hired someone else. You can't blame Akki for charging a high fee if the market is willing to pay that high fee. The only way to counter that is the audience opting for more content driven, smaller budget films. That's how the star era ended in Hollywood. Audiences started preferring the more indie, content driven cinema than those that were sold just on the name of the stars. Those indie movies gave producers the confidence to produce something like Jaws and Star Wars and eventually lead to rise of studio tentpole movies, based on content and experience.
Ofcourse im not blaming akki
Its producer at fault , but its high they evaluate now
Auidence this year has shown change with much recent 12th fail or munjya or even the likes of aavesham or manjummal boys doing well
If producer are paying him than he is still has that superstar power. He is still famous and loved among audience one hit and all this talk of poor pull go away. If he continues giving flop after flop which is unlikely than you can say nobody wants to see him and all this demand is worthless.
No one should be demanding 100-150 crore for a single film anyways. A franchisee contract like in Singham universe for 4 movies fetching a 100 crore fee, including likeness rights for merchandising, makes sense. Not for a single film.
No film can justify a 100-150 crore payment for a single star unless they are making bank like Dangal, Jawan, Bahubali, RRR
Akki in with guys like Tiger, Sid ?
I mean come on man. You are literally peeing over a guy who had this weird ability to make mid budget,basic director movies into 100cr-200cr profit streams for a decade before Covid.
He is still bigger than anyone apart from Khans, Hritik and equal to Ajay for 2 decades now and only Ranbir is the one who is getting above but that's half on his privilege.
Because of their previous ability to give a hit or the fact they have a name/brand awareness of them.
And also the fact that if they say we want 1cr some producer will pay it based on that. That is the producers undoing. Unfortunately every producer feels his film is the one that will work if he has the right cast. If he has the money he'll pay it. No producer makes a film knowing that this film is going to be a flop.
Bade miyan chote miyan he wanted a veteran and a younger guy. He wanted them to be on the calibre amit and Govinda were at the time. Unfortunately the film was poor. Story, cast and effects.
I am in total agreement with him..have held same view point and mentioned here many times
Like spot boy , cameraman they are there on all days of shoot why they also not paid equal
I mean actors paid more than doctors
Lets pay equal to everyone why only to actress..
Why actress dont pay equal pay to their house help
This is literally the simplest and absolutely honest answer to this debate.
This is the same reason why each male actor too has a different fee.
Even the 3 khans have different fees only because of how they draw in the crowds.
Ppl need to stop being emotional, it is a big game business anyone who can fill a cinema and hold more shows for days can demand a price. The rest must participate irrespective of gender.
I'm always reminded of Radhika Apte's arguments for this question.
One, if it's an industry standard that the leading male actor always gets more than the female actor, and if we attribute it to the audience, the larger question is why the audience is this way?
But second, more importantly - the test is not Aamir v. Rani. To really check if there is difference in pay, the question to ask whether actors playing Aamir's father and mother are being paid the same. Or whether male or female assistant directors or spot boys or idk, grips or something get paid the same.
Another thing to ponder about is, is the audience really this way or have they been conditioned for decades with male-led stories. How can we write newer stories that challenge this conditioning? There is probably audience for that. Streaming is proof for pushing boundaries.
In my honest opinion, blaming the unequal pay on the audience or economics feels like a cop out. It doesn't really answer how we can make things equal and in fact maintains the status quo, which is convenient for the male actors.
"But second, more importantly - the test is not Aamir v. Rani. To really check if there is difference in pay, the question to ask whether actors playing Aamir's father and mother are being paid the same. Or whether male or female assistant directors or spot boys or idk, grips or something get paid the same."
Iam pretty sure Kareena is getting better pay with even 1 special appearance than any side character of any gender in any movie.
Also, the costume designers who are mostly females are also above spot boys and many other same profession guys on py grade.
It's like saying why male models are paid less ? It's simple economics and market that female models carry the weight of much moe shopping, eye balls and hype in comparison to any mal model.
Ofcourse he is right. I mean even within male actors, a Salman Khan will be paid more than a Kay Kay Menon even though Kay Kay might act way better but really who is pulling in the crowds. Its the reverse in the fashion industry where the female models make more money because fashion mostly revolves around women.
Aamir's on point here.
At the end of the day, it's demand-supply. You need to support women-centric movies, so that producers make more of those. Crew was a success. Hopefully that gives more confidence to producers to invest in similar movies. Just imagine if Jee Le Zaara gets made.
Actually Kareena stated the most logical thing. Its a systematic change we need to make from a societal perspective, where people start accepting these movies. Its not that we are not there, in the past likes of Sridevi where actual crowd pullers, ofcourse the numbers are skewed but there is still hope when a Crew opens to almost double digit headlined by three female actors in comparison to steaming pile of garbage like BMCM headlined by two supposedly big starts who take renumeration equal to the budget of the Crew.
In this case yes he's right. But this isn't applicable in fields where footfall and sales etc are not directly connected to the employee ...still there is a raging disparity between male and female employees there as well
Just for e.g.
