What is the most important person in a movie?

[BCWWF]

The director, writer, actors, producer, other?

I was thinking about this last night, and we had a similar discussion in a film class I took in college.

For example, can the greatest actors salvage a terrible movie?

Can a great director make a great movie with terrible actors?

What is the most important?

[BCWWF]

Personally I say it is the writing, directing, acting, in that order. A movie like Gran Torino had pretty weak acting, but it was the best movie I've seen in a long time. I feel like the overall story and the writing is the most important element, as even great directors have terrible movies sometimes (Spielberg's AI, etc.)

[bigdaddysuperfreak]

I thought the acting was pretty good in Gran Torino and I thought AI was a great movie. I agree with writing being the most important but I think directing and acting are almost equally interchangeable.

[BCWWF]

The acting overall wasn't bad, but there were definitely parts where you could tell it was the actors' first movie.

[Haze]

I would go with Directing on this one. I mean the writing is key, but the director is there to determine if something on the page is working or not.

[Ogen]

Probably Krispy

[Jeritron]

Its the director without question. The writer hardly ever achieves "auteur" status. They have the least control of anyone really.

Producers have more control than them. Actors is wishy washy, and depends on the production. I suppose an actor has control when it's part of their contract, but in that case they're usually director or producer.

In old Hollywood, producers had all the control. Since the 70s, that has changed.

Director is by far the correct answer.

[ct2k]

Steven Seagal

[BCWWF]

I just feel like a great director can make a terrible movie if it's not written well, and that it all truly comes down to the writing.

[Haze]

Originally Posted by BCWWF I just feel like a great director can make a terrible movie if it's not written well, and that it all truly comes down to the writing.

But in the same breath, a shitty director can turn a written masterpiece into a disaster.

[mitch_h]

Originally Posted by Jeritron In old Hollywood, producers had all the control. Since the 70s, that has changed.

I would say control went back to studios/producers in the 80s.

I think they are all equally important, Paddy Chayefsky's scripts wouldn't seem nearly as good if amateurs had the parts over Peter Finch and Faye Dunaway.

Citizen Kane is well written but it wouldn't be the masterpiece it is if someone other than Orson Welles was behind the camera.

James Cameron was responsible for making Terminator 2 visually stunning, but it's solid script is what puts it above most other action movies.
Etc, Etc

[mitch_h]

Actually i'll change my answer to producer, because he is the one really responsible for the movie reaching the screen.

[parkmania]

Best Boy, or Key Grip.

[Kris P Lettus]

Do you even know what either of those are??

[Kris P Lettus]

Also

*who

[parkmania]

Yeah, I know that the Key Grip is a lighting technician, but I forget what the actual duties of the Best Boy are.

[St. Jimmy]

Actors. Without a decent actor, even the best movie is just feces on celluloid.

[Jon Kano]

I think when you approach this question, its not really the word important, valuable or anything like that really, its just in your opinion where the source of the message comes from.

For me, its the writer, I could read or watch some of my fave films and I would probably still be moved and entertained as much or even more through reading the words.

[Kris P Lettus]

Originally Posted by parkmania Yeah, I know that the Key Grip is a lighting technician, but I forget what the actual duties of the Best Boy are.

No..

Gaffer is the head lighting technician.. Best Boy is second for both Grip or Electric.. Then you have thirds, which are set electric or grips.. Electricians (Juicers) deal with the actual lighting instruments and power.. Grips help make everything safe and help mold the light using flags and gel frames..

I work as a Best Boy and Set Grip or Electric.. Mostly a juicer though..

[Kris P Lettus]

The thing this thread seems to be missing is, a movie needs a compilation of every ones talents to make it good.. Actors need writers who need money from producers who needs a good director who needs a good DP who needs a good Gaffer who needs a good Key Grip who all need a good crew to make it happen.. Shitty special effects can ruin a horror movie, I don't care who the actors or director or producers are.. Same with anything else, as in bad writing or acting can kill a movie, just like a bad producing (noty putting money in the right places) can kill a movie..

If you want to know my professional opinion, I'd say a good Script Supervisor is the key.. Without her (usually a female), many, many, many, many mistakes would happen on a daily basis, and cause the movie to not cut well at all.. And you are talking multiple shots with turn around and whatnot every single day, that they have to keep up with how the actors were dressed, what hand they were holding a cigarette, to how much of said cig had been smoked, etc etc etc..

But as I said earlier, no one piece is greater than another.. It take a whole crew to make a good movie..

That's just my .02..

[Jon Kano]

Originally Posted by Kris P Lettus The thing this thread seems to be missing is, a movie needs a compilation of every ones talents to make it good.. Actors need writers who need money from producers who needs a good director who needs a good DP who needs a good Gaffer who needs a good Key Grip who all need a good crew to make it happen.. Shitty special effects can ruin a horror movie, I don't care who the actors or director or producers are.. Same with anything else, as in bad writing or acting can kill a movie, just like a bad producing (noty putting money in the right places) can kill a movie.. If you want to know my professional opinion, I'd say a good Script Supervisor is the key.. Without her (usually a female), many, many, many, many mistakes would happen on a daily basis, and cause the movie to not cut well at all.. And you are talking multiple shots with turn around and whatnot every single day, that they have to keep up with how the actors were dressed, what hand they were holding a cigarette, to how much of said cig had been smoked, etc etc etc.. But as I said earlier, no one piece is greater than another.. It take a whole crew to make a good movie.. That's just my .02..

Very true.

Thats why I said, when approaching this question, its prob best to identify which area of the creative process and product you find the most appealing.

But script supervisor? nearly every film has continuity goofs and errors, some of the ones with the biggest budgets have the most.

