In a recent exchange on the escalating costs associated with film production, renowned actor Manoj Bajpayee raised concerns about the financial burden of star staff. He described these costs as a double-edged sword, noting that the financial expectations tied to a star’s market value are driving up film budgets. Manoj Bajpayee argued that it’s unrealistic to expect actors to lower their fees, given the numerous perks and demands associated with their status.
In a counter-response, filmmaker Anil Sharma took a critical stance on Manoj Bajpayee’s comments. Anil Sharma questioned the actual financial benefits that big stars are reaping, stating, “Where is the benefit? Who is benefiting? Even big stars are seeing openings of just Rs. 2-4 crore. What’s happening with the investment of Rs. 2 crore in their entourage? If the film has content, it should do well, but the reality is different.”
Anil Sharma’s criticism extended to the notion that star power alone should not justify exorbitant costs. He argued that stars should bear the cost of their entourages themselves, a practice that was more common in the past. “Producers should not bear the burden of unnecessary costs,” Anil Sharma asserted. “They should only cover essential expenses related to the production. If stars need a large entourage, they should fund it from their own pockets.”
He further emphasized that only a handful of key actors can impact box office performance significantly. Anil Sharma suggested that the focus should be on the quality of the film itself rather than the size of the entourage. “Why do you need 12 people? If you do, then you should bring them at your own expense,” he remarked. Anil Sharma’s point was that apart from a few leading actors, no one else can truly sway the success of a film.