Who should be held the most responsible for a good or bad movie; who should I primarily thank or criticize? The director, the writer, the producer, the director of photography, etc.? If it varies by film, how can I tell, based on the film, who had the most active role? Does any of this change for TV shows?
Thanks
2007-01-12 01:44:37 · 7 answers · asked by Jarrod 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
I think it's a combination of all of them, that truly make a movie a blockbuster hit.
Credit must be given to whomever spotted the potential for the movie too...there are so many good "stories" yet undiscovered, but it's a process, so I don't know that you can really connect the success to just one thing.
Budget plays a big factor for some TYPES of movies, ie wardrobe, location, cinematrography (like Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ...plus the fact that it was the story of Christ too)...others it's the concept or idea that make it a hit (ie CRASH...which snoozed through the theatres and yet won best movie of the year), and I thought it was just fantastic that someone was able to make such a fabulous movie that connected 5 seemingly unrelated lives in such an extraordinary way. Sometimes it's that brilliance of mind that points to whom should get the credit most.
Of course, when you have a combination of a good script, story and location, the other important factor is the actor...just throwing in a good actor guarantees nothing however, but sometimes the combination is so perfect that you can't help but have total success.
I dont agree that people who watch them deserve any kind of credit at all...people watch pure garbage these days and that's why we no longer have really good movies...they are just pumped out there to fill the theatres so that everyone can suck up your money....can't stand those b-flick horrors and have never, and never will spend a cent on them.
2007-01-12 02:04:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should be the director, because they should be able to tell the actors if some thing isn't right. However... If a big name A-Lister like Brad Pitt decides his character should do one thing and the not so well known director (who can see the big picture) disagrees, the studio which holds the purse strings (and the contracts) will probably back Pitt. At the same time a director can easily get carried away with artistic licence and a producer may have to step in and say "you know what? People are not going to sit through 4 hrs of this. Shorten it." So it really depends on a lot of things. And then you get personalities involved.... and egos. Some people wont work with this or that person. And add to that most scripts that producers, directors and actor read are actually on a synopsis of a few paragraphs, so in the end they may not really know what they signed up fore in the first place.
I know. I took a long time not to give you an answer.
2007-01-12 06:17:20 · answer #2 · answered by kllr.queen 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The people who watch the movies. With the movies these days, the people deserve some credit for watching those films.
2007-01-12 02:05:42 · answer #3 · answered by John Ghost 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The producer deserves final credit, they are the perosn who pulled every other aspect of a film/production together.
2007-01-12 01:57:33 · answer #4 · answered by jrwny 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the screen play writer because that is what the director is directing and the actors are saying what they wrote they basicaaly make the movie good or bad.
2007-01-12 01:52:34 · answer #5 · answered by thekorean2000 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it depends on what you really liked about it
if its mainly the story, then the writers
if its the acting that sucks you in, the actors
if its the soundtrack, then the sound people
anything else, i would credit the director
2007-01-12 01:52:27 · answer #6 · answered by thuglife 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People who watch them and spend there money on the movie.
2007-01-12 02:08:13 · answer #7 · answered by Rose Dew 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