And the vast overwhelming majority of them are not being paid comparably to jobs that require similar workloads and levels of education, due to the "vocational awe" of working on a movie. This is so pervasive in the arts that it's been talked about for decades, but it's not a problem our economy seems equipped to solve: Since people like working on art projects, people will often line up to do so even when conditions and pay don't economically square with their effort. To benefit from this vocational awe and then scrap the project is itself a moral injury to those workers
> but it's not a problem our economy seems equipped to solve
It's not a problem at all in my opinion.
> Since people like working on art projects, people will often line up to do so even when conditions and pay don't economically square with their effort.
The pay has only to be accepted to be fair. You're free to start your own production company that pays more "fairly" but you'll find yourself with fewer opportunities to give people this "awe" than the company that can finance more projects.
> To benefit from this vocational awe
Warner Bros. is losing money by scrapping the movie, how are they benefiting in this case?
