Alright. I'll concede nepotism is wrong. Starkids get easy access, they get chances after another, and even if they fail, they will still get enough hype to remain popular. Outsiders have to put 10 times the struggle, even if they are talented, they still struggle to get good roles, etc. No denying it's a wrong and screwed up system.
But what can we do? It isn't illegal, and come to think of it, if you believe in freedom of choice/expression, you cannot even call it unethical on the director's part.
Everyone loves their family and friends and friends' family over outsiders. I'll freely admit that, if I were a director myself, and I had a son or daughter who wanted to become an actor/actress, I'd have taken him in my film. Even if he wasn't a looker or a good actor, I'd probably give him chance because he is my son.
Similarly, if I have a very close friend, and he asks me to take his daughter in my next film, I probably couldn't say no, and take her.
That's exactly how nepotism works.
These directors aren't intentionally trying to destroy outsiders. They aren't trying to keep outsiders from coming in. It is just human emotion and tendency -- we love our families and close ones, and will always help them over unknown people. Nepotism exists in the non-filmy world as well. Have you never used your uncle's or father's connection to get a job or smthing??
I'm not justifying nepotism but all I am saying we cannot do anything about it. We cannot force a director/producer to not take his own family or his friends' family into a film if we believe in freedom of choice. The directors wouldn't even admit -- they will just say 'hey I just found this actor good for my role, that he is my friend's son didn't even come to my mind'. Since this is a free world, and directors can choose to take any one in their films, we can't really question them or put a ban to this.
Post your thoughts.
18