Pacts with Impact

In this article we examine the impact of “pacts” on the media. Pacts are when studios sign players to a contract. While Wasko uses production companies as an example we know actors also sign movie deals with studios as well as writers ad directors. In my own opinion going into a pact is somewhat of a sellout. Now, I understand everyone needs to make a living but pacts lead to control over media texts, where in most cases profit is the goal not artistic value. By producers going into pacts with big studio companies, it almost guarantees they will receive financing (because they most likely a big name to get signed to a contract in the first place). But by doing so they give away creative rights to the studio who has investors they need to keep happy.

Other that the studios and big producers, I do not see anyone benefiting from pacts. This may sound cynical but there is a reason I haven’t seen a movie since the summer. Studios want a movie that will make a splash, with lots of marketing potential. This means they want their producers making films that can be made into sequels. By producers signing these contracts, studios can tell them which movies they should go after. Edgy content by the writers is often re-wrote in fear of insulting audience members or that they may not understand it and thus not like the movie. Audiences loose because we are inundated with the same simplistic movies and Michal Bay’s over the top special effects. Lastly, to go back to the idea of the starving artist, new producers have trouble breaking into the field because studios already have producers under contract. This again blocks new ideas from permeating the media world.