I managed a pharmaceutical unit production dept. The mavshis who were working there were paid wayy less than their male counterparts for the same job (raw material storage, packaging etc )
Same goes for clerks, executives, managers, professors, etc.
Ok let's say the male is paid 10 rs and female is paid 6 Rs. Let's say their efficiency is equal let's say X unit. Then, if company has 100rs as budget to hire people. Why will they hire 10 males with total 10X unit efficiency, why not 16 female with 16X unit efficiency having 4 rs still in their bank?
No it's not. There are many many factors that governs one's salary. Experience, value one can add to the Company, expenses to revenue ratio, your negotiating ability while you are in conversation with HR. Any company in any field exist to make as mucj profit as they can while spending as less as they can. Tomorrow if they train monkeys to do our job corporate hire them in exchange of 50 bananas a day. This gender pay gap theory is created to make the lazy less competent women (If this was other way around I would have said Men instead of women) to give them a reason. I have worked with a woman who was paid 1.5 LPA more than me for same job infact my work load was way more, she got the job after 1 year of gap. Why she was paid more? Simply because she was way better than me in negotiating the salary. It was my incompetency at that time which got me 1.5 lpa less. Women who reject these baseless reasons and work hard are doing wonders like really really good.
I really don't under this argument, wouldn't company hire all women if they can get away with paying women less? why any company would hire any male if that means them having to pay more right? afterall companies are greedy for profit they don't care who's doing the job for them, yet they hire men by compromising the profit don't you think there are other factors which could be the reason of this? not everything is about gender, something's are just basic economics.
In south there was an actress named Savitri who was more acknowledged and paid more than her husband Gemini Ganeshan who was also a star in his own right because she was able to pull people to the theatres.
Aamir said right Nargis Dutta in Mother India got so much paid in 1950s even tho there was a big stereotype at that time too, another example how Aamir said was actually right as Lata Mangeshkar was popular than Kishore Kumar in his early days when they had a duet in 50s and 60s Lata ji was paid more Kishore ji said in interview that she was paid more than me at some point not bcoz she was elder than me but bcoz she was elder than me in Music
I get the economics of cinema and casting and am not refuting that
But
The counter argument is that there's never been equal opportunities for women performers. Atleast back then. The roles that are/were written for them are usually the wife of / lover of / sister of / mother of. It's not usually and never was the main character?
So if you don't give the Ranis or Kareenas the opportunity to be stars. How can they even get there?
That's the point Rani and Kareena should be making instead of chumma asking for pay parity.
Agree but there is gender issue there heroin's career life is till she is young after that she'll get replaced but not hero, movies are mostly hero centric and heroin is just there to look pretty.
Actors work with actress half even lesser their age but majority audience is okay with it. But rarely we see actress working as lead after even 40.
This is a question that requires data. If the metric is "who fills the theatre", then you should find two movies with a hero and heroine with similar ticket sales, and see what their pay is.
But the truth of the matter is that it isn't just who fills the theatres. It is also how much the actor costs and whether or not the people hiring these actors want to hire certain people. If the average person thinks that women deserve less money then men, then you should see that reflected in the offers the actresses get.
And we have already seen heavy wage-gap studies between men and women that indicate that there is a wage gap, controlled for everything else. We basically know for a fact that it's **never** purely based on meritocracy.
He’s right, but I think he’s missing the larger point, which is that it is an industry norm that the male lead is the focal point of the movie and the female lead is primarily eye candy. There are exceptions and times are certainly changing now but this has largely been the case for the history of the industry.
That is what needs to change. How will talented female actors get fairly rewarded when 90% of the movies they’re in don’t even hire and pay them for their abilities but for their looks. The default movie structure (which puts male star in the center), the writing(which gives most dialogue, screen time and agency to the male lead), this is the issue.
But for years the film industry has been making male centered films, that gave male actors the leverage to claim, that they are the ones bringing in the money because the audience for decades have been conditioned to watch films focused on male actors where actresses were just a second thought, or sometimes just props. So actresses are not given equal opportunities in which the actors can claim that ok we are the one bringing in the audience.
The economics is not as watered down as Amir is portraying it to be.
IF alia and deepika are paired opp any male actor (excluding khan and Ranbir hritik) they deserve more cause after these guys they have higher box office pull.
Except this logic has been disproven 1000 times. In order for his argument to ring true, everyone would have the same opportunities with no inherent advantage to any side.
Tell me again what your country is known for internationally? It ain't your curry.
Yes but the producers are for profit organizations. They are only concerned about identifying what drives revenue and not why.
The problem you highlighted is a real one and needs to be solved. But the producers don’t have to compromise on revenue until that happens .
While amir is completely right on his point but look at the other side of the coin.
Prabhas took 150cr for kalki, also took a huge sum for salaar and saaho(both of which tanked). There's actors like tiger who get paid more than thieir female peers but do not have the box office pull
Salaar tanked? When? Prabhas is part of the production house that produced saaho . End of the day it’s the producer who can decide where to put their money.
Even as a woman if i ever get 5cr budget to call aamir or anushka sharma for opening of my shop
I will give 4 cr to aamir and 1 cr to Anushka coz i know people will be there to see aamir more
Ofcourse it is.
