New rule binds artistes to shows for 3 years [DT NT-Pg4]

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

-himu-

@-himu-

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#11

i agree with gunjan utreja

Quote

Joseph

@Joseph_A

Stunner

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#12

Originally posted by: Zeeliciousxo

What did Sanaya say??

That was very controversial Redio (Sabras Redio) Interview of her entire career. 😆 She only said that,Fanz demand for Show winding because,Barun is not there ,is not right. 150-200 other employees also associated wid team n in this case what about them..?? n what is their fault?? (That time Viraf entry as New lead was confirmed)

But,some Fanz took her statement in wrong way n bashed her so much because,they thought she is only concerned abt her job so,hiding her face behind other 200 unemployed team members.

Sanaya's byte from her interview wid Gul Khan -

" On the BBC Redio... and then they (fanz) started bashing me. And they said things like, because I said the show is not only about Gul or me or Barun, like 150 people work on the sets, they make their money out of this, and its not fair that something should happen to our show just because of this... and then people started writing stuff like Sanaya cares only about money and all... I was like, where did that come from..."

Gul says that they pick up bits and pieces, to which Sanaya says... " they conveniently pick up the bits... I was like, money, like seriously... but then, I stopped clarifying, I was like, forget it, people are going to think what they have to think, that's not going to change it, so I was like , you (Gul) know where you stand, I know where I stand and where everyone stands, so lets forget it"

Edited by Joseph_A - 11 years ago

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Saba Saifi

@-Saba-

Inactive

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

#13

this rule i think is good !!
whatever Gunjan said its really make a sense i agree with that...

Quote

Joseph

@Joseph_A

Stunner

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#14

Originally posted by: sajanp
3 years is too long 1.5 or 2 years is enour & along with this they have to consider the cutting of working hours. per a day they have to work 12, 13, 14 hours it will easily affect their health.
agree with what gunjan & saurab tiwary told

I think, 3 Years is just for safe ground. I personally think that,2yrs is enough for wind-up any story. Working hrs is really hactic on Indian Tele but,they should be sign any show after check all terms n conditions.

Quote

bohemia

@bohemia

Voyager

Posted: 11 years ago

#15

I feel the rule is too binding for the actors... and has a few loopholes. The makers are justified in a way... but can they ensure that the show would be on air for 3 years. What if it closes shop before that? Will they pay the actor for the length of the contract?

Completely agree with Gunjan Uttreja here. We need the concepts of seasons. The PHs constantly switch tracks for better TRPs. Why can they not have a bound script, with a set time frame? The DD concept... though not limited to just 13 episodes. Sadly, the popularity of a show is India is gauged by the number of years it is on air, and not the quality. Apart from the usual 'Bollywood dreams', the reason most actors quit is because the role does not progress the way they were initially signed up for. Get a bound script, get the channel to agree to air the show irrespective of the TRPs. Pipe dream... maybe. But not entirely impossible.

As for those with 'Bollywood dreams' who treat their roles as a launchpad, perhaps the rule is justified. The PHs also need to secure their investments.

Edited by .bohemian. - 11 years ago

Quote

-Nuzrath-

@-Nuzrath-

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#16

Gunjan Utreja says, "The fact that both the parties have agreed on 'something' is worth applauding. In my view, it's not this issue which needed to be addressed. Why can't we address the issue of storylines changing abruptly? Look at western shows. I have never seen a show like Modern Family or any other show changing their storyline just because something in Boston Legal or any other show worked. All our shows here start with a bang promising to give something new, but within three months they all look the same. What's the point in running a show for six years without a break? Why can't we have seasons for every show? Why can't we put a maximum shelf life for a show? This way, more actors will get the opportunity to showcase their work. More production houses will get work. Actors will get an opportunity to rest. Creatives will get an opportunity to think fresh and come back with a new season. If we address the issue of content first, then I guess you won't even need any other clause to stop your actors from quitting. The Indian TV industry is a force to reckon with. We touch lives of millions of people across the globe in more than 120 countries. It's high time we start taking the content our shows seriously. 👏👏👏
so true

Quote

Suni

@Suni

Voyager

Posted: 11 years ago

#17

Originally posted by: .bohemian.
I feel the rule is too binding for the actors... and has a few loopholes. The makers are justified in a way... but can they ensure that the show would be on air for 3 years. What if it closes shop before that? Will they pay the actor for the length of the contract?

