Is nepotism bad only in Bollywood? - Page 2

Originally posted by: Amara_B

Nah, you're reaching. It's definitely worse in Bollywood - by a massive margin. Every other actor is a star kid.

Your doctor analogy is also off base. Parents may encourage their children to pursue the same career however the difference is they can't hand things to them. Those kids still have to work hard and earn their place. Sure they'll have the benefit of having a parent, who's worked their way through the system, to guide them. However no doctor or teacher, or any other professional in a role that requires academic qualifications, will be able to pick up the phone and call in a favour to get their kid hired. The kid will have to go through school and earn all the relevant qualifications. Bollywood star kids land roles by virtue of being their parents child - that’s literally it. They having nothing else on their resumes.

A more apt comparison would be with another film industry, i.e. Hollywood. And Bollywood still comes out much much worse.

Hollywood does have nepotism, but they don't laud star kids from the moment they step on the scene and they certainly don't hand them films on a silver platter. In fact 'outsiders' do better than 'star kids'.

Gwyneth Paltrow, Claire Danes, Jamie Lee Curtis, Dakota Johnson, Kate Hudson, Charlie Sheen, Matthew Brodrick, Freddie Prinze Jnr, Toby Stephens, are all 'star kids'. None of them did particularly well in films. Toby Stephens is huge in theatre but never made it in films, Gwyneth's career fizzled out after the 90s, Claire Danes never made it big in films and ended up on television, Kate Hudson was a one hit wonder, Charlie Sheen was a teen star and was then off the radar until 2 and a half men. Freddie Prinze Jnr and Matthew Brodrick never had much of a career outside a few teen films.

The only Hollywood 'star kids' I can think of that have made it big are Robert Downey Jr, Drew Barrymore, Emma Thompson, and Helena Bohman Carter.

There's also Angelina Jolie, but again she never made it big in films - that's why she's more on the humanitarian/activist side.

Otherwise the big actors are 'outsiders'; for instance: Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp, Keira Knightley, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Daniel Day Lewis, Meryl Streep, Helen Miren, Ben Affleck, Julia Roberts, Kate Winslet, Cameron Diaz, Tom Hanks, Will Smith, Samuel L Jackson, Sandra Bullock, Liam Neeson, Keanu Reeves, Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Brie Larson, Jack Nicholson, Eddie Murphy, Jim Carrey, Tom Holland, Tom Hiddleston, Bradley Cooper, etc.

Nope I come from a very lower middle class backward class background. I do know of doctors from my background-the best they start an office from a shop or work for a big hospital. To say this person and the child of a hospital chain owner is the same is laughable. They send their children to foreign countries tot he best medical school and with barely a practice take over the hospital.

You are unwilling to accept that people with money and power in all walks of life give a distinct advantage to their kids. I only broke free of my background because of the sudden IT boom and the waves pulled me . Nowadays it is very difficult even for iT as it is becoming a stable and steady industry. I have so many contacts in IT and will definitely do the maximum for my kids-weather it be education or jobs or giving my property away to them. Everyone I know weather it be abroad or India is the same. People don't want to see what they are doing is nepotism and easy to throw stones at Bollywood. It is their money, their production company-they can do what they what-if movie flops are they asking taxpayers for more money?

Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow are some of the biggest stars -please. In India, you have Amitabh Bachhan, Shah Ruck Khan, Sridevi, Vyjantimala, Madhuri Dixit, Deepika Padukone, katrina Kaif, Ranveer Singh, Priyanka Chopra all very succesful.

Star kids are successful, but there are many failures and many who never get launched. Nobody can buy success-what you can give them is an easier launch , publicity -but after that if they keep flopping, what can they do? Same like I can push my children, push them through college and then help them with job through contacts against better qualified candidates. But after that kid is on his own. I know two friends whose kids washed out-one on drugs-came back to live with parents. An outsider-ie a similar kid born to a servant maid-would have done wonders with the opportunity. We don't want to admit what we do.

