When I was starting my career, my first theater mentor was producing a new play. He hired a famous director, but they quickly had a disagreement that led to a broken working relationship. At the time, I struggled to understand the roles of each, so I asked my mentor to explain. He responded in a creative and practical way: “Imagine you are having a birthday party,” he said. “The producer is the one who organizes everything—buys the cake, the balloons, the decorations, the food, the glasses, the drinks, and everything needed to make the party a success… then the director arrives and enjoys the party, because it’s his party.”
Over the years, I’ve thought a lot about that definition, and I’ve come to the conclusion that while the director has a vision, it is the producer who makes that vision possible by gathering all the physical elements to transform those ideas into a palpable reality.
So, who really has control of the movie in this case?
In Hollywood, the answer seems clear to me: when the Oscar for Best Picture is awarded, it’s the producer who gives the speech. That’s all the evidence I need to make my case.
In the glitzy world of Hollywood, the director is often seen as the mastermind behind a film, the one who shapes the narrative and brings the story to life. However, in reality, the balance of power has been shifting for decades. Today, producers, particularly those who double as actors, are increasingly taking the reins, sometimes overshadowing the director’s vision. This dynamic is currently on display in the rumored feud between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, surrounding the film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s “It Ends With Us”. The tension between the two highlights how a producer’s influence can sometimes eclipse the director’s creative control.
The Rise of the Actor-Producer
Justin Baldoni, who optioned “It Ends With Us” in 2019 with the intent to direct, found himself stepping into the role of Ryle Kincaid after author Colleen Hoover encouraged him to do so. His initial excitement for the project was palpable; he saw the film as a chance to tell a deeply emotional story that resonated with his own experiences. However, when Blake Lively joined the project as both the lead actress and an executive producer, the dynamics began to shift.
As production progressed, it became clear that Lively was not just another actor on set; her role as a producer gave her significant influence over key creative decisions. One of the most notable examples of this was her insistence on keeping Lana Del Rey’s “Cherry” in the film, despite resistance from others involved in the project. Lively’s determination to retain the song speaks to the broader issue of how producers can steer the direction of a film, sometimes against the director’s original vision.
Baldoni himself has acknowledged the collaborative nature of filmmaking, stating that he believes in a “best idea wins” approach. However, this openness can sometimes lead to a dilution of the director’s control, as was the case with *It Ends With Us*. Lively’s involvement and her creative contributions, while undoubtedly valuable, highlight the precarious balance that directors must navigate when working with powerful producers.
The Power Struggle in Hollywood
The situation between Baldoni and Lively is not unique in Hollywood. There have been several instances where producers, especially those who are also part of the cast, have exerted significant control over a film, leading to creative clashes with the director.
One of the most infamous examples is the 1993 film “The Nightmare Before Christmas”. Although Tim Burton is often credited with the film, it was actually directed by Henry Selick. However, Burton’s influence as the producer and creator of the original story was so strong that many consider it “Tim Burton’s *The Nightmare Before Christmas*.” Selick later expressed frustration that his role was overshadowed by Burton’s more prominent name, despite being the one who brought the film to life on screen.
Another example is the 1990 film “Dick Tracy”, where Warren Beatty served as both the lead actor and producer. Beatty’s influence over the film was so extensive that he essentially took over the directing duties from the official director, leading to a film that bore his distinct style but at the cost of creative conflict behind the scenes.
The Changing Landscape of Filmmaking
The tension between directors and producers is not a new phenomenon, but the rise of the actor-producer has added a new layer to this dynamic. In today’s Hollywood, where many actors are also taking on producing roles, directors must navigate increasingly complex power structures. While collaboration is essential in filmmaking, the balance of power can easily tip in favor of those who hold both creative and financial stakes in a project.
In the case of “It Ends With Us”, the rumored feud between Baldoni and Lively serves as a reminder of the challenges directors face in maintaining control over their films. As producers like Lively continue to wield significant influence, it becomes clear that the director’s role, while still central, is not as singularly powerful as it once was. Instead, filmmaking is becoming more of a collaborative, and sometimes contentious, process where multiple voices vie for creative control.
This is the principal reason why directors who don’t want to give away control of their visions often choose to remain as far away as they can from the Hollywood industry, building their careers almost entirely in independent cinema. More control… but much less money and recognition. Which choice would you make?
Pedro Cohen
Audiovisual Coach
Get more articles like this.
Join our Newsletter!
