The system has for its object an increase of persons that are to intervene between the producer and the consumer, living on the product of the land and labour of others, diminishing the power of the first, and increasing the number of the last.
Usually in TV... A TV director could be anything from a main grip to just a glorified cameraman, and sometimes a director can be the person who is hired last. It's very much a producer's medium.
There's a kind of unwritten rule: Don't say anything at all, and everything will be fine. It's a producer's medium. The directors aren't there to make any decisions. They're not going to change anything.
Even if actors ask for more money, will producers fulfill their demands? They might just show us the door.
A disk unbeknownst to the director can go to the producer in another city or in another office and that producer can edit behind the director's back much easier than in the old days. Since these dailies are now put on videotape, more kinds of people have access to dailies.
Why is it that the producers can do anything and get away with it, and the actors are held accountable for everything? The makers often stop actors' payments, too. Everything is in their favour in the contract.
The type of contract between players and producers is, I feel, antiquated in form and abstract in concept. We have no privacies which producers cannot invade, they trade us like cattle, boss us like children.
As a first-time director, you cannot have final cut. But as a producer, you can have final cut.
People like me, DJs and producers, have a bigger say and a bigger voice than we've ever had before.
If you're a super-producer, you can produce whatever you want to produce. That's where I'm at.