Nepotism is bad everywhere. Bollywood is getting a lot of flak but they also they also get more than required remuneration and idolizing unlike other fields where nepotism exists. No one from Bollywood complains why are we being idolized so they should also not complain now.

Originally posted by: desertsun

I usually just read the topics. But this nepotism is intriguing. Film makers are private companies and put in crores of their own or borrowed money into projects. They can put whoever they want in their project.

Star kids do have an advantage because they hang out in that circle. But if they flop then they go away. Kanagana herself has 4 flops and 1 moderate -Manikarnika yet she is still getting multi crore offers. So much for nepotism

In real life, a doctor who has a hospital will force his son to be a doctor and hire him to be head of hospital. A small business owner will hire his son or his relatives. Any middle class parent who educates their children, sends them to tuition , pays for a college education and then calls their friends to find their kids a job after they finish college is enraging in nepotism at the expense of say a servant maid's son/daughter who ends up working construction or working as a watchman?

Why should producers and movie wallas who put up crores or borrow crores at high interest be so pure and only hire outsiders when the rest of society promotes their children/relatives/friends in any field?? There is no barrier to entry-why not all outside people who suddenly interested in nepotism crowd fund, collect crores and make their own movies.

You are right in some ways

Nowadays the quality of doctors is going down because parents take management seats for their children who are totally incapable of even passing XII std by paying lakhs and crores

Not only that nowadays grace marks are awarded to MBBS students to pass majority of them else they will never pass MBBS in their life time honestly

Also recently there was a scam where MBBS students were paying their teachers to pass per paper

But problem is if this continues the patient life will be in grave danger

Till 1970s only the most brilliant would become MBBS but now those who fail 12th std and write suplementary and just pass can become doctors by taking management fees

Will you be fine with such a doctor treating you after paying 1000 Rs or 500 USD in USA definitely not

But you are forced to go to such doctors because you have no idea who did MBBS with merit and who did with management seats?

Also if you do BE/Bsc/MBA by management quota or by copying etc still to get a job this person has to write entrance exams in big companies. If they pass they get recruited. But for MBBS or bollywood there is no entrance exam to join a hospital or do a movie. They are just recruited based on MBBS degree no matter how they passed it

Same way these bollywood families are purchasing seats or roles for their sons/daughters although they have no ability to act/dance/look good etc

The public is forced to watch movies with sub standard hero/heroine

Originally posted by: NoraSM

@Bold -

Nepotism in health, politics and bureaucracy is much more problematic because these institutions affect all of us. Qualifying doesn't mean one will get job in big hospital, do you really know how money, family and names work in these fields?

Bollywood and Hollywood nepotism is easier to handle by refusing to watch the movie, look at how we are struggling without opposition because our main opposition party can't think beyond the crown prince

No, it's not. A doctor, nurse, teacher, etc. will not be hired for a role if they aren't qualified. Point blank. May be India is even more corrupt than I thought, because you certainly can't buy your way into the medical field in England.

Originally posted by: desertsun

Nope I come from a very lower middle class backward class background. I do know of doctors from my background-the best they start an office from a shop or work for a big hospital. To say this person and the child of a hospital chain owner is the same is laughable. They send their children to foreign countries tot he best medical school and with barely a practice take over the hospital.

You are unwilling to accept that people with money and power in all walks of life give a distinct advantage to their kids. I only broke free of my background because of the sudden IT boom and the waves pulled me . Nowadays it is very difficult even for iT as it is becoming a stable and steady industry. I have so many contacts in IT and will definitely do the maximum for my kids-weather it be education or jobs or giving my property away to them. Everyone I know weather it be abroad or India is the same. People don't want to see what they are doing is nepotism and easy to throw stones at Bollywood. It is their money, their production company-they can do what they what-if movie flops are they asking taxpayers for more money?

Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow are some of the biggest stars -please. In India, you have Amitabh Bachhan, Shah Ruck Khan, Sridevi, Vyjantimala, Madhuri Dixit, Deepika Padukone, katrina Kaif, Ranveer Singh, Priyanka Chopra all very succesful.

Star kids are successful, but there are many failures and many who never get launched. Nobody can buy success-what you can give them is an easier launch , publicity -but after that if they keep flopping, what can they do? Same like I can push my children, push them through college and then help them with job through contacts against better qualified candidates. But after that kid is on his own. I know two friends whose kids washed out-one on drugs-came back to live with parents. An outsider-ie a similar kid born to a servant maid-would have done wonders with the opportunity. We don't want to admit what we do.

You're talking about economical privilege, not nepotism. Of course there's a class divide which puts people from poorer backgrounds at a disadvantage compared to those from privileged backgrounds who can afford to attend top education institutions. However, paying for your child's education is not the same as nepotism. Nepotism is when people get jobs purely due to their connections. Which is what we're seeing happen in Bollywood.

And Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow are big stars; if you read my post, what I said was they didn't make it big in films. Which is a fact - Angelina's film career has always been very lukewarm. She became a massive star due to her controversial personal life and her humanitarian work.

Gwyneth Paltrow has also had a stagnant film career - her biggest hits were Emma, and Shakespeare in Love. Outside this she hasn't done well at all in films. In recent years she's just had a bit part in Iron Man/Avengers. She's more famous for Goop.

Originally posted by: Amara_B

No, it's not. A doctor, nurse, teacher, etc. will not be hired for a role if they aren't qualified. Point blank. May be India is even more corrupt than I thought, because you certainly can't buy your way into the medical field in England.

You really have to know before you make a "point blank" statement.

Its just that people care more about Bollywood and Hollywood than things which actually make a difference in their lives

Yes nepotism is bad in Bollywood as it includes dirty tricks, dirty games, less talent, mistreating outsiders, brain washing general public all in one included in nepotism.

What are we even discussing here.. Of all the categories mentioned two fields that do not need a certified degree are BW and politics. Even though you have a benefit of parents in the same field you need to pass some exams. Mediocre and tough ones.. but being a son of rich surgeon doesn't guarantee you becoming a surgeon without working on. You might have extra privileges but exams needs to be given by you. Same goes for engineers .. teachers or any other field where education is a must.

Bollywood these days needs you to just have some skin lightening treatments some facial surgeries.. some designers to care of your appearances and elitist club membership and some English speaking skills. So yeah that's about it. Rest is taken care by the surname you have. I guess they might face their internal nepotism later on when the fight would be about whose surname has more weightage.

Politics I don't even need to go there. We have seen enough what's needed there.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

You really have to know before you make a "point blank" statement.

Its just that people care more about Bollywood and Hollywood than things which actually make a difference in their lives

I stand by what I said, you cannot buy your way into the medical profession you need an MBBS.

Unless, of course this type of corruption is the norm in India? Because it certainly isn't in my country.

Originally posted by: asmi_joya

What are we even discussing here.. Of all the categories mentioned two fields that do not need a certified degree are BW and politics. Even though you have a benefit of parents in the same field you need to pass some exams. Mediocre and tough ones.. but being a son of rich surgeon doesn't guarantee you becoming a surgeon without working on. You might have extra privileges but exams needs to be given by you. Same goes for engineers .. teachers or any other field where education is a must.

Bollywood these days needs you to just have some skin lightening treatments some facial surgeries.. some designers to care of your appearances and elitist club membership and some English speaking skills. So yeah that's about it. Rest is taken care by the surname you have. I guess they might face their internal nepotism later on when the fight would be about whose surname has more weightage.

Politics I don't even need to go there. We have seen enough what's needed there.

Exactly! How is this so difficult to understand for some people? There's a big difference between socio-economic privilige and nepotism.

Most of us have have some sort of relative socio-economic privilige, in that there is always someone worse off or with less opportunities open to them. However that doesn't mean we're all products of nepotism.

Nepotism is specifically, when a person gets a job because of their connections and not their ability/qualifications. That is not the same as someone being privileged enough to have parents who can afford to send them to good schools, or who are educated themselves and can guide them.