The commercial cinema industry has always heavily relied on its leading actors. Star heroes understand that audiences flock to theaters primarily to see their faces rather than the producer's name.
In the competitive landscape, producers have further fueled this phenomenon by pampering star heroes with substantial remuneration to secure their involvement in a film.
In a scenario where a hero's film has the potential to generate Rs 100 crore in revenue, the hero often claims a substantial portion, say Rs 70 crore, as their remuneration. This leaves the producer with a meager Rs 30 crore to cover all expenses, including remunerations and production costs. Consequently, even if the film succeeds and earns Rs 120 crore, the producer might have to share Rs 20 crore of the profit with the hero. This illustrates the prevailing situation in today's film industry.
However, in most cases, producers struggle to see any profit, and even if they do, it rarely compensates for the tremendous hard work and stress they endure to bring a film to fruition. They bear the burden of paying interests to financiers and other financial obligations. But who is responsible for this poor situation of the producers? Yes, their own decisions but nothing else.
In certain situations, some producers may express the view that the hero should bear some responsibility for compensating the losses to a certain extent. However, from a practical standpoint, this is not the hero's responsibility. To begin with, it is the producer's decision to enter into a film project with a hero who demands such a substantial sum.
Recently, in an interview with media, Abhishek Nama, delving into the past, addressed the issue with Vijay Deverakonda, stating, "I want to make it clear once and for all that I am not asking even a rupee from Vijay Devarakonda since we know he's not the producer of ‘World Famous Lover’. K S Rama Rao was in dire straits after making ‘World Famous Lover’ and even pledged properties to clear the pending remuneration to Vijay Devarakonda, who was unwilling to promote the film. When he received the payment, he just attended one event in Vizag and one in Hyderabad and wrapped up promotions, unlike now where he is doing extensive promotions. When he announced Rs 1 lakh for 100 families, we reminded him about the losses we incurred by distributing World Famous Lover since it was Rs 8 crore cash. And we have been waiting for his dates to make a film and recover our losses, but he's left us in a lurch."
Being a producer, he also added, "The collections of Kushi movie are dropping drastically and it will not be a profit-making venture for sure. His films are over-hyped, while box office figures are inflated to project fake collections. Actually, his market is dwindling and he has to understand this. If he is willing to make a proper film, we will get the right script and deliver a decent hit. But the ball is in his court. Otherwise, we have nothing personal against Vijay Deverakonda, who is a talented actor."
It is worth noting that such criticisms rarely target bigger heroes like Chiranjeevi. When "Acharya" faced a setback at the box office, the blame was placed on the director Koratala Shiva, and buyers approached his office. Chiranjeevi, who commanded a substantial remuneration, remained untouched.
Therefore, it should be recognized that, although the industry revolves around its heroes, not all heroes have the capacity to drive the industry. Legacy and nepotism play a role in shielding certain individuals from criticism within the industry.
Vijay Deverakonda deserves support from the industry in this matter, and he should not be obligated to reimburse a producer if his films fail to perform at the box office.
The primary duty of an actor, whether it be Chiranjeevi or Vijay Deverakonda, is to be punctual and dedicated on set and deliver the performance required by the director. They are compensated according to their agreements, and they are not obliged to reimburse any losses unless explicitly stipulated in the signed agreement. Moreover, Vijay Deverakonda is not an actor who demands remuneration in a 70:30 ratio, as explained above. He is known to be very reasonable in his quotes, according to industry talk.
