New Twilight Zone on CBSAA because of Disco's success

[Ovation]

I NEVER go into ANY artistic experience with the attitude that the artist OWES me satisfaction. NEVER.

My view is the opposite. When I pay for such artistic experience, I expect to be satisfied. Otherwise, I stop paying.



The fact that you have expectations and that you are taking risks means that you expect to be satisfied, and that's a sense of self-entitlement. Otherwise, you would not care about either!



If he doesn't make you happy, then likely you'll stop paying! What do you think he has to do next in order to be paid in the future?



If he doesn't cater to your expectations, and if he keeps doing that, then it's likely that you won't watch his future shows and movies.

If he takes a risk for a future project, then he will have to explain that to his potential investors, and they will fund him only if he can persuade them that the payback will be significant.

Finally, the irony about all this is that STD itself is a good example of that "cookie cutter regurgitation of a familiar formula." It's a a Hollywood tent-pole that needed funding from international subscription sales!

Ok. Clearly there is an impasse. So let me be perfectly clear.

1) I completely and utterly DISAGREE with everything you’ve said on this matter.

2) I have made that disagreement abundantly clear. You believe you are entitled to satisfaction from an artistic experience. I. DO. NOT.

3) STOP quoting me and stating I mean the exact opposite of what I ACTUALLY mean. Either you have exceedingly poor reading comprehension skills, poor command of the English language or you are deliberately trying to provoke me for some unfathomable reason. Whatever the case may be, it’s damned annoying. Disagree with me all you like on the topic. DO NOT twist MY words into something they are not.

 

[ralfy]

Ok. Clearly there is an impasse. So let me be perfectly clear.

1) I completely and utterly DISAGREE with everything you’ve said on this matter.

2) I have made that disagreement abundantly clear. You believe you are entitled to satisfaction from an artistic experience. I. DO. NOT.

It's not an impasse. You're off-topic: you are talking about artistic experience. I am talking about commercial art.

This thread is about commercial art.

3) STOP quoting me and stating I mean the exact opposite of what I ACTUALLY mean. Either you have exceedingly poor reading comprehension skills, poor command of the English language or you are deliberately trying to provoke me for some unfathomable reason. Whatever the case may be, it’s damned annoying. Disagree with me all you like on the topic. DO NOT twist MY words into something they are not.

Your problem is that you cannot reconcile your beliefs in artistic experience (i.e., the artist owes his audience nothing) and the phenomenon of commercial art (i.e., he owes his audience satisfaction, or else they stop paying for his work). That can only happen if for this topic the creators of NTZ and STD are also their sole investors.

This has nothing to do with my twisting your words or whatever personal insults you now employ, such as claiming that I lack reading skills and so forth. It has to do with the point that you're talking about something other than the topic thread.

STD was not produced in order to satisfy their creators' craving for self-expression, and it is very likely the same applies to NTZ. They were produced because of profitability. That is, the investors expect a return on these shows, and that can only happen if enough audiences pay to watch.

Finally, there's an obvious lack in your views of artistic experience, but I won't discuss that because that's not what this thread's about.