I think the article is misguided. No matter how creative content is being delivered, actors are going to be acting parts and delivering lines written by writers

I think the article is misguided. No matter how creative content is being delivered, actors are going to be acting parts and delivering lines written by writers and directed by directors. And everyone "below the line" stays employed. The problem is with the business entities in Hollywood, not the creative entities. I didn't read PG's essay as a call to destroy that "stage" so much as rethink, reinvent, and re-imagine it: the stage itself, and the way the stage gets delivered to you. My take away was: Hollywood studios are damage, we must route creative content around it. Let's create new, direct-to-consumer pipelines that deliver stuff (maybe stuff like today's TV and movies, maybe new stuff we haven't seen yet) without the middleman. Indie filmmakers, DIY musicians, etc. have been doing this for 50 years. YouTube-based serials have been doing it for a few years now. We have plenty of good (and failed) examples to based ideas on.