3 ms·
Again, <whoosh>. The expression in popular usage definitely implies "someone to tell the auteur NO THIS IS TOO MUCH SIMPLIFY IT" or similar, which results in a
by ubermonkey 3y ago
Again, <whoosh>.
The expression in popular usage definitely implies "someone to tell the auteur NO THIS IS TOO MUCH SIMPLIFY IT" or similar, which results in a tighter work.
This is a pattern we see in long-established novelists, for sure. They win awards or sell a ton, and their books get LONGER without getting BETTER. Stephen King is a great example.
The same thing is true of some filmmakers. No one is telling Marty his movies are too long. They should.
- Avshalom 3y agoYeah, I understand that it's a phrase that morons often use under the belief that editing is just deleting things, but again, editing is not actually about telling people "no". He's got an editor, he's got one of the best most respected editors in the game, she has been working with him for as long as he has been working. You disagreeing with her editing is, as objectively as anything can be in art: a you problem.
- ubermonkey 3y ago"Moron" is it? It's true what they say, you know: it's rarely a winning or charming rhetorical move to resort to ad hominem attacks when challenged.
- Avshalom 3y agohttps://www.google.im/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=it%27s+rarely+a+winning+or+charming+rhetorical+move+to+resort+to+ad+hominem+attacks+when+challenged&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&tbs= https://www.google.im/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=it%27s+rarel... they don't say that at all actually