46
Executive producer is not a real job and its continued existence while actual people doing actual work in TV and Movies cannot afford to live in the areas in which they are required to work is wild (hexbear.net)
submitted 23 hours ago by to c/movies@hexbear.net
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

yeah man pay this succesful director/actor/some other fucking guy a couple hundred thousand not to show up, meanwhile the vfx guys had to pawn their computers

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Usually executive producers are funding the movie in exchange for the credit and usually a cut off the potential profits. Most of the time they are directly funding with money but sometimes they are using social capital and name recognition as their "investment." Executive producers are not usually paid at all except in points on the back end

Not justifying the system just explaining how it typically works

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 15 points 22 hours ago* (1 child)

    There is no justifiable system where a guy can be paid out a couple of million or hundreds of thousands or tens of thousands or even honestly a single cent for not showing up to make what is essentially an animated movie while the guys doing the animation can't afford to eat. It doesn't matter if the payment comes before or after. I'm sure other people get screwed too, but I just saw a thing about VFX guys so that's where my ire is right now.

    Also every time I see a behind the scenes thing they present executive producer as essentially an Ideas Guy who knows the people with money. Which is just not a fucking job.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 22 hours ago (1 child)

    Right, capitalism is bad. Rich people put up their (typically inherited/unearned) capital and get to extract the profit from the workers. This is how everything works under capitalism

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 10 points 22 hours ago* (3 children)

    No other forms of art does this. Music doesn't put the owner of the studios name in the songs! Well, not typically at least! The name on the painting isn't an investor! We're not pretending that poems are made by a patron.

    Yes someone getting paid for ownership is just capitalism. But separate things can be weird in different ways within capitalism

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 20 hours ago

    another example is celebrity-owned restaurants where the celebrity name is more important than the staff. this includes restaurants where the celebrity owner is a "CHEF" but doesn't work in the restaurant (or even create the menu probably) like the Gordon Ramsey chain

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

    Songs have credits too, you just don't watch them on a screen or look them up. The publishing companies, the producers. One of the most famous music producers in the world is notorious for literally doing nothing. Ceos, bosses, investors etc get the credit for shit they didn't do always, they just shove it in your face differently

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

    Danny Devito was one of the producers for Gattaca.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 21 hours ago

    Yeah a lot of famous actors will put their name on a project they really like as a way to ensure it gets funding and help it get seen, especially if they can't really afford to fund it directly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent