Experts estimate that Emily in Paris's lifestyle costs $120,000 a year. This is why film and TV are losing touch with normal people.

https://ift.tt/tfo2XeG article states that experts have estimated that Emily in Paris's lifestyle costs around $120,000 a year, and her clothing costs almost $80,000.Is it me, or does it feel like films and tv is increasingly losing touch with how most people actually live their lives?Here is a bit from the article:Are these streaming shows and movies all that deep? No, but also yes. There’s a reason we tend to notice these silly money and career tropes in troubled economic times. Many people are struggling at work.Given all the stress about the economy, recession, etc. do film and media have a responsibility to make accurate representations of the work, or not really?Interested in hearing what y'all think.EDIT: Not sure why everyone is posting so many snarky comments, was hoping for a bit more nuanced discussion about the history of film and its depictions of labor and lifestyle. You can think a film is a form of escapism but I do tend to search for some truth or reality reflected back and that isn't less valid of an opinion. Also, most examples listed here are exclusive to the US, whereas depictions of lifestyles in world cinema (Italian neo-realism movement for example) have always been grounded in reality. via /r/movies https://ift.tt/LK3iUZH