Fast, Cheap, and Good are never all friends. They never hang out at the same time. And, when the three do link up there’s more tension and drama than the women showcased on a current reality TV show. One of them has to go. Only two of them can go together as a pair. So, when it comes to creative works ‘fast, cheap, and good are never friends’ is a truism that has stood the test of time. In pairing Fast and Cheap on a given work it usually means it won’t be Good. If it is Cheap and Good the work won’t be Fast. And, if the work is Fast and Good it won’t be Cheap.

For independent films and the big-budgeted Hollywood blockbusters this is an all too often reality for producers and their producing teams as they set off on their creative projects. Budgets may come in increments throughout production or it may be wasted due to poor management. Thus, one of the three elements mentioned above must be sacrificed. If the given project has an non-negotiable delivery time budget fallouts may force out the value of that project. When time is allotted for extending the project to the director’s and producer’s satisfaction as we see with so many independent documentary films than Good can pair up with Cheap and leave out Fast.

Now two beliefs are a given when analyzing whether Fast, Cheap, and Good can, in fact, be friends together. One is the belief that Good, a relative term, can be universally applied in this truism. The second is the belief of “time” when it comes to the element of Fast. For the former–what is good in the eyes of one may be different from another whether they are in the audience seats, the production office or on set. Who dictates what is good in the realm of art, a subject matter that is wholly dependent on subjective favor and experience? Plus, in the belief that film can be a utility to raise awareness more so than narrating a story–does good even matter in the end? Good, here, I would define as a work that can be appreciated as a memorable piece. Short of hailing the work as a classic I define Good as whether it did its job to influence and inspire and entertain in a congenial way. If one or more people forget a work too quickly and then move onto something else then it is fair to say that the given work is not good. Good must stand on its own merit and production value by delivering a positive and lasting mark through its given mode of expression (film, writing, music, etc.). I simplify good in creative works as not being fast food–something we see all too often in this new digital landscape of constant V.O.D. streaming. In regard to time I am just as simple with that understanding as with the Good element. Time is whether enough depth of measured space in duration allows for the best delivery by the producer and producing team. In other words, when a director and producer has enough time to deliver a work to the best of their ability than the given work is not fast. No rushing or forced rushes occur when producers are allowed to work free of time constraints. This measure of time can be anything from several years to a few months. In pairing Fast and Good together to leave out Cheap than time here is pushed forward to a very expensive proposition which compels the best of the best to accomplish simultaneously to reach deliverable dates. Fast and Good usually entails a litany of people on hand delivering their portion of a given work in a very tight schedule for the highest production value possible. One can only image how expensive that can be.

Far too often we see ambitious production heads and network execs rush order a given work or works from concept to completion. This ambition pities Fast, Cheap, and Good from a productive, valuable connection and limits the elements to embrace one another collectively. In this era of high-demand, video on demand–Fast, Cheap, and Good constantly clash in the race for the next big splash. Netflix’s library of content continues at a stellar pace but often leaves viewers with a large catalog of filler in each of their categories of shows and films to watch. Traditional television stations are still operating with an old business model of package deals of slated, episodic programming. This with tight deadlines compromises the relationship of Fast, Cheap, and Good. Even young, aspiring filmmakers want to carve their place in the splintered world of digital entertainment. Going the way of limited budgets with a rush to deliver and disseminate to their enthusiastic audiences Good gets back-burned or at least marginalized for a given work in the placement of Fast and Cheap. The motivation obviously is to slow down a bit.

However one wants to go out and create, sacrifices are indeed made. If a creative work along the way reaches a top milestone then Fast, Cheap, and Good are interchangeable in pairs but not in threes. Certainly in that case–two’s a company and three’s a crowd.