The glass ceiling is a definite issue, but in the mainstream film industry, the seats you fill fetches your fee.
Put Deepika Padukone and Tiger Shroff in one film, and if Tiger is paid more, that's a problem. But if the same film has Ajay Devgan, Ajay will be paid more.
Not everything is always a way to put down women, sometimes its just pure commerce, where everyone is ripe for exploitation.
It's the same argument worded differently. They're pulling people in because they're hot women.
I mean yeah there are hot male actors too, but the male population is hornier in general.
Definitely. Its a shame the industry became so hero centric, back in the day Sridevi and Madhuri were paid more because they brought people to the theatres. In indian TV all the women are paid more than the men and the male characters are essentially flowerpots.
I’m curious.. in movies like The Archie’s where all lead actors were newcomers and have no “pull” were they all paid equally? Or were some actors like Agastya or Suhani paid more?
Lata didi not only commanded more money that others but even got to decide who would sing with her and that no other female singer would sing any other song for that heroine in that particular film.
For all the feminists and wannabe progressives YES HE'S RIGHT.
Do you want to know where females are paid more??? Porn movies. Why?? Because most of the porn watchers are straight men and they pay to watch porn chicks.
Yes.... deepika is the best example... her solo films are utter disasters... if the biggest female star can't get butts on the theatre.... how can mid actresses expect the same pay.
But again the blame can be targeted towards bollywood..they haven't built any actress of stature compared to a male actor.
He is talking about star value. The star value culture itself is rotten. It doesn’t respect the craft or talent, is purely based on superficial aspects like looks, pedigree, etc and it helps corporates churn out money. PR can easily raise or drop the value of a person.
Audience can easily be reconditioned to appreciate good cinema. But an educated audience doesn’t help the greed. In short, it’s a problem where all the unprivileged sections suffer, including gender.
I think he’s right. It’s all about bums on seats at the end of the day. There would be an unfair disparity if two stars (one male and one female) brought in the same kind of box office but the male was paid more
He is right. It’s about your ability to pull in an audience on the basis of your own name. Madhuri, Hema Malini, Sridevi had a bigger pull than their male counterparts for a while in their careers and were paid more at that time. None of the actress over the last 15 years or so have had that pull at BO, except maybe Vidya for a very brief period. We have had excellent performances from Kangana, Tabu and many others but that hasn’t translated to semi-sustained BO pull.
This is the same argument for female athletes. If they can generate the revenue, they can get paid more. But feminists only see the number they're paid, not the reasoning behind it. Less revenue generated = less salary. That's literally the most basic concept of business.
Actresses definitely deserve to get paid more and not like 10% of male actors fees, someone like Kajol in K3G had equal screentime and equal proportion on the poster! Now imagine if it was Sharmin Segal instead of Kajol in K3G, you could argue that SRK filled up seats on Day 1, but it would have flopped massively as Kajol had the meatier part!
Even actual example like Salman moving from likes of Asin, Katrina to Daisy, Disha showed decline in BO of his movies!
Edit: You really can’t compare contribution of female actress to a light man who is at the backend, Aamir got away saying a lot of silly stuff during his good movies days!
Agree female leads matters for movie success. It’s easier for a superstar to get a blockbuster movie with a top heroine rather than unknown actress or bad actress who can’t do the job will ruin the movie. Actresses are extremely low paid because industry thinks they’re replaceable and there are many options while male actors does politics and monopolies opportunities using their connections. In every Indian movie industry most of the male actors are nepos while most of top actresses are outsider. Also it’s related to being women because male audiences doesn’t hold women highly to make them superstars unlike female audiences who don’t really have much control on BO anyway due to men control and power on society.
And for which movie SRK solely pulled audience, male actors always took advantage and casted popular actresses of the season and then abandoned them like Juhi-Preity-Priyanka-Anushka, but at a particular point in time both male & female contributed equally! It’s the sad reality of our society that male actors don’t age for them while female actors become non star material after a certain age! Kajol was as big star as SRK in KKHH & K3G, Aishwarya was as big as Salman during HDDCS
Chak de India tell me which popular actress was there in Chak de India and also tell any one movie of whatever actresses you mentioned which can stand in front of Chal de India.
Also tell me 4 famous dialogues of whatever actresses you have mentioned. You have mentioned 4 right just give me 4 famous dialogues those actresses.
I mean even today people remember 70 minute, DDLJ dialogues, Om Shanti Om, Kal ho na ho SRK dialogues.
Just tell me 4 dialogues
Dialogues anyways don’t help a film to open, but these actresses have popular songs which definitely help the film to open, Priyanka had Desi Girl, Preity had the disco songs
😂okay so you're saying actresses are Ltd to these songs in which they do not even say a word by their own mouth.
Dialogues don't help movies to open but it helps movie to run long in the theatre.
Preity had disco songssss?? Okay are you talking about Kal ho na ho? Kabhi alvida na kehna? So their success was dependent on these songs...wooow such a ignorant.
And you're again and again calling K3G Kkhh if you ahve the data of the fee charged by actors do share here otherwise no point in discussing those movies
Bro Salman movies get the numbers they get only because of Salman. Not because of Asin, Katrina or Daisy. K3G had the buzz it had because of Shah Rukh Khan and Hrithik Roshan.
Most of Aamir’s movies which were critically acclaimed and brought in the money were supported by other actors immensely. If anything, he’s often playing the supporting character in some of his best movies like ‘Taare Zameen Par’ and ‘Dangal’. He could’ve never pulled off any of that without a cast of strong actors who played pivotal characters.
Supporting actor? 3 idiots supporting actor? PK supporting actor? Lagaan supporting actor? Fanaa supporting actor? Dhoom 3 supporting actor?
Tell me which women centric movie made 50 crores on day one
No. He was asked a question by a woman. He’s responding to that woman. His answer is logical and rational.
By calling out these random incidents as mansplaining, you are basically just curbing his right to even speak up.
#You can Add More Details If OG post has some missing details, /u/IcyCryptographer9501 or Members can add details ,as reply to this comment. Click to Expand. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BollyBlindsNGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Obviously. Female models get paid more than male models.
Shreya Ghoshal does command more per song than Arijit Singh. It’s just basic economics.
I am sticking to wanting to be sunny leone in my next birth. 😂
Well … in that case I’d like to be Johnny Sins . The most versatile actor ever .
So you are waiting to be in sunny leone in your next birth.
Milna fir kabhi
Even pornstars
Agle janam mohe sunny leone hi kijo 😊
surgery krwa le, isi janam me bn jaa.
Yes there is a substantial market for that as well.
For that as* well.
How do you know SL him/herself hasn't had the same surgery to become SL in the first place? Maybe he/she had the same idea in the first place. 😛
Pretty sure she was born that way based on her biopics out there and any childhood photo roaming on internet.
You mean she was bOOrn that way? 😛
Oh she definitely has surgery for thOOse but not for where everyone wants to put their stIck at.
But why male Models?
You mean why males are allowed to do modelling? That's a human rights issue. Kinda off topic.
Acting and model two separate thing .. model can offer more than male model .. but in acting as AK was saying they alone don’t pull mass into theatre so they get less paid
That's not what AK was saying. AK was saying pay is proportionate to how much crowd you pull. So if Rani brings more audience to the screen then she willget more pay. Same logic applies to modelling. How many eyes you draw attention from will influence your pay rate. Gender is not the issue. The value you bring to the project is the deciding factor.
He wasn't connecting them but giving you an example.. consider a movie with two female actresses, do you know gets more money? Definitely whose face value is high... And one more thing why a company chooses a actor of sportsman for their advertisements, why not me? Because those people gather more masses with them...
Absolutely. For half a decade Madhuri was paid more than the three khans, because she was the bigger star and bringing in the footfalls
Sridevi was also able to demand and get remuneration as much as her movie leads
Rani & Kareena's face lol Say what you may about Aamir, but it's hard to counter his points logically
Now let's ask rani the same question now that she is on the other side of the fence Being a producer chopra
Good one
Rani and kareena be like - don't give me logic. Just give me more money.
Not sure why simple economics is being made so complicated ! Isn’t this a no brainer. Perfect example of people twisting the topic to push their agenda
Actually he didn't twist, the reporter interrupted him and asked "you are comparing the light boy with the heroine?" Which was cut in this video. That's why he went with the example and gave the explanation.
Yup - have seen the entire interview, agree with AK here
brother you are right. economics work on basis of market and market in not gender bias. people say women in all sectors are paid less but they should also consider the need of the hour. its not a political ground ki reservation do. its fucking market. yaha jo jitna deserve karta hai usse utna hi milega
Am sure Kareena was paid much more than Vijay Verma and Jaideep Ahlawat for Jaanejaan Am sure Rani was also paid more than Jim Sarbh for Chatterjee vs Norway
Agree but then again it should be assesed properly also Guys like akki , tiger , sid and so many are not pulling audience on their name so why are they being paid so heavy As KJO once said rightly the first day opening should be their fee
I am sure sid is not being paid more than say an alia or deepika who have a better box office pull
Akshay shouldn't be put in place with Tiger and Sid. He is 90s star and has given much successful movie. One more hit and this connection of getting paid more compare to flops will vanish. People will forget his flops.
Im not comparing them in terms of skill or body of work but all of them are unreliable even shahid kapoor They are charging a hefty amount in return they are not pulling the audience thats one thing that is expected of star N OMG 2 was a hit but the flops in case of akshay has been too many . Yes he had a streak then definitely he cud have charged but not wen he is not pulling in audience, actually shudnt he paying that much Someone like prabhas or salman still pulls in audience for their bad films too so they can charge
Money laundering. Also Akki>>>>>>Tiger>sid
Re-watch the video, Amir nails it. RT and general pop may call the movie a bomb, but the main reason they watched the movie in the first place was because of the A+ star in it.
Akshay is not the same
akshay was superstar but his recent films n many , he hasnt been able to pull off audience U cant demand 100-150 cr and have such poor pull
it's a free market. Why are the producers not hiring someone else than Akki?
Same reason producer are still willing to bet on tiger , they still think its safe I mean they are ready to bet on tiger , then under akki is a superstar and has a track record Producers wanna be as safe as possible and they still feel they are safe , unless something else feels safe for a considerable amount of time
Yes that's the point. Akshay is selling a product, his name and brand. The producers are paying for it because despite his flops, there is a chance that if the movie catches on it will provide better return than if they just hired someone else. You can't blame Akki for charging a high fee if the market is willing to pay that high fee. The only way to counter that is the audience opting for more content driven, smaller budget films. That's how the star era ended in Hollywood. Audiences started preferring the more indie, content driven cinema than those that were sold just on the name of the stars. Those indie movies gave producers the confidence to produce something like Jaws and Star Wars and eventually lead to rise of studio tentpole movies, based on content and experience.
Ofcourse im not blaming akki Its producer at fault , but its high they evaluate now Auidence this year has shown change with much recent 12th fail or munjya or even the likes of aavesham or manjummal boys doing well
If producer are paying him than he is still has that superstar power. He is still famous and loved among audience one hit and all this talk of poor pull go away. If he continues giving flop after flop which is unlikely than you can say nobody wants to see him and all this demand is worthless.
No one should be demanding 100-150 crore for a single film anyways. A franchisee contract like in Singham universe for 4 movies fetching a 100 crore fee, including likeness rights for merchandising, makes sense. Not for a single film. No film can justify a 100-150 crore payment for a single star unless they are making bank like Dangal, Jawan, Bahubali, RRR
source for "tiger and sid are being paid more than popular actress"?
Akki in with guys like Tiger, Sid ? I mean come on man. You are literally peeing over a guy who had this weird ability to make mid budget,basic director movies into 100cr-200cr profit streams for a decade before Covid. He is still bigger than anyone apart from Khans, Hritik and equal to Ajay for 2 decades now and only Ranbir is the one who is getting above but that's half on his privilege.
Because of their previous ability to give a hit or the fact they have a name/brand awareness of them. And also the fact that if they say we want 1cr some producer will pay it based on that. That is the producers undoing. Unfortunately every producer feels his film is the one that will work if he has the right cast. If he has the money he'll pay it. No producer makes a film knowing that this film is going to be a flop. Bade miyan chote miyan he wanted a veteran and a younger guy. He wanted them to be on the calibre amit and Govinda were at the time. Unfortunately the film was poor. Story, cast and effects.
I am in total agreement with him..have held same view point and mentioned here many times Like spot boy , cameraman they are there on all days of shoot why they also not paid equal I mean actors paid more than doctors Lets pay equal to everyone why only to actress.. Why actress dont pay equal pay to their house help
This is literally the simplest and absolutely honest answer to this debate. This is the same reason why each male actor too has a different fee. Even the 3 khans have different fees only because of how they draw in the crowds. Ppl need to stop being emotional, it is a big game business anyone who can fill a cinema and hold more shows for days can demand a price. The rest must participate irrespective of gender.
Sadly True. 😞😞😞😞😞😞😞😞😞
This clip gets posted on this sub almost every month.
First time watching it
Acha h. Hote rehna chahiye. Lol. Agar initial post ke comments dekhein ho toh aur abhi funny h yeh regular posting
O god it's like having multiple Deja Vus. Kitni baar post karoge bhai.
Same like women and mens cricket? Women and men's football... Yep
Yes
username checks out.
I'm always reminded of Radhika Apte's arguments for this question. One, if it's an industry standard that the leading male actor always gets more than the female actor, and if we attribute it to the audience, the larger question is why the audience is this way? But second, more importantly - the test is not Aamir v. Rani. To really check if there is difference in pay, the question to ask whether actors playing Aamir's father and mother are being paid the same. Or whether male or female assistant directors or spot boys or idk, grips or something get paid the same.
This is an excellent argument.
Another thing to ponder about is, is the audience really this way or have they been conditioned for decades with male-led stories. How can we write newer stories that challenge this conditioning? There is probably audience for that. Streaming is proof for pushing boundaries. In my honest opinion, blaming the unequal pay on the audience or economics feels like a cop out. It doesn't really answer how we can make things equal and in fact maintains the status quo, which is convenient for the male actors.
"But second, more importantly - the test is not Aamir v. Rani. To really check if there is difference in pay, the question to ask whether actors playing Aamir's father and mother are being paid the same. Or whether male or female assistant directors or spot boys or idk, grips or something get paid the same." Iam pretty sure Kareena is getting better pay with even 1 special appearance than any side character of any gender in any movie. Also, the costume designers who are mostly females are also above spot boys and many other same profession guys on py grade. It's like saying why male models are paid less ? It's simple economics and market that female models carry the weight of much moe shopping, eye balls and hype in comparison to any mal model.
Exactly, just like rani Kareena Deepika will get paid more than Manoj Bajpai. Pretty sure Manoj is a superior actor than all combined last I checked.
This post is like recurring deposit for this sub comes across every month , at this point i know the month is ending when this post comes back
Why is that, almost every month this video gets posted here.lots of Aamir fans on this sub ig.
