Print

Print


  But I do
> believe there is a "crisis in creativity" where not only to producers,
> executives, agents  not know what is good, but people writing scripts have
> little left to say.  An over-abundance of media entertainment?  Do we
> really look forward to 100+ channels of television, and still little worth
> watching?
> David Desser,UIUC Cinema Studies
 
 Well. . . perhaps you're right, although I suspect there are a number of
scriptwriters lurking out there who would strongly disagree. I'm also not
sure there is an overabundance of any substantial media entertainment. Each
new and
current cable channel I see replicates Springsteen's song, "57 Channels
and Nothing On"; nothing, that is,  except for endless reruns and
infocommercials. For example, I was intrigued when I learned of the
"Sci-Fi Channel," although very wary since no trufan ever would be caught
dead calling SF, "Sci-Fi." My fears were realized when I first got an
opportunity to view the channel; it is sheer drivel, unless of course
you happen to enjoy the 1970's "Buck Rogers" program. There's a part of
me that can't help thinking that the old studio system, in spite of its
many  flaws, was much more effective in cranking consistently fresh
entertainment. And as far as overabundance is concerned: In 1939, the
five major studios alone were each producing 500 full-length feature
films, not to mention thousands of shorts, cartoons, and news.
 
Anyway, I have to believe that the site of exhaustion is located in
the current studios/networks--the bean counters' bottom line and not
the writers. In other words, the talent is still there but execs are
too timid to use it.
 
--Patrick