Why the Film Industry Hasn't Been Disrupted Yet, Part 5
It&#x27;s a multi-tiered problem with each one with its own complexities. I don&#x27;t want to write a long story now, but I want to emphasise one and one thing only.<p>If you want to disrupt film and&#x2F;or tv industry then you have to disrupt people, not technology (by much). It&#x27;s a people problem.<p>It takes a lot of people in a collaborative manner to work on a product like that, with each person being skilled and expensive. You need a lot of people like that for a long time. You also need wood, nails, paint, cars, space, energy... lots of those in order to build sets. And someone to imagine them and someone to design them.<p>Having a fancy camera, grip, lenses is a tiny tiny proportion of any reasonable-sized budget. Most of the money goes to people and towards materials, rentals and space for sets.<p>It&#x27;s a lot of money too, if you want to make something reasonable. Not everything can be made on a small budget with innovative story. Some products can, but not majority.<p>What it means is that you need a lot of cash, and for that you need investors (or deep pockets and then you don&#x27;t care, maybe). With investors there are expectations of return on investment. And with that you&#x27;re in the realm of distribution.. and then real complexities come forward.<p>You can&#x27;t expect to raise anything moderate in crowd-funding for these types of products. It&#x27;s too much for the level where that is now.<p>Note: I work in this industry. I have or have access to free state-of-the-art cameras, grip, lenses, even studio facilities and more, yet I can&#x27;t make a movie just like that. I still need to pay lots of people to do their job and pay the materials for (at least some) sets or set dressing.<p>It&#x27;s a people problem. They need to eat and pay bills and they don&#x27;t care (much) about your grand vision if you&#x27;re not paying.