![]() |
I think if you go with the bigger name director, the film might end up with a bigger budget and I would think more funding would equal a bigger paycheck for everyone working on it, including the writer. If that's the case, I'd go with the big name for sure. If he makes your script a smash hit, you are off and running.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Exactly, however frustrating that might be. Plus, it would certainly help your own visibility as a writer to have a big name associated with your script instead of a few hungry unknowns. Plus, as some have said, you never know, the guy just could pull it off brilliantly and then your name would really be out there. |
I agree with most everyone else - go for the name.
Really though, its your script: go with your gut. Whichever one you personally feel will be able to do the best job should be the one you go with...not the opinion of a bunch of random internet horror freaks:) |
Go with the up and comers. That way, if it's a hit, then it's everybody's big break. If you go with the established director in a slump, and it's a hit, then it's the director's big comeback.
On the other hand, if you go with the unknown guys, and it fails, nobody'll notice. If it fails with a name attached to it, it'll get noticed, even if it's noticed as "another M. Night Shyamalan" failure or whomever it is directing. |
Quote:
|
Another thing that I just thought of:
Just how big is this "big name" today? Is it someone like Craven, who still has pretty consistant boxoffice success, or someone like Hooper who is just running the DTV / TV show circuit? If its someone like the latter, I change my vote and say go for the up-and-commers. Contrary to what Sam said, if its a Hooper style "big name" and it flops - it wont be noticed anymore than if the new guys make it. |
everything looks good:D
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:02 PM. |