Those stuffy "film industry" types

I have now had several people reply, but once they find out the format I am shooting in, decide to pass on the project. Some of these people have worked on features here in BC, and also done short film (but on 16mm). Regular (not digital) video and Super 8 just don't seem good enough for these film snobs.

So, I guess my question is...has anyone had a similar experience? And what did you do to find crew?

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

-Lil' Scorcese

------------------

Eightfold Films

-Spock

An XL-1 what?

-Lil' Scorcese

------------------

Eightfold Films

1. They're not going to get paid, or stand to make anything off of ancillaries, or probably even get a good meal out of it. Whether or not this is true, there's the feeling that if you can't afford a 16mm or DV camera, then you can't afford them.

2. Since regular video and Super8 are still looked upon pretty disfavorably by festivals, studios, broadcasters, etc. then the film will be going nowhere, and thus, neither will their careers by helping you out.

With low budget / no budget (especially student films), it's unrealistic to think that the project is going to garner high acclaim at a festival. After all, that not why I make films. It is about the journey, not the destination and flashy prizes waiting at the end of it. If it happens, it happens. And I don't agree that festivals shun regular video or Super 8. I'm not sure what kind of
festivals you're entering Red 5, but the one's I've entered in the past are Super 8 and video friendly, and judge primarily on content as opposed to format.

That in mind, most people I've come in contact with are just glad to be part of a creative process like filmmaking. Despite the format. The gold digging people who use it for career gain are usually the first to look down on small films (and their formats), because they know that the film will never elevate beyond certain festival curcuits. Hence, will not "get them anywhere", and not fit into their self serving agenda.

So getting back to my point, with all the self serving folks looking to make a name for themselves in the film industry, there does exist beyond them, a small faction of people looking to do anything, just to gain experience and be part of a collaborative effort. These folks are my "Holy Grail". I know they exist, as I've met a few. (But damn if I can find them now that I need them!!!!)

-Lil' Scorcese

------------------

Eightfold Films

------------------
-Vu Nguyen
vu972@movie-maker.net

quote:

---

**** Edited a bit of "hate" out here **** I Don't really like that kind of thing on likeastory. Save that for usenet
Check the rules at http://www.likeastory.com/boards/cgi/Ultimate.cgi?action=agree
Webmaster

---

Dont pay any attention to those nihilists. Your trying to make art when they're trying to make dollar signs appear in their eyes. Ka ching, ka ching.

Thats what the garagefilmmaking board is there for. To get away from those elitists.

"Nobody wants to waste their time for no money or profit."

Movies lover are you a ferengi?

-Spock

To you, I say this..."opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one!". And to further that, let me ask you, isn't it the message, not the medium, that is ultimately important? Or are you so wrapped up in pursuit of the almighty dollar, that you've forgotten that fact. I'm by no means expecting anyone to work free, (and to expect to be paid for a low budget / no budget film is just lame; sometimes the experience is enough for most folks) but when you consider being part of a film, and the collaborative effort "work", you might as well take a business course, and try to become a "suit" not an artist in the film field. The bottom line ($$$) is not that important to everyone.

To Big Al, what leads you to beleive that I don't have a demo reel and have never done this before?

To thx-1138, thanks (as always) for your input. Well said, and kudos for your reply.
Couldn't have said any of it better myself.

Spock, thanks for the input. I'll look more into that.

'Nuf said.

-Lil' Scorcese

------------------

Eightfold Films

Well, the fact is obvious that I am a ****, doing this for, dare I say it....... MONEY!!! Heaven forbid I should make a living doing what I worked so hard for so many years learning on my own without begrudging the success of others who did make it, using the pretense that I was the artist and THEY were the money grubbing *****s. Nope, never spat a drop of bile like that. Now if you'll excuse me, my hot-tub, Margarita, and several large breasted, vacuous women are calling me to snort cocaine off their buxom torso's whilst cackling about the empty "art" we foist off upon the millions

Hollywood Al

Is it accepting cash money that makes you a sell-out? Or is it comprimising your artistic integrity for cash, *****s, houses and cars that does? Anyone seeing a "Peter Dragon" scumbag producer, comparison here?