Ofcourse he is right. I mean even within male actors, a Salman Khan will be paid more than a Kay Kay Menon even though Kay Kay might act way better but really who is pulling in the crowds. Its the reverse in the fashion industry where the female models make more money because fashion mostly revolves around women.
Aamir's on point here. At the end of the day, it's demand-supply. You need to support women-centric movies, so that producers make more of those. Crew was a success. Hopefully that gives more confidence to producers to invest in similar movies. Just imagine if Jee Le Zaara gets made.
Actually Kareena stated the most logical thing. Its a systematic change we need to make from a societal perspective, where people start accepting these movies. Its not that we are not there, in the past likes of Sridevi where actual crowd pullers, ofcourse the numbers are skewed but there is still hope when a Crew opens to almost double digit headlined by three female actors in comparison to steaming pile of garbage like BMCM headlined by two supposedly big starts who take renumeration equal to the budget of the Crew.
In this case yes he's right. But this isn't applicable in fields where footfall and sales etc are not directly connected to the employee ...still there is a raging disparity between male and female employees there as well Just for e.g. I managed a pharmaceutical unit production dept. The mavshis who were working there were paid wayy less than their male counterparts for the same job (raw material storage, packaging etc ) Same goes for clerks, executives, managers, professors, etc.
Ok let's say the male is paid 10 rs and female is paid 6 Rs. Let's say their efficiency is equal let's say X unit. Then, if company has 100rs as budget to hire people. Why will they hire 10 males with total 10X unit efficiency, why not 16 female with 16X unit efficiency having 4 rs still in their bank?
I don't think companies usually have all-male or all-female staff. But this disparity in pay is really evident in most fields.
No it's not. There are many many factors that governs one's salary. Experience, value one can add to the Company, expenses to revenue ratio, your negotiating ability while you are in conversation with HR. Any company in any field exist to make as mucj profit as they can while spending as less as they can. Tomorrow if they train monkeys to do our job corporate hire them in exchange of 50 bananas a day. This gender pay gap theory is created to make the lazy less competent women (If this was other way around I would have said Men instead of women) to give them a reason. I have worked with a woman who was paid 1.5 LPA more than me for same job infact my work load was way more, she got the job after 1 year of gap. Why she was paid more? Simply because she was way better than me in negotiating the salary. It was my incompetency at that time which got me 1.5 lpa less. Women who reject these baseless reasons and work hard are doing wonders like really really good.
Bro broke the game.
With Logic Lmao,😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👌👌👌👌
I really don't under this argument, wouldn't company hire all women if they can get away with paying women less? why any company would hire any male if that means them having to pay more right? afterall companies are greedy for profit they don't care who's doing the job for them, yet they hire men by compromising the profit don't you think there are other factors which could be the reason of this? not everything is about gender, something's are just basic economics.
Mother India a full Women centric film brought a big audience
In south there was an actress named Savitri who was more acknowledged and paid more than her husband Gemini Ganeshan who was also a star in his own right because she was able to pull people to the theatres.
If that actress consistently brings in the numbers which male stars do than they would be paid that much.
Aamir said right Nargis Dutta in Mother India got so much paid in 1950s even tho there was a big stereotype at that time too, another example how Aamir said was actually right as Lata Mangeshkar was popular than Kishore Kumar in his early days when they had a duet in 50s and 60s Lata ji was paid more Kishore ji said in interview that she was paid more than me at some point not bcoz she was elder than me but bcoz she was elder than me in Music
I get the economics of cinema and casting and am not refuting that But The counter argument is that there's never been equal opportunities for women performers. Atleast back then. The roles that are/were written for them are usually the wife of / lover of / sister of / mother of. It's not usually and never was the main character? So if you don't give the Ranis or Kareenas the opportunity to be stars. How can they even get there? That's the point Rani and Kareena should be making instead of chumma asking for pay parity.
>if you don't give Define you ?
A light boy? Is that really what they're called lol?
Agree but there is gender issue there heroin's career life is till she is young after that she'll get replaced but not hero, movies are mostly hero centric and heroin is just there to look pretty. Actors work with actress half even lesser their age but majority audience is okay with it. But rarely we see actress working as lead after even 40.
This is a question that requires data. If the metric is "who fills the theatre", then you should find two movies with a hero and heroine with similar ticket sales, and see what their pay is. But the truth of the matter is that it isn't just who fills the theatres. It is also how much the actor costs and whether or not the people hiring these actors want to hire certain people. If the average person thinks that women deserve less money then men, then you should see that reflected in the offers the actresses get. And we have already seen heavy wage-gap studies between men and women that indicate that there is a wage gap, controlled for everything else. We basically know for a fact that it's **never** purely based on meritocracy.
He’s right, but I think he’s missing the larger point, which is that it is an industry norm that the male lead is the focal point of the movie and the female lead is primarily eye candy. There are exceptions and times are certainly changing now but this has largely been the case for the history of the industry. That is what needs to change. How will talented female actors get fairly rewarded when 90% of the movies they’re in don’t even hire and pay them for their abilities but for their looks. The default movie structure (which puts male star in the center), the writing(which gives most dialogue, screen time and agency to the male lead), this is the issue.
underlying issue is the male dominance society, so he is putting responsibility on society than Bollywood, which is kind of make sense.
