cast? crew? how bad is... too bad?

How much would you charge to work on someone else's project?

  • Free of charge for anyone daring to let me on the set!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • At least the cost to driving to the set, and a meal at the end of the day...

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Minimum wage if they're lucky...

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I expect to earn at least what I get at my day-job.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Top dollar for my services, baby!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Evening all.

Thought I would just pose this question. Say you're trying to put together a short that is watchable by, say, people that are objective. As in, something you would put on the internet or something you would submit to a local film festival. If you wanted to go beyond the novelty of being able to show your friends some movies that you've put together...

What level of experience and skill should you demand? You always needs to have standards... Personally I'm sure all of us would like nothing but the very best for our movies. Then again we all have to come to terms with our budgets (or budgetless movies). We can't expect the same passion for filmmaking from everyone we work with. So anyway, getting to my point:

You've got some people who are willing to act in the roles but probably pretty badly and you've got some people (the same people as the actors) willing to hold a mic or carry some lights or something, even though they don't really want to invest the time of reading all the books about it. Is it worth bulldozing ahead and just getting it done? Or should you take a step back and try to find the "right people" for the job. The aspiring cinematographer... the hopeful young actor in your community theater? Even if these "gems in the rough" are more than difficult to find (to work for free/a piece of the "profits" that is). Of course I realize you have to be thankful for what you can get, and thankful for people who are willing to give up their time to help you out on anything at all....

I guess a second part of my question is: is it unreasonable to try to do everything in a movie yourself, from screen writting to lighting to mixing to directing to editing to... well... whatever I decide to do with it afterwards? Is that just too much to do well for a single person? Has it been done before with some sucess? I know that you can probably point to Clerks or something where they just did it all themselves, but I heard that movie, and others like it that "transcended" from indie to fantastically widely known where doctored by all sorts of professionals with lots of money to look and sound a lot better than they originally did. But all the same, I'm just putting that out there to see what everyone thinks. I've read books on all the different movie making areas, and feel as though i have a good base knowledge on things... But I can't exactly have a gazzilion eyes in my head.

Movies are very personal things, but it's pretty apparent that they're a group effort to get made. The entire "auteur" concept of a one man artistic machine seems less and less likely to me right now.

Alright, thanks for reading, and thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Doug
staticnothing@hotmail.com
aol: staticfour
YahooIM: staticnothing
 
Personally, I try to find as many people that have experience that are willing to work for free. I try to get as many key positions filled by experienced people then fill in the rest with the family and friends who are just looking for something to do.

I would definitely suggest attracting as many helpers as possible. If you try to do it yourself fully, you might miss something. That's not saying you should have a hundred person crew for a simple ten minute short. Just fill in key positions (camera, lighting, sound, etc.) then let them do their jobs so you can concentrate on yours.

Also, and I don't think this gets mentioned enough, if your aren't paying people, don't expect a lot from them. I have had so many people cancel on me at the last second I can't even number them. That's another reason why I say to get some back up (extra crew members) in case someone backs out. Also, don't expect them to call in sick to work or miss a funeral for your project. I had a guy who wanted me to use my vacation to work on his project. As much as I want to be a successful filmmaker, I can't look my wife in the eye and say, "You're not gonna get to see your family at Christmas because this Yahoo wants to make a short that'll probably suck." I don't feel like going through a divorce.

Poke
 
[

Also, and I don't think this gets mentioned enough, if your aren't paying people, don't expect a lot from them.


This is so true it hurts.

I would love to have someone say to me, "Wanna be in a movie" or help out with one, people like us are all over. And usually not very close together, if we were we'd be making movies for a living, we need a revolution, something for the real indies, the people who have families and bills and real jobs who can only spend a few hours a night on their current projects, a few hours if we're lucky.

Revolution Real Indies or REEL INDIES, who's in?
 
Personally I feel that alot of begining actors ARE being paid. If nothing else they can use the footage from films they've done (for free) to produce a Reel that can be submitted to agents; not to mention, exposure from various film festivals.
It's just my point of veiw.
 
You get what you pay for. Depending on the project I will fill the key positions and scrape as much money as I can for them, and get volunteers for assistants and pa’s. It’s amazing the difference a little bit of money compared to no money gets you. Most importantly, whether you’re paying nothing or scale, a well-fed cast and crew will work 10 times harder than one fed on pizza. Don’t scrimp on the catering. Just remember, no matter how low you go, some money will be spent somewhere.

I’m going to be honest, if you try to do everything yourself, it’ll probably look like crap. Get experienced people who can concentrate on all the details while you concentrate on production. