how come we still talk primarily about directors? - rec.arts.movies.past-films

Message from discussion how come we still talk primarily about directors?
Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder2.on.meganewsservers.com!meganewsservers.com!reader1.on.meganewsservers.com!reader1.on.meganewsservers.com!not-for-mail
ath: nntpswitch.com
From: George Weinberg <eorg...@covad.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.past-films,alt.movies,rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: how come we still talk primarily about directors?
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 09:36:56 -0700
Message-ID: <56cmc0pl2a07o3css4ugfl0v65bsm6jrb8@4ax.com>
References: <7b98c3ee.0406101718.7e268f95@posting.google.com> <f33e00ab.0406110552.5af0bfec@posting.google.com> <d3aeee5b.0406111337.29ff06e0@posting.google.com> <poldy-D0668C.15382511062004@netnews.comcast.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: We
Lines: 25
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.251.47.166
X-Trace: 1087057964 reader1.on.meganewsservers.com 20121 216.251.47.166:42767

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:38:26 GMT, poldy <po...@kfu.com> wrote:

>In article <d3aeee5b.0406111337.29ff0...@posting.google.com>,
> jayembeeNoS...@snurcher.com (jayembee) wrote:
>
>> In fact, I would argue that writers are probably replaced
>> more often than directors.
>
>Film making is a collaborative medium and usually, the directors are 
>suppose to have the final authority on the artistic side of things.  But 
>we know producers often overrule directors.
>
>And writers are pretty low on the totem pole, below the directors and 
>actors who like to infuse their "input" on the script.
>

Reminds me of a joke....

There' this hot chick, she really wants to be in a movie, she'll
do anything to get into the film but she's really really stupid.

How stupid is she?  She's so stupid...she sleeps with the
writer!

George