Posted:
No Salman's aatma has not possessed me. But ARB's saaya will definitely haunt producers for times to come.....😆
Link: the bollywoodbasket.
Previously only one director has had a pregnancy clause ever signed by his actress. The director was Subhash Ghai who got Madhuri Dixit to sign a contract stating that she would not get married or knocked up during the making of Khalnayak, when she and Sanjay Dutt were hot and heavy.
Now Bollywood's film makers are voicing their opinions about Baby-gate. Here is what some had to say:
Ekta Kapoor:
"As a professional I can say all the proper things like yes, we should have a clause and way of compensating the producer but on the personal front as a woman I think it's a big deal for a woman. Pregnancy is a very happy moment for any woman and I can't think like a producer in such a situation. For a woman over 30, getting pregnant is a huge achievement and a moment of happiness. A producer can't come in between. It's like a wow moment for me! Having said that, in the future we will be working on adding the clause."
Vipul Shah:
"In B-Town, everyone is like a family. I don't know how such a clause will be seen by stars. However, with more and more studio structures coming into film production I feel it will soon become a norm as long we don't violate the privacy of artists because huge money is involved. Not just a clause for pregnant leading ladies but, I feel the Film Producers Guild has to play a much more active role in improving the conditions of producers like Hollywood has control over actors prices and the South industry bans actors who break their rules. Having such a clause or clauses for male and female actors will bring more discipline into the film industry. Anything that derails the process of shooting or leads to financial losses should be discussed and certain guidelines laid down preventing that. As no individual producer has a strong say in the matter, all producers should unite to improve the way we work."
Perhaps Mahesh Bhatt said it best:
"Producers would be foolish to have such a contract suggesting such a clause. It's the leading lady's privilege to get pregnant. In B-Town the real contract is the unspoken one which has more weight. Being a member of the Film Producers Guild of India. I would refrain from this absurd exercise. Having said that I will add that it's the duty of the leading lady to see that she doesn't jeopardise the entire film by pursuing her own personal goals thus causing immense hardship to the producer. The leading lady has to provide the glamour quotient and she can become another entity completely in the eyes of the consumer — from a desirable diva to a new mother — which serves as a body blow to producers. Smita Patil had got pregnant when I was directing Thikana but she never treated herself like a Ming vase. She told me that when domestic helps keep working when pregnant, why couldn't she?"
Personally, I do believe it's unethical for an employer to stipulate any conditions like not allowing one to get married or pregnant. Would they consider giving our Bollywood hunks a clause to keep their pecker in their pants for the duration of the film? No. Why should they impose it on women? With that being said, the duration for a film (from pre-production all the way to the promotional post-production stage) can be almost a whole year. If our Bollywood babes want the fame, notoriety, and money that brought them to the industry to begin with, then perhaps signing away their freedom and liberty for 10-12 months is something they ought to consider. Especially because the film they sign onto involves MANY other parties. It's not just about themselves.
Granted, ARB should have told her bosses about her life altering news. By not doing so, it could have potentially ruined careers. That was mistake number two. Mistake number one, was made by the production house and film makers by not having ARB sign a legal binding contract!
Ugly mess. Can't place the total blame on any one party. Everyone f*cked up.
Real Estate
23