I thought the article was clear on this point. The director was paid 5% of net. Net was negative -- the director got shafted.
The directors I know are unlikely getting shafted by this method, as their portfolios consist of mainly live births, cattle auctions, and high school sports. Still Art Institute graduates though.
No, the article wasn't clear on the point. It gave an example of one specific director, Scott Derrickson, getting shafted. No offense to Scott, but as a casual movie watcher, I haven't heard of him. And if casual movie watchers haven't heard of him, he can be easily replaced, and therefore easily shafted.