-Lil' Scorcese

PS- What lead you to assume that I was begruding those who made it, in my original post? Until talking to you, I hadn't really put a lot of thought into the begrudging department. These folks I am talking about, haven't made it yet, but they sure talk like they have. I wasn't begruding their making it, it was more their uncalled for elitist attitudes. But now I see, that the attitude blossoms with success! Thanks for the insight!

Check the rules at http://www.likeastory.com/boards/cgi/Ultimate.cgi?action=agree

Yet, I believe that some related topics should be discussed:
For Example:
1. Does the "Professional" have an aesthetic obligation/duty to dance with the "amateur (as in for the love of it) Muses" once and a while? I believe he does.
2. What "charms" does the startup "amateur" need to display to get the Pro to the dance?
(ie passion, show of talent in working with even a limited medium), I believe the amateur needs to at least be willing to impress/entice a pro by some artistic non monetary means.

------------------
Webmaster Dale
(Administrator for Likeastory Forums.)

My original point was... there are some people out there with experience who tend to look down their noses at those without (or with little), when really they should be looking to help struggling filmmakers, not passing harsh judgment on what they don't know/have. Not much can be done about that, granted. What I personally can do without is their holyier than thou attitudes.

The people I posted about being "film snobs" only had experience in 16mm film (and not much at that) and worked on features as a PA (picking up garbage, directing traffic, twiddling their thumbs) or Script Supervisor. Hardly jobs to qualify them to look down at a struggling filmmaker.

In a perfect world, I would have a 35mm Arriflex camera (or digital video camera), all the sound equipment money could rent, be able to pay crew according to scale and have a catering spread standing by. In reality, all I can offer potential crew people at this stage is experience, a credit in the film, and the chance to offer their respective talents to help create a meaningful final product.

I don't think that I'm being too unreasonable. Do you?

You are right. Shameful behaviour on my part. I apologize. I got sucked into the moment.

I'm unsure how the topic got steered towards the whole argument of what constitutes a professional, but like I just posted above, the people I was speaking of and concerned with in my dealings had a little more experience than I, and were passing themselves off, hastily, as "professionals". Working on a professional film set, in a entry level position no less, hardly qualifies one to pass themselves off as a "professional".

Because myself and my cast and crew had access to lesser equipment than they were used to using, this caused the automatic assumption on their parts, that we didn't know what we were doing, and weren't worth the time. Not even worth a look at my synopsis or fact sheet, to see what the story had to offer.

In response to that, I still have to say I live by the addage "the message, not the medium".

Lil scorcese, dont be apologizing, it was me who started the whole thing.

Sorry webmaster dale I didnt mean to spread so much hate and kill the fun, but some people just bring that out in me. I dont think those things you mentioned will be discussed because this thread probably died shortly after this sentence.

Anyways let just all kiss and makeout....I mean up.

I am game to keep this thread going (and possibly obligated as I started this whole mess) and maybe discuss some of the points Webmaster Dale brought forward.I think we're all made up at this point, and ready for some civilized discussion. Anyone else game? Big Al? Thx-1138?

Oh, and Thx, I was simply apologizing a few replies back because I got wrapped up in the whole finger-pointin', name-callin', intelligence-insultin', livlihood-attackin' mess. Peer pressure's a Mo'fo ain't it?

-Lil' Scorcese

"1. Does the "Professional" have an aesthetic obligation/duty to dance with the "amateur (as in for the love of it) Muses" once and a while? I believe he[sic] does."

Agreed. A professional does have a responsibility to pass on the skills she's acquired and often does so without responding to posts on websites or local arts organizations. Many of us stay away from local arts organizations because most of the people hanging out there are more interested in being artsy than in making movies.

Which leads to why some people throw a hurdle in the way of someone shooting on hi-8 or Super-8 (or public access or whatever). When you ask them to work for free, you're asking them to commit their time, skill, and often equipment, to a project.

Before we can do that, we want to know about your, the producer's, commitment. Commitment often takes the form of cash. If you've got the equipment and the stock, you've invested yourself in the form of money into your own project.

Why do you think people ask my least favorite question: "What's your budget?" It's not just so they know their paychecks won't bounce. It's so they have a quick way of determining the level of commitment.

Now to throw something else into the salad, I agree with LilScorsese---it shouldn't matter what you're shooting on. I know people who routeinly use high-end Super-8 cameras for special effects miniatures and music videos finishing on video.

