From all accounts, it still sounds like making 'Rocky' was a risky move. I thought it was interesting that the studio expected 'New York, New York' to be a hit and for its profits to subsidize the making of 'Rocky'. In the end, 'New York, New York' flopped, and, of course, 'Rocky' brought in millions. Picking winners is a hard thing to do.
Picking winning movies is apparently pretty much impossible. That was the whole point of the old Studio System; it allowed the movie makers to limit risk.
The government broke up the studio system and now they limit risk by bilking foreign investors of capital, from what I gather.
Why aren't there laws against lying? Why isn't this fraud or false advertising? Why are people able to lie to sell? What would the world be like if lying was a criminal act without an oath required? Why is it okay to lie outside the courtroom, but not inside it?
Why did you put protect in scare quotes? Miep Gies protected the Franks by lying to the Gestapo. OK, they were the government, but you could protect someone by telling the killer that he's not home. Or do you disagree? So yes, an inability to receive honesty is something we want to protect.
The interesting part is the video about Sylvester Stallone's perserverance for becoming an actor. Here's a summary:
* Knew without a doubt he wanted to be an actor. People told him "you look stupid." He was thrown out of agent's offices over 1500 times.
* Got his first job sitting in the office of an agent overnight. Played a thug that beats someone up for 20 seconds.
* Didn't have any money, wife wanted him to get a job, but he wouldn't because "I knew that the only way I would make it was if it was my only choice."
* Went to the public library one day because it was warm (didn't have money for heat). Started reading an Edgar Allen Poe book, which inspired him to become a writer.
* Wrote a bunch of screenplays, still broke. Finally sold one for $100.
* Was so broke, he sold his wife's jewelry. That was the end of their relationship.
* Couldn't afford to feed his dog, so he sold his dog - his best friend - for $25.
Later that night saw a boxing match and was inspired to write Rocky.
* Was told the screenplay was "stupid, sappy, etc." Wrote down all of those things
and read them the night Rocky won an Oscar.
* Was eventually offered $125k for his script. But he demanded to star in it. Eventually after refusing even more money, they agree to pay him $35k and let him play Rocky.
* Desperately wanted his dog back. Bought his dog back for $15k and a part in Rocky (for the guy he bought it back from).
The Hollywood Today post seems to cast all of that in doubt. And now I wonder how much of that interview in Writer's Digest that I cite below was true too. People like true underdog stories. Fake underdog stories are simply despicable.
In Stallone's case, persistence led to a great product that he eventually sold. If you already have a great product, persistence may be a signal to customers or investors that you are serious. If you haven't built anything before or have only been at it for a little while, people simply won't believe you -- and why should they? How can you prove that you are serious about your venture?
The persistence is sometimes about patience. My grandmother tells me frequently, "Every business man I know says it took him 5 years to build his business." It takes 5 years, because anything less than that isn't significant in the minds of customers. You need a track record. You need to prove your belief in yourself through your commitment to your ideas.
If you can't convince yourself that your idea is great, why should someone else believe it is great enough to buy and trust to exist for another year or two? If it's existed for 5 years, it'll probably exist another one year, then two more and eventually, it's just always around.
Of course this doesn't matter as much for a simple product that you buy and go, but with enterprise products or products where the customer is establishing a relationship with you, it's important to prove the stability and viability of that relationship.
