Producers

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Producers

    There are too many Producers in Hollywood who look at a film and say:

    "What can this film do for me?" >> How can I use it to feather my nest as much as possible?

    There need to be more Producers who say:

    "What can I do for this film?" >> How can I make it the best it can be? Do I have a vision for this film? Is my heart in it?

    This is one/a reason for many high profile 'bombs / flops'. Even the 'Money Producers' have an important role in shaping the creative outcome -- the quality of the Art -- created during the filming process. When they don't, it shows.

    You know?
    Postmodernism?

    http://www.juliantyler.com

  • #2
    Re: Producers

    Originally posted by PoMoTy View Post
    There are too many Producers in Hollywood who look at a film and say:

    "What can this film do for me?" >> How can I use it to feather my nest as much as possible?

    There need to be more Producers who say:

    "What can I do for this film?" >> How can I make it the best it can be? Do I have a vision for this film? Is my heart in it?

    This is one/a reason for many high profile 'bombs / flops'. Even the 'Money Producers' have an important role in shaping the creative outcome -- the quality of the Art -- created during the filming process. When they don't, it shows.

    You know?

    You say that like producers are the only ones concerned with money and prestige over the quality of the project. I can think of quite a few actors, directors, writers, cinematographers, and other creative professionals who fall into that trap every now and then...

    Worrying only about how something affects/advances your own career isn't solely the province of producers.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Producers

      There's an old "making of" documentary, "Hamster Factor and Other Tales of Twelve Monkeys", that shows producer Chuck Roven at work, hands-on, with director Terry Gilliam, the set director and production designers, etc., as well as the actors. There was one amazing hands-on producer! You can imagine how it might step on the toes of some of other other players, but just to see his enthusiasm for the project has made me query his company about 20 times -- to no avail... yet.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Producers

        Originally posted by SoCalScribe View Post
        You say that like producers are the only ones concerned with money and prestige over the quality of the project. I can think of quite a few actors, directors, writers, cinematographers, and other creative professionals who fall into that trap every now and then...

        Worrying only about how something affects/advances your own career isn't solely the province of producers.
        You are very right.

        However...

        When Actors, Directors, Cinematographers and some other creative professionals are NOT CREATIVE, it cannot be hidden, and is on the screen for all to see.

        When a Producer, particularly a money producer, is a draining (or uplifting) force, it is less obvious on the screen, harder to see, but no less important.
        Postmodernism?

        http://www.juliantyler.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Producers

          Originally posted by PoMoTy View Post
          There are too many Producers in Hollywood who look at a film and say:

          "What can this film do for me?" >> How can I use it to feather my nest as much as possible?
          Most people in the industry look at a movie that way - from runners and grips to HODs and above-the-line personnel. In the movie business a person's career status and earning power is defined by their best and most recent credits, so everybody looks at a project to see if it might be a step up the ladder or a credit they can use to get a better gig. Producers are no different in this regard.

          But it's not the way most people approach their work on the project, including producers. A producer usually looks at project from several points of view. The main one is: can I deliver this movie on time, within budget, and meet the expectations of marketing and distribution? Most producers are also looking to get the best value they can from the budget, to make the film as successful as possible within its limitations. Producers who only look at a movie in the way you suggest above either don't survive long as producers or get stuck on the fringes of production.

          There need to be more Producers who say:

          "What can I do for this film?" >> How can I make it the best it can be? Do I have a vision for this film? Is my heart in it?
          It may surprise you to know that most producers do think like that. From a producer's perspective, filmmaking is fifty percent problem-solving. Mostly your heart has to be in it or you don't get the project off the ground.

          This is one/a reason for many high profile 'bombs / flops'.
          Not really. It's usually 'chemistry' - casting, the X-factor and timing - that leads to high-profile flops. Producers have usually done all they can to bring the best ingredients together. Sometimes the people who collectively green-light the movie - distributors, financers and so on who facilitate the loans to get the thing made - misread the marketability and audience response to a movie and approve a budget for something that flops even though it looked good when it was being packaged. But it's rare for a movie to flop because a producer was looking at it solely as a fast buck and a notch on his/her belt.

          Is it possible there was a lot of guesswork in your post? Have you worked with many producers? Have you ever seen, first hand, a movie being packaged and green lit?
          "Friends make the worst enemies." Frank Underwood

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Producers

            Originally posted by PoMoTy View Post
            There are too many Producers in Hollywood who look at a film and say:

            "What can this film do for me?" >> How can I use it to feather my nest as much as possible?
            Sure. But remember - they're playing with other people's money, and if they lose it they're not going to get to play much longer.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Producers

              Honestly, any producer who is not looking at the ROI - artistic and financial - in equal measure, is not going to last long. Film is both art and business. You cannot separate the two and those who attempt to do so fall short of excellence every time.
              "All of us trying to be the camera behind the camera behind the camera. The last story in line. The Truth" Chuck Palahniuk - Haunted

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Producers

                Originally posted by PoMoTy View Post
                There are too many Producers in Hollywood who look at a film and say:

                "What can this film do for me?" >> How can I use it to feather my nest as much as possible?

                There need to be more Producers who say:

                "What can I do for this film?" >> How can I make it the best it can be? Do I have a vision for this film? Is my heart in it?

                This is one/a reason for many high profile 'bombs / flops'. Even the 'Money Producers' have an important role in shaping the creative outcome -- the quality of the Art -- created during the filming process. When they don't, it shows.

                You know?

                I missed this thread. ... you know, I've always been intrigued by the romanticizing of art & commerce. A good portion of the art by the classic masters was commissioned and client dictated.

                DaVinci and Michelangelo used to compete for paid Vatican gigs all the time. And the Vatican would dictate subject matter. Some of DaVinci's famous sculptures were actually executed by his students based on his sketches.

                Did Davinci love painting, sculpting, all those bible themes? Some historians have concluded he was an atheist and mocked religion. But those Vatican gigs supported his other interests.

                Through the ages, a number of the masters have used students (apprentices) to paint backgrounds or touch up details -- before the master signed the work.

                Sort of takes the blush off the romance of the creative impulse, no?
                Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Producers

                  Originally posted by DavidK View Post
                  Most people in the industry look at a movie that way - from runners and grips to HODs and above-the-line personnel. In the movie business a person's career status and earning power is defined by their best and most recent credits, so everybody looks at a project to see if it might be a step up the ladder or a credit they can use to get a better gig. Producers are no different in this regard.
                  Below the line people will always look at a movie/job that way. They are just there to focus on thier craft, not the story or the "creative". The technical facets are different in nature from the Producers, writers, and actors.

                  Originally posted by DavidK View Post
                  But it's not the way most people approach their work on the project, including producers. A producer usually looks at project from several points of view. The main one is: can I deliver this movie on time, within budget, and meet the expectations of marketing and distribution? Most producers are also looking to get the best value they can from the budget, to make the film as successful as possible within its limitations. Producers who only look at a movie in the way you suggest above either don't survive long as producers or get stuck on the fringes of production.
                  Producers who cannot create or foster a creative space for the artists produce bad movies, and don't last long.

                  It takes certian skills to balance and keep a budget, but also keep the creative process true and strong.


                  Originally posted by DavidK View Post
                  It may surprise you to know that most producers do think like that. From a producer's perspective, filmmaking is fifty percent problem-solving. Mostly your heart has to be in it or you don't get the project off the ground.
                  No suprise indeed, I can see it on the screen.

                  If it's a studio run feature, and has over $100 million to spend -- the going rate for a major feature -- you will, without doubt, find key people's hearts are not in it, they are really just in it for the money. Which is fine, as long as they are not a negative force on set.


                  Originally posted by DavidK View Post
                  Not really. It's usually 'chemistry' - casting, the X-factor and timing - that leads to high-profile flops. Producers have usually done all they can to bring the best ingredients together. Sometimes the people who collectively green-light the movie - distributors, financers and so on who facilitate the loans to get the thing made - misread the marketability and audience response to a movie and approve a budget for something that flops even though it looked good when it was being packaged. But it's rare for a movie to flop because a producer was looking at it solely as a fast buck and a notch on his/her belt.
                  That is what every producer will say, and in some cases they might be right. But it is foolish to ignore the critical nature of producing, and the role producers have in putting together a good package, and creating a creative space in which to create "magic".

                  Not all producers can (any longer) produce "magic" or Art.

