We like to imagine that films and tv is a creative space, but it is interesting how much of a war is conducted over control of this creativity.I have hear many directors with great experience get rejected by studios becaude the studios 'are worried the director will actually direct the film and not act as an facilitator for the creative desires of the studio'. They actually say this.I have talked to the people behind the Interview with a Vampire tv show, and they were really relieved when Anne Rice died. Anne was trying to control how things should be, and when she was gone, the people behind the show were happy to get to do what they themselves wanted to do with it. I don't like Rice's stuff, but that felt wrong to me.We all know the Wheel of Time show wanted Sanderson's name attached for legitimacy, but wanted nothing to do with him in the writer's room. I don't watch that slop or read Sanderson for that matter, but that is another revealing picture of how these things are done.So many people want outlets to be creative with significant budgets. It is a really satisfying and cathartic feeling. It is so much better than being a wage slave for someone else's will. But, as the world may have it, there are only so many people who get access to these roles. That is why so many people are willing to go to war for it.
>>220128150>there are only so many people who get access to these roles. That is why so many people are willing to go to war for it.And for that reason studios have creators by the balls. >don't want to shoehorn in our message? We'll find someone who will.This is why they're afraid of AI. If anyone can become a studio-level creative from home, their stranglehold on creativity comes to an end.
>>220129441>This is why they're afraid of AI. If anyone can become a studio-level creative from home, their stranglehold on creativity comes to an end.I think the connundrum there is that oversupply of 'creative content' may very well lead to the same situation. Look at books. The average American might read 1-2 books a year at best. Then look at the walls of shit that fill Barnes and Noble. Think of all the books that will sell 10 copies lifetime and no more. Books are devalued (1) because they require active participation which is work for many people and (2) essentially any literate person can write a book if they want to do so and are literate. As a result, only the big big names get any success in publishing, and usually that is only a stepping stone to tv/film deals. The same thing can't be said of of film and tv which requires lots of money. People care about those industries largely because there is gatekeeping that encourages minimum level of quality (yes, even with the slop that gets produced today) and more importantly, scarcity, that makes people inherently value it.
>>220128150Gay