[Jeritron]

lol at writing. Ask screenwriters how much control they have. There aren't too many star writers. Unfortunately, they're at the service of the studio and director, and their writing leaves their hands at some point, and is at the whim of the others.

The writer has the least control of anyone in this poll, but okay.

[Jeritron]

Originally Posted by mitch_h I would say control went back to studios/producers in the 80s. I think they are all equally important, Paddy Chayefsky's scripts wouldn't seem nearly as good if amateurs had the parts over Peter Finch and Faye Dunaway. Citizen Kane is well written but it wouldn't be the masterpiece it is if someone other than Orson Welles was behind the camera. James Cameron was responsible for making Terminator 2 visually stunning, but it's solid script is what puts it above most other action movies. Etc, Etc

Yea, and it was written by him. It comes down to him being the director first and foremost, and the fact that the screeplay is his vision adds to that. He's an auteur. As the director and producer, he has the control to realize his script. That doesn't happen when the writer is simply the screenwriter. Never.

A great script is the skeleton of a great movie, but ultimately it is at the discretion of the directors and producers.
There are plenty of screenplays that have been gutted and modified to their liking. The average screenplay isn't even written by one party.

Also, thats not true about the studios taking back control. Maybe in studio run productions where a hired gun director is hire, but not the superstar directors. Superstar directors were a new thing in the 70s, with few exceptions before them. Pretty much just Hitchcock. He opened the door, and then Spielberg blew it off the hinges.

Even directors like Huston and Welles had very little control over their movies. Kubrick didn't get control over his projects as he would have liked until the director movement of the late 70s. That's why most of his defining works come after that.

Welles had control over Citizen Kane, and it was so panned by the powers that be, that he never got that control again in his life and naturally fell short.

[loopydate]

Originally Posted by thehazeeffect But in the same breath, a shitty director can turn a written masterpiece into a disaster.

Yes, but not even the best director in the world can turn a disaster of a screenplay into a masterpiece.

[The Mackem]

The guy that gets the sandwiches.

[Kris P Lettus]

Originally Posted by Jon Kano But script supervisor? nearly every film has continuity goofs and errors, some of the ones with the biggest budgets have the most.

It is a very difficult and technical job..

[Kris P Lettus]

Diligent note taking..

[mitch_h]

Originally Posted by Jeritron Yea, and it was written by him. It comes down to him being the director first and foremost, and the fact that the screeplay is his vision adds to that. He's an auteur. As the director and producer, he has the control to realize his script. That doesn't happen when the writer is simply the screenwriter. Never. A great script is the skeleton of a great movie, but ultimately it is at the discretion of the directors and producers. There are plenty of screenplays that have been gutted and modified to their liking. The average screenplay isn't even written by one party. Also, thats not true about the studios taking back control. Maybe in studio run productions where a hired gun director is hire, but not the superstar directors. Superstar directors were a new thing in the 70s, with few exceptions before them. Pretty much just Hitchcock. He opened the door, and then Spielberg blew it off the hinges. Even directors like Huston and Welles had very little control over their movies. Kubrick didn't get control over his projects as he would have liked until the director movement of the late 70s. That's why most of his defining works come after that. Welles had control over Citizen Kane, and it was so panned by the powers that be, that he never got that control again in his life and naturally fell short.

I don't think auterism is really relevent to the question, well maybe the way BCWWF phrased it... the real question should have been "what's more important, acting, writing, or directing". But as Krispy said it's a collaborative effort, try watching a movie without foley.

As for your point about studio control, I agree, auterism definetly invaded Hollywood during the 70's, although I wouldn't give that much credit to Spielberg. However, after Michael Cimino went crazy with power, control gradually moved towards the studios again, plus companies like Sony started buying up production houses. I'm not saying auterism is dead though, it's managed to keep going because of the rise of independent cinema and what not.

[Sixx]

Originally Posted by ct2k Steven Seagal

That, and Michael Dudikoff.

[Reavant]

The fluffer that keeps the guys hard between scenes

[DrA]

BCWWF is the most important person in a movie.

[Jon Kano]

Originally Posted by Jeritron lol at writing. Ask screenwriters how much control they have. There aren't too many star writers. Unfortunately, they're at the service of the studio and director, and their writing leaves their hands at some point, and is at the whim of the others. The writer has the least control of anyone in this poll, but okay.

A lack of control doesn't necessarily dictate importance, esp in this case.

And it also depends, a lot of films are written and directed and even produced by the writer, so in some cases they are the one with the most control.

[road doggy dogg]

Originally Posted by Ogen Probably Krispy

lol
crossrine

[Kalyx triaD]

Writer <<<<<<

Director a close second.

Fuck actors. Producer gets props, though.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I believe that Kris P and Jon Kano have the best idea out of anyone in this thread. I'm fascinated by the movie industry, know people who work within it, and have flirted with that lifestyle myself (of course, not in a big way).

I really don't think you can pin it down to one particular area. In the film industry, yes, writers do tend to get shitted all over -- I'll give you that, Jeritron. But to say that writers aren't important? Initially the script is what gets the nod to be turned into a film -- without one, you really have nothing.

Directors are very important, and you do get a lot of directors who don't have a clue what they're doing, but they keep getting work because the actors in their films are talented enough to hold it together. Acting is getting a shit deal in this thread. A really good actor will always be able to pull through, at least with their reputation intact.

I wouldn't know who to go with, but I think I'll elect the writer, just because they cause the initial spark which gets everything rolling. Sure, their work may get bastardised, but without it, there'd be nothing for a director to bastardise.

[ct2k]

Writers. Great actors cannot make terrible dialogue work, but great dialogue can make pretty bad actors seem palatable.