                  Originally posted by DavidK View Post
                  Is it possible there was a lot of guesswork in your post? Have you worked with many producers? Have you ever seen, first hand, a movie being packaged and green lit?
                  Yes I have, on more that one occasion, in more than one capacity.
                  Last edited by PoMoTy; 01-24-2011, 08:59 PM. Reason: First draft.
                  Postmodernism?

                  http://www.juliantyler.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Producers

                    Originally posted by Kermet Key View Post
                    Honestly, any producer who is not looking at the ROI - artistic and financial - in equal measure, is not going to last long. Film is both art and business. You cannot separate the two and those who attempt to do so fall short of excellence every time.
                    I agree.
                    Postmodernism?

                    http://www.juliantyler.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Producers

                      Originally posted by sc111 View Post
                      I missed this thread. ... you know, I've always been intrigued by the romanticizing of art & commerce. A good portion of the art by the classic masters was commissioned and client dictated.

                      DaVinci and Michelangelo used to compete for paid Vatican gigs all the time. And the Vatican would dictate subject matter. Some of DaVinci's famous sculptures were actually executed by his students based on his sketches.

                      Did Davinci love painting, sculpting, all those bible themes? Some historians have concluded he was an atheist and mocked religion. But those Vatican gigs supported his other interests.

                      Through the ages, a number of the masters have used students (apprentices) to paint backgrounds or touch up details -- before the master signed the work.

                      Sort of takes the blush off the romance of the creative impulse, no?
                      Not at all, in my mind.

                      The Vatican wanted Art, and other than naming rights and loose guidelines as to who/what to paint or sculpt, the Artists had great creative freedom. If they just painted a picture for a "paycheck", they would have been fired and their art discarded.

                      Sort of like studios do today.
                      Last edited by PoMoTy; 01-24-2011, 08:52 PM. Reason: This was a first draft. I didn't get a chance to proof my writing today.
                      Postmodernism?

                      http://www.juliantyler.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Producers

                        I find that almost everyone got into the business because they love movies. There are so many easier and safer ways to make a living, but this is their passion.

                        Producers, executives, directors, actors, writers... They all want to make great movies. Now their idea of "great" obviously differs - some people love cheesy horror movies. Some people love explosions. Some people love goofy comedies. Some people love smart dramas.

                        But I'm not seeing many of these mythical soulless creatures who only care about making money and don't care what shit they pump out to do it. Does it always work out? Of course not. But you can't judge intention from your perception of the product.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Producers

                          Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                          I find that almost everyone got into the business because they love movies. There are so many easier and safer ways to make a living, but this is their passion.

                          Producers, executives, directors, actors, writers... They all want to make great movies. Now their idea of "great" obviously differs - some people love cheesy horror movies. Some people love explosions. Some people love goofy comedies. Some people love smart dramas.

                          But I'm not seeing many of these mythical soulless creatures who only care about making money and don't care what shit they pump out to do it. Does it always work out? Of course not. But you can't judge intention from your perception of the product.
                          You said everything that I wanted to say.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Producers

                            Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
                            I find that almost everyone got into the business because they love movies. There are so many easier and safer ways to make a living, but this is their passion.

                            Producers, executives, directors, actors, writers... They all want to make great movies. Now their idea of "great" obviously differs - some people love cheesy horror movies. Some people love explosions. Some people love goofy comedies. Some people love smart dramas.

                            But I'm not seeing many of these mythical soulless creatures who only care about making money and don't care what shit they pump out to do it. Does it always work out? Of course not. But you can't judge intention from your perception of the product.
                            Intentions are not products. Products can be, and are judged. You can gauge intentions/ability by product quaility.

                            P.S.

                            >> But I'm not seeing many of these mythical soulless creatures who only care about making money and don't care what shit they pump out to do it. <<

                            You have never seen an Agent? : )
                            Postmodernism?

                            http://www.juliantyler.com

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Producers

                              Originally posted by PoMoTy View Post
                              Intentions are not products. Products can be, and are judged. You can gauge intentions/ability by product quaility.
                              I don't know anyone who's been involved in the collaborative creation of a motion picture that thinks the quality of the finished product (which is mostly subjective) is by any means a direct translation of the intentions of the people that made it.

                              Sometimes a movie comes out great. Sometimes a movie comes out and it's a mess. But no one goes into a multi-million dollar investment with the intention of making a mess.

                              Looking at your resume, it seems that you've been involved in the production of quite a few movies. Did every single one of them end up exactly how the producers intended it? Did Spielberg and Lucas go into INDIANA JONES FOUR intending to make as much of a mess of that film as they did? How about GULLIVER'S TRAVELS?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X