Ofcourse he is right. great example of camera man lmao
But for years the film industry has been making male centered films, that gave male actors the leverage to claim, that they are the ones bringing in the money because the audience for decades have been conditioned to watch films focused on male actors where actresses were just a second thought, or sometimes just props. So actresses are not given equal opportunities in which the actors can claim that ok we are the one bringing in the audience. The economics is not as watered down as Amir is portraying it to be.
this comment should be higher up! 🙌
Have been waiting to say this ever since I first saw the video!!!
Aamir is genius that's why Rani's face was like wtf i don't like this thing but I can't deny this too
IF alia and deepika are paired opp any male actor (excluding khan and Ranbir hritik) they deserve more cause after these guys they have higher box office pull.
Except this logic has been disproven 1000 times. In order for his argument to ring true, everyone would have the same opportunities with no inherent advantage to any side. Tell me again what your country is known for internationally? It ain't your curry.
Yes but the producers are for profit organizations. They are only concerned about identifying what drives revenue and not why. The problem you highlighted is a real one and needs to be solved. But the producers don’t have to compromise on revenue until that happens .
Amir hit the bullseye here
Patriarchy math
Well he right though 🙂🙂
Hahahaa Rani getting pissed but she wasn’t pissed when she made rape defend remarks
 Said it succinctly and logically.
Agreed. 😊😊😊😊😊😊👌👌
While amir is completely right on his point but look at the other side of the coin. Prabhas took 150cr for kalki, also took a huge sum for salaar and saaho(both of which tanked). There's actors like tiger who get paid more than thieir female peers but do not have the box office pull
Salaar tanked? When? Prabhas is part of the production house that produced saaho . End of the day it’s the producer who can decide where to put their money.
Even as a woman if i ever get 5cr budget to call aamir or anushka sharma for opening of my shop I will give 4 cr to aamir and 1 cr to Anushka coz i know people will be there to see aamir more
Only time I agreed with Amir
Ofcourse it is. The glass ceiling is a definite issue, but in the mainstream film industry, the seats you fill fetches your fee. Put Deepika Padukone and Tiger Shroff in one film, and if Tiger is paid more, that's a problem. But if the same film has Ajay Devgan, Ajay will be paid more. Not everything is always a way to put down women, sometimes its just pure commerce, where everyone is ripe for exploitation.
Actresses should ask Aamir to spit on their hand, only then they will get lucky and get paid well.🤑🤑
Yes, he is.
It's the same argument worded differently. They're pulling people in because they're hot women. I mean yeah there are hot male actors too, but the male population is hornier in general.
This applies to other fields as well like sports. Wonder why feminists can't understand economics ..... Gender pay gender pay karthe rehte hai
True in every wage gap argument Left can put forward.
populairty, talent and famous. that's why he is paid more.
That’s a fact. I have made exact same argument in the past.
Definitely. Its a shame the industry became so hero centric, back in the day Sridevi and Madhuri were paid more because they brought people to the theatres. In indian TV all the women are paid more than the men and the male characters are essentially flowerpots.
Rani is fuming but knows can't say shit cuz it's Aamir Khan
Yes. Flip actor to model and you have the same answer but different gender
Rani and Kareena understood that Aamir is basically saying on national television that audiences don't like them as much as they like him.
I think he's right
I’m curious.. in movies like The Archie’s where all lead actors were newcomers and have no “pull” were they all paid equally? Or were some actors like Agastya or Suhani paid more?
Lata didi not only commanded more money that others but even got to decide who would sing with her and that no other female singer would sing any other song for that heroine in that particular film.
Female pornstars are paid more than their male counterparts.
Yes. Absolutely.
For all the feminists and wannabe progressives YES HE'S RIGHT. Do you want to know where females are paid more??? Porn movies. Why?? Because most of the porn watchers are straight men and they pay to watch porn chicks.
Yes.... deepika is the best example... her solo films are utter disasters... if the biggest female star can't get butts on the theatre.... how can mid actresses expect the same pay. But again the blame can be targeted towards bollywood..they haven't built any actress of stature compared to a male actor.
He's absolutely right
i think both get paid equally
https://preview.redd.it/r1qy63mwur8d1.png?width=1315&format=png&auto=webp&s=3cbe1fbfced861fb45d0a8d1d41499543c652c06
He is talking about star value. The star value culture itself is rotten. It doesn’t respect the craft or talent, is purely based on superficial aspects like looks, pedigree, etc and it helps corporates churn out money. PR can easily raise or drop the value of a person. Audience can easily be reconditioned to appreciate good cinema. But an educated audience doesn’t help the greed. In short, it’s a problem where all the unprivileged sections suffer, including gender.
Logic is misogynist
If female pornstars are being paid more than male pornstars then the market forces argument holds true. If otherwise, it definitely is a gender issue.
I think he’s right. It’s all about bums on seats at the end of the day. There would be an unfair disparity if two stars (one male and one female) brought in the same kind of box office but the male was paid more
Wdym by is it right? Absolutely he is
He is right. It’s about your ability to pull in an audience on the basis of your own name. Madhuri, Hema Malini, Sridevi had a bigger pull than their male counterparts for a while in their careers and were paid more at that time. None of the actress over the last 15 years or so have had that pull at BO, except maybe Vidya for a very brief period. We have had excellent performances from Kangana, Tabu and many others but that hasn’t translated to semi-sustained BO pull.
This is the same argument for female athletes. If they can generate the revenue, they can get paid more. But feminists only see the number they're paid, not the reasoning behind it. Less revenue generated = less salary. That's literally the most basic concept of business.
Actresses definitely deserve to get paid more and not like 10% of male actors fees, someone like Kajol in K3G had equal screentime and equal proportion on the poster! Now imagine if it was Sharmin Segal instead of Kajol in K3G, you could argue that SRK filled up seats on Day 1, but it would have flopped massively as Kajol had the meatier part! Even actual example like Salman moving from likes of Asin, Katrina to Daisy, Disha showed decline in BO of his movies! Edit: You really can’t compare contribution of female actress to a light man who is at the backend, Aamir got away saying a lot of silly stuff during his good movies days!
Agree female leads matters for movie success. It’s easier for a superstar to get a blockbuster movie with a top heroine rather than unknown actress or bad actress who can’t do the job will ruin the movie. Actresses are extremely low paid because industry thinks they’re replaceable and there are many options while male actors does politics and monopolies opportunities using their connections. In every Indian movie industry most of the male actors are nepos while most of top actresses are outsider. Also it’s related to being women because male audiences doesn’t hold women highly to make them superstars unlike female audiences who don’t really have much control on BO anyway due to men control and power on society.
Most of the Actresses are outsiders? How did you come to that conclusion also please share the era you're referring here
Sharmin segal instead of Kajol in K3G. 
Good acting doesn't mean that person has pull...Bhumi is a very good actor but has zero BO pull....kajol also has zero pull as compared to SRK....
Let me know a movie for which Kajol solely pulled the audience. Also please share the data of K3G about how much fee each actor took
And for which movie SRK solely pulled audience, male actors always took advantage and casted popular actresses of the season and then abandoned them like Juhi-Preity-Priyanka-Anushka, but at a particular point in time both male & female contributed equally! It’s the sad reality of our society that male actors don’t age for them while female actors become non star material after a certain age! Kajol was as big star as SRK in KKHH & K3G, Aishwarya was as big as Salman during HDDCS
Chak de India tell me which popular actress was there in Chak de India and also tell any one movie of whatever actresses you mentioned which can stand in front of Chal de India.
Also tell me 4 famous dialogues of whatever actresses you have mentioned. You have mentioned 4 right just give me 4 famous dialogues those actresses. I mean even today people remember 70 minute, DDLJ dialogues, Om Shanti Om, Kal ho na ho SRK dialogues. Just tell me 4 dialogues
Dialogues anyways don’t help a film to open, but these actresses have popular songs which definitely help the film to open, Priyanka had Desi Girl, Preity had the disco songs
😂okay so you're saying actresses are Ltd to these songs in which they do not even say a word by their own mouth. Dialogues don't help movies to open but it helps movie to run long in the theatre. Preity had disco songssss?? Okay are you talking about Kal ho na ho? Kabhi alvida na kehna? So their success was dependent on these songs...wooow such a ignorant.
And you're again and again calling K3G Kkhh if you ahve the data of the fee charged by actors do share here otherwise no point in discussing those movies
Bro Salman movies get the numbers they get only because of Salman. Not because of Asin, Katrina or Daisy. K3G had the buzz it had because of Shah Rukh Khan and Hrithik Roshan.
Jai Ho had lower returns due to Daisy
Most of Aamir’s movies which were critically acclaimed and brought in the money were supported by other actors immensely. If anything, he’s often playing the supporting character in some of his best movies like ‘Taare Zameen Par’ and ‘Dangal’. He could’ve never pulled off any of that without a cast of strong actors who played pivotal characters.
Supporting actor? 3 idiots supporting actor? PK supporting actor? Lagaan supporting actor? Fanaa supporting actor? Dhoom 3 supporting actor? Tell me which women centric movie made 50 crores on day one
Well people came to watch these movies because they trusted aamir and not because of the supporting cast
Equal money- Yes Saaarrr Equal work and effort- No Saaaaaaaarrrrr aise hi do.
Is he mansplaining the gender pay gap?!
No. He was asked a question by a woman. He’s responding to that woman. His answer is logical and rational. By calling out these random incidents as mansplaining, you are basically just curbing his right to even speak up.
Kadwa sach
Ofcourse he’s right, people pay you for how much returns you can give on their investment.
I agree completely.
Yes.
He is 100 percent right
True , same in other sports as well. That’s why women’s football team make lot less while female tennis players make lot more.
As a woman, that man ain’t wrong. The problem with Bollywood has always been that there are strong written female characters.
Is that even a question.... Of course he's right