31–34 of 34 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a citation for this because it's from memory, but I believe that a lot of the companies that go under in debt are actually subsidiaries of the studios themselves. It works out as a tax/debt write-off.
Just curious, how is this different from what Enron was doing? They are basically setting up shell companies to hide their losses right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The flip side of that is everyone with a Mac and a Canon 5D thinks he's Stanley Kubrick, so it's harder to spot real talent. This is the only point I disagree with. I don't care how much more accessible the tech gets it's still about te storyline, the acting and cinematography.
I assume sunchild called it "harder" to spot talent simply because the increased accessibility of tech means there's now more crap to wade through.
>In response Paul Graham, the Svengali of of the startup community, posted an essay calling for ideas that would kill Hollywood.
From Wikipedia:
>The word "svengali", has come to be used as a common noun referring to a person who, with evil intent, controls another person by persuasion or deceit. The Svengali may use pseudo-kindness and manipulation to get the other person to turn over their autonomy.
How, exactly, is this an apt description of pg?
Make sure to share this information with anyone you know when discussing SOPA.