Completely agree with Gunjan Uttreja here. We need the concepts of seasons back. The PHs constantly switch tracks for better TRPs. Why can they not have a bound script, with a set time frame? The DD concept... though not limited to just 13 episodes. Sadly, the popularity of a show is India is gauged by the number of years it is on air, and not the quality. Apart from the usual 'Bollywood dreams', the reason most actors quit is because the role does not progress the way they were initially signed up for. Get a bound script, get the channel to agree to air the show irrespective of the TRPs. Pipe dream... maybe. But not entirely impossible.

As for those with 'Bollywood dreams' who treat their roles as a launchpad, perhaps the rule is justified. The PHs also need to secure their investments.

Agree with you. The rule seems very one sided and geared towards the producers. Yes, there should be a contract and actors should not be able to walk off the show whenever they feel like (for bollywood dreams and the like). But binding people down for 3 years is going too far. Especially when the makers change the story on a whim. What if the new story is not what an actor signed up for? Love the idea of a bound script and seasons. The DD shows of yore were so good because the producers had a time limit and were able to tell their stories efficiently within the 13 episodes. Of course like you said, now the time limit for a show cannot be 13 episodes but if a PH was given a time limit of a year, the stories would be tighter and would not meander. TRPs could be used only to see if the show gets a second season. Yes right now it's a pipe dream but just like how bollywood wood changed over the years (after Dil Chahata Hai , when Farhan Akhtar gave the actors bound scripts), tellywood could one day change too.

Quote

bohemia

@bohemia

Voyager

Posted: 11 years ago

#18

Originally posted by: Suni

Agree with you. The rule seems very one sided and geared towards the producers. Yes, there should be a contract and actors should not be able to walk off the show whenever they feel like (for bollywood dreams and the like). But binding people down for 3 years is going too far. Especially when the makers change the story on a whim. What if the new story is not what an actor signed up for? Love the idea of a bound script and seasons. The DD shows of yore were so good because the producers had a time limit and were able to tell their stories efficiently within the 13 episodes. Of course like you said, now the time limit for a show cannot be 13 episodes but if a PH was given a time limit of a year, the stories would be tighter and would not meander. TRPs could be used only to see if the show gets a second season. Yes right now it's a pipe dream but just like how bollywood wood changed over the years (after Dil Chahata Hai , when Farhan Akhtar gave the actors bound scripts), tellywood could one day change too.

The rule is somewhat a knee-jerk reaction. Barun received a lot of flak, but he was not the first one to quit for Bollywood. A few other shows too went downhill after the leads quit. None of them closed shop in four days, but were effected.

They did try the bound script... limited episodes concept with Tumhari Paakhi. But as always, money talks. The show received a lot of goodwill, and was somewhat successful. Now with the extension, they ended up negating it all.

I agree with you about Bollywood. The early 90s were horrible with cookie cutter movies. Now with the 'multiplex movies', the quality and scripts have improved considerably.

Quote

SS88

@SS88

Rocker

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#19

There are pros and cons in everything. Like this MoU. It is much needed what with so many actors quitting their shows . But on the other hand, 3years is too long. There has to be an exit clause. Both parties should have a say so that the rights of all are protected. Besides three years is nearly half of an actor's shelf life. Esp the female actors. Because the minute they turn 35 they re offered mummy roles. And I agree with Gunjan. There should be a finite story line. And a finite running time as well . Also if we move from daily to weekly or twice a week pattern, the stories, acting and production values will be much better. Actors will get their rest and thd audiences will not get twists every other weeks. Maybe having serials prefilmed is a good idea as well. Like they do in Pakistan.

Quote

coolbakes_Jalad

@Lifeistooshort

Voyager

+ 5

Posted: 11 years ago

#20

i am tired of seeing Barun dragged everywhere😲!! so many heroes quit! even KSG did! so whats the deal...!! all the actors who spoke their views are not happy with this!! 😆 as one of them rightly mentioned new shows these days don cross a year! so 3 years is too big a word! ACtors have a life too and making them feel suffocated is unfair and might lead people hating tellyworld ,more! and rightly said this favors the producers more... Personally would you or I agree to sign a contract like that which might be hurdles to your progressive carrier! and if actors can add their clauses what wil producers do if they say " they wont father , they wont old and they would not do leaps"😆

as Gunjan said " we all start with a bang and end with a danda from the audience on the trp .. so first check content and then think about binding actors 🥱

Edited by coolbakes_Jalad - 11 years ago

Quote

1 2 3 4

New rule binds artistes to shows for 3 years [DT NT-Pg4] - Page 2

Related Topics

Explore Topics