Master Tucker Max explains his very bad moviei :
Well, I thought I understood how the Hollywood system worked. I was still arrogant enough that I thought truly understood the system. And you could think of it the same way as starting a company, like a first time entrepreneur saying I know how to do a startup. You may think you know, but you don't know until you've done it, right? I thought I knew how Hollywood worked. I thought I knew how the set would work, etc. So we picked our own director, and we ended up picking a director who essentially sold us in the room that he would act a certain way and do a certain set of things on the movie, but when it came time to do it did something totally different. And by the time we got to that point in the process, there was no way to unfuck the decision. And then because he didn't live up to what he said he would do, I instead of, what I should've done is said, "Okay, we are where we are. We can't change it. I need to figure out how to make the best situation possible out of this." What I did was the wrong thing. I got fucking pissed and I got angry and I didn't deal with those emotions. So instead they kind of came out in the way I acted towards him and towards a lot of other people, and it negatively . . . a movie set's a very sensitive, delicate artistic place and you can't act like that there. And I did because I was fucking pissed off because this guy had fucked me. And it negatively impacted the movie in a lot of ways, and I can't even watch the movie because I can see on screen in scenes where I know what's going on in the background and I know someone's fucking up a scene and I know it's at least partially my fault and it drives me nuts. It drives me nuts because I didn't have to act that way. Even with the bad decision, I could have just swallowed it in the short term and gotten the best product out and then dealt with the director later. I didn't. I was short sighted in that way.
Question for you : is he right or is he wrong ?
slave How could he be "right" or "wrong" in that? He's describing how he felt about something.
Master "what I should've done".
slave Ah. No. If he realized he picked a shitty director he should have fired the guy and scrapped the whole thing until he had enough dough and the right director to do what he wanted.
Master "The one thing I learned with the movie was to never, ever do any sort of creative endeavor unless I have full, complete, real creative control, because if you don't have any creative control, you essentially have no control. This book, I finished it, I turned it into Simon and Schuster, and I said, "Print it the fucking way I did it, don't change a fucking thing." And they said, "Yes Tucker, whatever you want". What are they going to say to me, right? Hollywood doesn't work that way. Hollywood doesn't give a fuck. If you don't write the check in Hollywood, you don't matter. That's true even for Steven Spielberg. He gets more control than I do, but he still gets the boot on the neck in Hollywood. That's a battle I've been fighting the last six years. That's why I cancelled two TV shows because both times they were going to do something stupid and I wasn't going to deal with it."
slave Otherwise wth is this, "I wanted to knit an afghan but it turns out I bought celery instead of knitting needles but w/e, I should have figured out how to make the best of it."
Master He's actually right, I would say. Why did he get the bad director ?
slave Because he doesn't know how to interview for a good one.
Master Point in case :
Well, the big thing that I would say would be that the co-writer Nils [Parker] and I would direct it. We had a director on the last one, and he just didn't - we thought he understood the vision, and we thought he got it, and it turns out he didn't...it seems like a little thing, but it makes a difference if you understand movies. Like, I think the movie is lit really poorly. I think it looks like - you know, I mean, we spent $7 million on the movie, which is not a small amount - it's not a huge amount for a movie by any stretch, but definitely more than enough to make a movie look professional, you know? And that version looked very indie and very gritty, and I just thought it looked like sh*t. Like, it didn't look good. And that's the director's fault...he fuc*ed up; he lit it incorrectly. And that seems like a small thing, but it makes a huge difference. Like, that's one thing I would do differently. And I don't know, there's probably a million other little things that we would do differently, but that's, like, the big thing.
That's like, really, the big thing ? Oookay >D The problem isn't that he's smart and the director lied to him. That's what he likes to think, that he's MP sitting on MP's throne and some scammer worked his butt off for 2 years to get through the gates and well, ran off with some BTC. He's not that. He's a dumb kid who has no idea, and what he SHOULD have done was to use that film to learn. Build and test hypotheses.
slave Still not seeing how this makes him "right".
Master He should in fact have made the best of it.
slave Interpreting "make the best of it" that way is takin' a loootta liberties. This shit never crossed his mind, it's not what he meant by several thousand miles. But anyway, nitpick.
Master Certainly not. But that is the other way this is all about the meta problem. He actually is right and not aware of it. This is what that means. What "idea" ? You can't have an idea. It's not a thing, not something to "have". It's not like a chocolate cake, you get your hands on it that's that, it's yours.
slave :) I sees!