They’re just people, trying to get programmes and films made.
We're all "just people". Please don't try and make each other's profession more of an issue than it already is.
Graham’s point about analysis of failure and learning from mistakes in terms of less than successful films and TV programmes is a good one.
Im sure producers dont make programmes wondering if they have making a mistake. Well maybe, in the dead of night when doubt gnaws at their bones. Do many producers get that?
But lets take one good example "The Cult" good production values, good acting and locations.Ok the dramatic tension wasn't really there. But the real problem, the subject matter would have been a winner 10 - 20 yrs ago, but it just wasn't going to fly from the first episode. Dead in the water. Now you will no doubt disagree - I hope you don't tho - cause that is a problem.
And it's going to get worse. I don't envy producers in the coming years as taste's (in the developed world) get ever more sophisticated, while to make a TV program for FTA prime time finding a way through broadcasting standards must be a nightmare. Especially when it comes to drama, 'cause humans are such messy creatures. I guess that's the rubbernecking appeal of it.
Films- different creature and for the time being I'll just say. To make a, what I would classify as a good film. A producer really has to bite the hand that feeds, (to put it euphemistically) with the subject matter. That's if you aren't making a "franchised film" shudder...Is that the art of a producer? or one of the many arts... I dont know.
Sorry vanity has got the better of me today, so I wont show my age by linking to what I classify as a good film.
These wacky times
nice catch and pretty pics, I've heard the Hauraki can be like a millpond on the right day.
What was the boat? I ask out of voyeuristic interest. One of the reasons I came back to NZ was a boat. A Pelin Gullwing design. Funny thing is I'll never get to fish from it. Well, tragic really. Families who'd have 'em.
To me the obvious approach is to try and get the smartest most creative most “productive” children – rather than simpler more children.
Perhaps those smartest most creative productive children can be any child.
Knowledge Is Power Program, or KIPP, founded in 1993 by a couple of frustrated young teachers, Michael Feinberg and David Levin, in Houston’s inner-city schools. By 2008 there were sixty-six KIPP schools coast to coast, with 16,000 students. KIPP takes children who seem headed for mediocrity or failure — who have little or no hope of ever making it out of the slums — and turns them into exemplary scholars with bright futures.
Nice new website. And I'll keep my talk of death to a minimum.
Thought this thread was about children , but OK you want to mention us old farts.
How about we have a conversation about death. And the dumb arse christian notions which still hold sway over the feeble minded health bureaucrats and all to often disempowers the actual person dying.
Sorry, I don't shrink in fear from death and if anyone finds that offensive, yes that's my middle digit telling you exactly how I feel about your squeamishness.
And I am excluding those with dementia.
Some bring treasures with them. Others are never seen again.
Oh Ben you gloss over so much with a little statement like this, which appears to give balance.
That wobbly middle ground again.
Worth remembering that the most populous country on the planet is now also the most productive (industrially). Humans are resources, at some level.
Yeah but would you move there (to Changzou say) as a lifestyle choice. And dont pretend you are a poor farmers child with no other choices or give me this, yeah if I had to for work or some other bullshit.
actual figures on what this planet can support with real confidence because we don't know the future of technology.
Figures .....you want figures .......We could all live like monks. Well I do any way so doesnt bother me. And I suppose we could send a few million to live in the desert. With the aid of technology Im sure their lives could be made reasonably comfortable. Of course they would have to pay for it.
We currently only receive a minuscule fraction of the energy roaring past us from our local fusion reaction.
Dont you mean use not receive. And whys that then?
Humans are resources, at some level.
Everything "at some level" is a resource to something. But I'd rather be a resource as wormfood that a "resource" in mass numbers in a massive city in a system that seems to care little about me, except as a "resource" to keep its GDP ticking over.
But then that just me.
Stalin = a megalomaniac
the Shining Path = Maoist
the Red Brigades = Marxist/Leninist
or the Great Leap Forward = Maoist
Well one out of four aint bad.
But anyway that's by the by anyway.
Is John Lennon in there?