Yet it does. It matters to the buyers. Your buyer is not the audience---it is the distributors.

Regardless of where they are on the food chain, all distributors want a product that fits certain technical specifications so they can sell it to their buyers. The needs of a distributor are not the needs of the audience. They are, at times, diametrically opposed.

An example: a distributor wants 35mm with name actors running exactly 56:40. The audience is dying for good stories. You've got a beautiful Super-8 short. The distributor picks the crappy movie starring someone you've heard of instead of your gem because that's what their buyers want.

I am on both sides of this issue. I make no-budget movies where nobody gets paid. I manage, miraculously, to make the money back, which goes into the next project.

I also earn money doing this stuff. When I consider volunteering for a project, I wonder about who is going to see it. I ask if this project has, in my estimation, very little chance of getting made, getting finished, or getting seen.

Even if the project has next to no chance of getting seen, I still may do it because I like the producer. Often I like her after the first phone call.

The response you get from "Industry" types about working for free is often a test to see how you respond. Come back with a good answer and you may get that fantastic cinematographer/videographer on your project for nothing because she likes your style. She's got something to help her believe you'll do what you say you're going to do.

Pros don't get into the business of making movies to shoot "Always" commercials. They get into it because they love the work.

This leads to Dale's next question:

"2. What "charms" does the startup "amateur" need to display to get the Pro to the dance?
(ie passion, show of talent in working with even a limited medium), I believe the amateur needs to at least be willing to impress/entice a pro by some artistic non monetary means."

Yes. Yes. Yes.

I've been known during an audition to ask an actor if she can do her monologue again, "But this time, a little more pink." I don't ask because pink is my favorite color. I ask to see how the actor will respond. Sometimes they do great, sometimes they do not so great.

The question is a test of an actor's willingness to give me what I'm asking for. I get a good idea of how they'll respond in rehearsal or on a set.

So I guess the "charm" comes in building relationships. It's not enough to say, "You get a chance to work on a movie." Big deal.

The message I send out is the same I want to hear: "You get to work with ME. I'm committed to this project because of X,Y, and Z. I will create an excellent work environment, give you authority and responsibility in your area of expertise, work you hard, challenge your skills and give you the chance to learn new ones, and do my best to get this movie to an audience."

I've turned down paying gigs because the producer/client had her head shoved so far up her butt, it's a miracle she could drive. I've volunteered for penniless gigs because the producer helped me believe.

Ohio, thank you. You have brought up some good points. Some which were also touched on by Big Al. I agree with you in the respect that there are both sides of the argument that have equal value. The professional doesn't want to commit his time if there is no cash to be had from the production or the after product. And the filmmaker can't really offer the cash, so he is forced to "charm" pros (and even semi pros) to attract them to his/her project. Doesn't always work, but you can't blame a guy for trying.

I do see how both parties may view this situation. I had an opportunity to talk to a sound guy today, who did pass on the project (as there was no cash to offer him), which I understand. Time is money, especially for trained individuals. But I also hooked up with an actor, with a few credits to his name, who was thrilled at the prospect of working on a low/no budget. If for no other reason than to gain more acting experience. So there is equal balance out there.

So I guess to wrap it all up, when I do things for free for people, I become better friends with them, because I am not an employee, and they aren't my boss. I am able to give better performances, I believe, because I can make the role my own. I can do things how I want and not totally be under a persons control. I do listen to directors and stuff don't get me wrong but you know what I mean. Some people are just not in it for the love. Thats's all you have to remember.
Well there. That was my totally un-sarcastic view. Tell me what you think...lol

Bye now!

Thanks for posting. Maybe sarcastic wasn't the word I was looking for. "Witty" is more appropriate. Seems like you have a great sense of humor. Anyway...

I have to say I agree with you 100% on working on a film that breeds a tight-knit "family" environment. So far, this seems to be taking shape with my production. The actors (and few crew I have) are positive and psyched up about the possibilites of this production, and the production itself. That is a very catchy feeling, and lends to breeding creativity and a great atmosphere in which to work. It's a great social dynamic.

As for the sound guy, he wanted us to rent his equipment, and he would just do "boom work" for us. We're going to pick up a mini-disk or used DAT and do the sound work ourselves.