I agree, in part. If you have a proven track record then you should be allowed to experiment and Apatow certainly did here. The film itself seems very marmite. I was recommended the film by one friend and told to never bother watching it by another. I agreed with the latter friend’s assessment.

I think the main issue with this model is now the buy in cost and the nepotism. The easiest route into the industry is off the back of someone else…. So while Judd Apatow and his wife may have earned their place in the industry, the part for his daughter and her best friend weren’t a product of that. She was quite good, but for every Iris Apatow and Galen Hopper the door closes on twenty other young actors, some of whom might be Oscar winning material. Their inability to even be seen for the part doesn’t match their effort or skill.

And the other issue is the buy in cost for creative industry. It’s not cheap to be able to get the equipment or find the time to make films. There were plenty of plucky young directions back in the 1960s and 1970s who emerged relatively cheaply, with studios taking risks on lesser known books with authors like Peter Benchley. James Cameron’s chance of getting Terminator made in the modern system are next to zero. Spielberg might get Jaws away but then he’d be caught waiting for a marvel slot.

It’s not cheap and it’s not easy to get into the industry…. One which prides itself on being progressive, then wonders why it’s a sort of race/class hegemony most of the time.