How would she feel if the writers suddenly jumped in to give her acting directions?
Sorry, I don't care how "protective of the character" you are, you are not a writer, period. And you signed a contract, that I'm 100% sure didn't say you got to do your own rewrites. And if it did, it would have stated that this happens BEFORE the day of the shoot.
She essentially held the production hostage by being a little primadonna. Not OK.
I liked the show, and she was great in it, but sorry, as a writer, I hope she loses gigs over this. And we'll never know how much better the show may have been, had she not interfered with REAL writers, doing their job.

Him making gobs of money doing this, AND him having to mortgage his house to finance the latest ones, don't jibe. If this was working for him, he'd be ahead, NOT having to mortgage his house. Just comparing "shooting budget vs gross" is irrelevant. There are a lot more expenses when you distribute a film, than just what it cost to get it 'in the can'.

Great job guys, well done.
My criticism is to the writer of the article. Yet ANOTHER absurd, hyperbolic, clickbait headline that has nothing to do with anything. You're insinuating that these guys were ABLE to quit their day jobs, - i.e. make a living off this short film, which is clearly total made up BS. Stop acting like the Kardashians or Alex Jones with the nonsense. We just want reality and facts.
They haven't made any money from this short, they lost money... just like the rest of us who have made short films.

Great article. However, using Sweeney, a young, successful, multi-millionaire hot girl who can hire photographers to follow her around taking provocative pictures of herself to up her fee (which she obviously does, smartly so) as an example is absurd.
Try using me - an older, straight white guy who's won almost 170 writing awards, who can't get anyone to read my stuff, because I'm not "BIPOC" enough.

Sorry, I think the whole thing is silly. First off, what qualifies someone to be an 'intimacy coordinator?" Nothing.
These actresses are over 18. They're adults. They can vote, drive, run for office, fly an airplane, etc. But when it comes to sex, we're supposed to treat all women as children who are absolutely incapable of saying "I don't want to do that." (We're not talking about rape or sexual assault situations here).
The fact that most of those complaining have made millions of dollars and built their careers based someone on being really sexy onscreen and CONSENTING to taking the parts and doing the performances takes a lot of credibility away from their complaints.
A good 'vintage' example is Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct.
1. She first said she had no idea her privates were going to show up in the film (in spite of the camera at knee level with at least a 500watt light shining directly up her dress)
2. Years later, she claimed it was all her idea.
3. Years after that, she went back to saying she had no idea and was exploited.

The formula is:
1. When you're a nobody, get naked.
2. When your acting craft has improved and you've become a big star, claim that you were exploited and you had no say in the matter (even though you were an adult).

It's interesting that Amanda Seyfried is STILL parading around in her underwear in photos and movies. She's not 19 anymore, she's 37.

Good cinema technique is good cinema technique. If you think you're going to just happen upon being better than Hitchcock was, I'm sorry to tell you, but you are self-deluded. And a lot of the crap we see today is evidence that a lot of people feel as you do, unfortunately.