Hollywood Production

I don't like the heroine, she's so mean. All other settings are fine. Even if the heroine is original and not involved in the entertainment industry, she is better than Scarlett. Scarlett, the heroine, has been particularly unlikeable from the moment she appeared. So I don't understand why the author chose her as the heroine for Mao? Do men naturally like bitchy women?

In the first chapter of the game, he persuaded him to quit the new book tour, saying that he had been reborn for 21 years and still accomplished nothing. In the first 21 years, he was faced with so many prophetic opportunities that he could not seize and accomplished nothing. How could he succeed in his career when things get harder in the future? What a stupid setting.

First of all, I traveled back twenty years with no preparation, no funds, and the script was now written. I went to the crew to film, and I filmed more than a dozen characters and still had no name, even though there were people in the background. I wanted to ask what I was doing after traveling back twenty years? It would be more reasonable to just wait for death and wait for the plot to begin. It would be more reasonable to just set the time travel to be twenty years old. Secondly, Natalie, purely for the sake of blackness, gave her first time to the protagonist, and the protagonist also accepted it. Is it too much to want to change roles? And this is because the protagonist had an idol plot before, and when Natalie gave, Natalie did not use moral kidnapping, coercion, or any other unfavorable practices. As a result, the protagonist accepted the benefits and did nothing, according to the original words of the Cannes episode in the book (Natalie: I handed over my most precious thing, but did not get the return I deserved). Before this, Natalie also approached the protagonist and expressed that she wanted a role, but the protagonist refused to give it and pretended not to see it. This is because everyone is angry. Isn't it normal for Natalie to give the protagonist a little stumbling block? Then the protagonist said no, and the overall attitude was that I can only mess with you, and I can only accept the benefits and do nothing, but you can't resist at all. If you resist, I will punish you, really 6. Don't you think Natalie's character in the end is inconsistent? Let's not talk about whether we are smart or not. In front of the protagonist, she has a transactional attitude. The first doi is also the last time. She is very chaste and fierce. Then it comes to the part of [Black Swan], when a third party interferes in other people's feelings and robs Black Swan's choreography director (Benjamin) or something. In order to increase the chance of winning, he also planned to have a child with Benjamin while Benjamin was still in a relationship with another woman. He wanted to tie Benjamin to himself through pregnancy and gain sympathy points. Author, can you see for yourself whether the two characters before and after are the same? Isn't the protagonist's status far superior to that of Benjamin? According to the latter character, wouldn't it be nice to be with the protagonist from the beginning? Can you be a third party, but can't you accept the protagonist? And the article also said that she is very shrewd and knows what she wants. Doesn't the protagonist give her much more help than Benjamin? And the protagonist has made it clear that he likes Natalie very much, and has also admitted that he has an idol plot. However, in the article, Natalie did not choose the protagonist, but first became the mistress and the choreographer of the crew. Does this conform to the basic setting of the character's high IQ, shrewdness and sobriety? Isn't it just black for the sake of being black?

Why does the author force the protagonist not to speak Chinese? It makes me feel uncomfortable every time I write about the Chinese characters. Also, since the author has opened the cheat code but does not want to use the cheat card, the writing is too contradictory. When was 911 even forgotten? Some things will be remembered for a lifetime, let alone 20 years ago, let alone such a big event

I feel like the choice of Scarlett as the female lead was a big mistake.

The author of this article actually writes very fluently, but it seems that there are many shortcomings that hinder the improvement of performance. Tell me what time! First of all, the understanding of business seems to be very in-depth, but there are many common sense mistakes. The author probably does not understand how valuable the control of a company is. You have also repeatedly mentioned in the article that it is inexplicable to give up control in exchange for a few points of equity. Still smug. In addition, you can check the financial reports of Time Warner and Warner Bros. In 2008, the Time Warner Group, including TV, Internet, media, and movies, together had a net profit of less than 3 billion. It was still a profit on the balance sheet, and its cash flow was still very poor. You probably don't understand the value of cash flow. Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Transformers, Underworld, Marvel, DC, The Hobbit, several series are released every year, and they are all blockbuster movies. Not to mention that you also own Pixar, which makes a total profit of billions every year. How many points can you package it for? Are you going to find out how much Pixar sold to Disney? Secondly, I have made too many mistakes made by the film critics in your book. I have never made a movie, so what I say is clear and logical. I can just make it up based on hearsay. It is relatively consistent with basic logic and it will go smoothly, right? There is a formula for being a vase in commercial movies. You must have a hot body and good looks. Hollywood actresses cannot make it in commercial movies so they go to the independent circle to climb the popular sofa. You just did the opposite and stuffed a bunch of literary young female campus idols and youth idols into commercial movies. To be in shape but not in shape, to be in good looks but not to have looks. Check out more information and make sure it is in line with the public's aesthetics. Don't be unique and imitate film critics. Finally, in addition to submitting transcripts and writing film reviews, don't write the success or failure of the film as a victory outside the market. You can write, but there is too much to write.

9 Votes in a row +38. In fact, what I like most is the filming process of the film. This is the most attractive part of this book. Many other novels downplay this part and it looks very false! [Fn=2_3]

After reading the previous point, it was a bit poisonous Pig's mother mortgaged the house to give tens of millions to Pig's feet so that Pig's feet could make a movie. However, Pig's feet had no previous experience in directing movies. It does not count in the past life. Mother's love? There is nothing good to do with this 1,000,000+. Also, before, a newbie from Pig's Foot was asking for tens of millions of investments all over the world with an average script. This is nonsense. Who the hell will invest in you? The start is too vicious. Yy There should be some limits.

I couldn't stand it for the first three chapters. The protagonist was reborn 20 years ago and has always had the goal of becoming a director. However, he graduated from the academy with nothing. The movie script was copied from the memories of his previous life. So what are your 20 years of preparation? Why do you want to be a director? To make money and power women? No logic

The logic at the beginning is very strange. A reborn person returned to the United States in the 1970s. It took him 20 years to graduate from school and "start from scratch". He had no money to make the first movie. This is no longer as simple as a logic explosion. Even those who have only watched a little bit of Forrest Gump know that back in the 1980s, just buying Apple stocks made you rich, but the protagonist achieved nothing. There is obviously something wrong with the setting here. It is better to set it to directly travel to a 20-year-old graduate. In addition, the protagonist's motivation for becoming a director is also very strange. If he wants to make money, it is obviously a bad idea to become a director himself. It is a normal choice for a normal person to directly become an investor and fight in the financial market. If we say that he is pursuing his film ideal, he starts off by plagiarizing all kinds of things from his previous life, and it doesn't look like he has his own artistic pursuits. If he wanted to enter Vanity Fair, in fact, just like the one who made money, he had inexplicably chosen a super long road in the opposite direction, making it puzzling for people to understand his choice. There are a lot of problems at the beginning, which makes the protagonist's setting very awkward. There are too many illogical places in the author's setting that I can't think about in detail.