top of page

Contemplations on Tommy Wiseau The Room -- How Flaw Turns Into Greater Success

Updated: 5 days ago


A city resembling San Francisco in the afternoon.

Ms. Tamara Moskal's Synopsis


"The Room": An eccentric Tommy Wiseau, the director and star of the movie The Room, created an unconventional masterpiece that can be considered awful or great. Although the movie is of low quality and poorly acted, the audience elevated it to cult status. Profit-driven companies try to produce the most profitable products that appeal to the standard mediocre taste, thus potentially having the largest audience, the slightest chance of failure, and the least risk. In contrast, Mr. Wiseau took a significant financial gamble by spending USD 6 million to make the original and flawed "The Room," which became an accidental cult movie and earned USD 30 million in profit. The Room's success shows how sometimes virtue and flow coexist, and taking risks can lead to unexpected rewards.

The Room: A Masterpiece of Awfulness


For years, I craved the experience of watching a truly unique movie, in a world filled with unoriginality. Created, directed, and acted in by the enigmatic Tommy Wiseau, a man whose artistic vision mindlessly ignores the standrad of quality, this film is The Room. Wiseau, in his eccentricity, managed to achieve the unthinkable: Crafting a masterpiece through sheer awfulness and laughable incompetence.



Masterpieces are traditionally associated with high production value, meritorious performances, and a masterful leading hand. Furthermore, according to the Virtusoart blog:

Although there are differentiating criteria on the specific elements involved in selecting a masterpiece, there are common qualities that every masterpiece shares. Some feelings must be evoked, whether it's curiosity, awe, or disgust. There should be style, technique, balance, and harmony.

Then, how could a film riddled with flaws shamelessly embraced, awkward dialogue, and questionable acting choices, be considered a masterpiece?


The answer lies in the paradoxical, uncanny allure of "The Room". While undeniably bad by conventional standards, it's this very "badness" that elevates it to cult classic status. In a way, awefulness has its own degree of, well, awe. Many would consider it a movie "so bad it's good".


It's a film so hilariously inept that it becomes strangely compelling. Love it or hate it, The Room  is unforgettable. It goes to present the fact that "good" and "bad" aren't always clear-cut categories. Sometimes, the line blurs, and what's terrible can also be strangely delightful.


Perception, Economy and Business in Media


A movie's quality depends not only on itself but also on the way the audience perceives it. This is why other media creations, which are largely considered subpar, may still have an enduring liking by a loyal audience of fans who still resume to enjoy them. I, for example, still enjoy rewatching bad games I grew up with, not only because of nostalgia bias, but also because I enjoyed them even back then.


The variety of tastes people have towards items and media reveal that all subjectivity is euqal and thus worthy of redemption when it comes to self-examination and self-reflection.


Good products sell because they appeal to common taste, not necessarily because they are "objectively good". Market demand is what companies seek to make a profitable product. To get the most profit to cover up their expanses, production companies depend their product on its ability to appeal to its target audience as much as possible.


And thus, people with more unique taste will remain displeased, as their spending power isn't strong enough compared to audiences with greater numbers. Of course the greater the audience demanding a certain product, the bigger their collective spending power will be. There is therefore a logical reason for the absence of avant-garde-esque products in our corporate-capitalist world: Publishing niche work is less likely to turn a profit after all the investments and allocation of resources made.



Mr. Wiseau spent 6 million to make the movie. However, despite the poor taste of the film, it turned a profit of 30 million dollars. The reason for this unexpected success was simply because "The Room" is an accidental masterpiece. It was supposed to be far better, quality wise, but its director, who also played the protagonist, had no prior experience in film-making, as it was his first.


As you can tell, he made a great risk making this film. He succeeded despite the risk in an uncanny way, and perhaps it's for the greater good that many companies don't strive to take risks like he did.


Many companies, in theory, settle for mediocrity, as that allows them to avoid conflict, avoid difficulty and avoid spending much emotional energy. All three can easily lead to fatigue/emotional exhaustion. For sure, fatigue can greatly hinder your productivity. So, those who can't or are unwilling to bear the mental toll, will refuse taking risks.



Conclusions


Tommy Wiseau The Room defies orthodox categorization. It's a film amassed with flaws, awkwardness, and questionable acting. It become a cult classic due to unintended luck and overflowing originality that discards the notion of what a masterpiece should be.


The key lies in its charm, something bad movies like the Star Wars sequel trilogy fails to apply. Its very "badness" elevates it to an unforgettable experience of delight, blurring the lines between good and bad as some polar opposites that necessarily conflict with one another.


In a way,"The Room" presents to us how flaw and virtue can exist in harmony, despite their conflictive nature. It's an example to the power of subjective taste, and how the unexpected turns that can lead to success with the ambitious desire to go all out despite the risks involved.

Thank you all for reading this article. And, by the way, here's the full movie, again.


Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback


Isn’t it true that true perfection in life comes from life’s imperfections? The things which make us different. Art is all about making mistakes. Why not apply this concept to a business? Try everything at least once and keep a record of what has and hasn’t worked.
Don’t be afraid of failures as they are one of life's most important lessons. You can never learn how to properly do anything right until you learn all the ways to do it wrong. This is what is missing from small business owners' success. Success comes from action. Who cares if something does or doesn’t work? You find out either way by trying and trying again. Just remember to be willing to take the gamble of financially making things happen.
Why do they create focus groups? So you could get people’s ideas without having to dish out all the money to find out. Marketing is very important to any business as it is what controls your company's narrative. Why many small businesses fail is because they forget about this. How is anyone supposed to come to you for a product when they aren’t aware you exist?

85 views0 comments

תגובות


Tomasio A. Rubinshtein, Philosocom's Founder & Writer

I am a philosopher from Israel, author of several books in 2 languages, and Quora's Top Writer of the year 2018. I'm also a semi-hermit who has decided to dedicate his life to writing and sharing my articles across the globe. Several podcasts on me, as well as a radio interview, have been made since my career as a writer. More information about me can be found here.

צילום מסך 2023-11-02 202752.png
bottom of page