# What does "creative differences" usually mean?



## Morrus (Sep 12, 2013)

It's an often used reason for why an actor leaves a movie.  But it sounds like codespeak for something to me.  Does it usually mean that the actor and the director had a fight and fell out?  Or that the actor was fired? Or that the director whanted the actor to do something not in his contract?  What's the usual usage of the term?


----------



## PigKnight (Sep 12, 2013)

When the actor (or director, or investors) is being an ass and everyone else is like "Nope. Not dealing with this."


----------



## Janx (Sep 12, 2013)

Kind of like when top executives quit in order to "spend more time with family"

Or when a senior person (manager, director, VP) is moved to a new position of working on Special Projects with no staff under them.  this is always the key word for, we're going to lay him off in the next round if he doesn't quit.

I think these are really just cover phrases to gloss over the specific reason the person is leaving.  Some might say it's to save face  (we found he was forking the photocopier, and we don't cotton to human-appliance relationships in the workplace).


----------



## billd91 (Sep 12, 2013)

It could actually be creative differences such as the actor has one vision for a particular role and the director has another and they're at loggerheads. But I think that it more often is a catch-all so that everyone can save face over someone being fired or quitting from a picture without airing the dirty laundry which could range from being pricks to each other to being pricks to the crew, showing up to work in a drug-induced stupor, or having sex on the service table with the catered food.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Sep 12, 2013)

All the above - 

It is when the director realizes he should have, had more control over casting.  
It is when an Actor realizes he does not have the range required by the director. 
It is when a producer regrets the casting couch.   
It is when a somebody thinks they have power because of who they are.


----------



## JediSoth (Sep 12, 2013)

I used to think it was codespeak for "We found out we hate each others guts, can't agree on a thing, and think each other should die in a fire, so we're calling it quits."

Then I had "creative differences" with an artist I'd hired to do the cover for my latest novel. I wanted an exterior scene and his specialty was people. I wanted to showcase the setting more on this cover and de-emphasize the characters. He did a couple of sketches that were not bad, but he expressed reservations about being able to do what I wanted to the standard of quality we both expected. We went back and forth (quite amicably) for a couple of weeks before I decided that I also needed to spend less money on my cover art. When I told him, he was relieved, because although his sketches were good, he had zero confidence in his ability to produce art like I wanted in a final form. We parted ways, remained friends, and I found someone else who was a fraction of the cost who gave me the type of cover that I wanted (which was not all that different from one of his sketches). He told me it was an awesome cover and he was happy I found someone who could give me an environment-based piece of art.

I think "Creative Differences" can be codespeak, but now I know it is not always.


----------



## mattcolville (Sep 12, 2013)

Morrus said:


> It's an often used reason for why an actor leaves a movie.  But it sounds like codespeak for something to me.  Does it usually mean that the actor and the director had a fight and fell out?  Or that the actor was fired? Or that the director whanted the actor to do something not in his contract?  What's the usual usage of the term?




Films, like games, are all about money and power. Control over the final product. When someone leaves a project because of creative differences, it often means they didn't have enough power to exert the control they wanted to. 

There are super dramatic exits and fights, but those fights happen because one party wanted to exert control, but didn't have the power, and wasn't willing to compromise.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 12, 2013)

I think it's generally code for "because of stuff we don't want to talk about in public". And as such, it can cover pretty much any of a wide variety of reasons why people might no longer be able to work together. I don't think it's code for any one specific situation.


----------



## Wild Gazebo (Sep 13, 2013)

It is not meant to be specific.  People in the know will know and, respond in kind by the way they choose to spend their money in the future.  But, there is no way any sensible person will itemize grievances in business that is open to the public:  because it can affect the bottom line.  And that is it...there is not a reasonable way you can judge whose bottom line it will reflect the most, so you make a statement of neutrality and site no specific differences.


----------



## EscherEnigma (Sep 13, 2013)

Sometimes it's just "when I accepted this role, you guys didn't tell me I was going to play a cereal rapist.  I thought you said serial rapist.  That?  I can do.  I can be creepy as [censored for sensitive grandmothers].  But... cereal rapist?  I don't... I don't even know what to do there.  It's just... how do you leer at a bowl of funny-shaped grains?  I just... I can't do this man!  I can't handle the stress!"

But mostly I figure it's not my business.  Literally.  I'm not in the business of casting, acting, directing, or in any way that knowing what "creative differences" actually meant would be at all relevant to my monetarily-interested endeavors, so as far as I'm concerned if no one involved cares enough to air the laundry, it's above my pay grade to speculate.

That said, when "creative differences" translates to "they wouldn't let us show Kate's wedding" and "we think super-heroes getting married is stupid, and further, you're stupid"... well, it's not wrong to call it that... but the translation, as revealed by those involved, is much more informative.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Sep 13, 2013)

Often, there is a knife fight involved....


----------



## PigKnight (Sep 13, 2013)

TarionzCousin said:


> Often, there is a knife fight involved....




So basically this?
[video=youtube;CBhr2yPOWMQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBhr2yPOWMQ[/video]


----------



## LostSoul (Sep 14, 2013)

I always think...

Drugs.


----------



## MBJwally (Sep 15, 2013)

In my experience, creative differences can be as small as the color of a design or fundamental game rules.


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews (Sep 16, 2013)

EscherEnigma said:


> ...you guys didn't tell me I was going to play a cereal rapist.  I thought you said serial rapist.




Who frosted these flakes?

Mostly I believe "creative differences" is about personality conflicts.


----------



## EscherEnigma (Sep 17, 2013)

Grumpy RPG Reviews said:


> Who frosted these flakes?



Ah, the ol' "serial killer at the insane asylum who kills people by freezing them with liquid nitrogen" gag.

Always hilarious.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 17, 2013)

Some interesting answers. I was prompted to ask this after I read that Benedict Cumberbatch had left a project for that reason. Though speculation seems to be that it's because he's been offered a part in Star Wars. If that's the case, it seems the phrase masks what are probably some complex contract exiting negotiations.


----------



## DesOps (Sep 17, 2013)

It is often because there was a personal conflict (eg, someone saying something hurtful and rude repeatedly just out of spite) between people. Think of it like the explanation "we are taking our company in a new direction" for being fired.

It sometimes also means that the actor, designer etc actually does dislike the way a project is going so much that they no longer wish to be associated with it for fear of it tarnishing their reputation. 
See: World War Z.


----------

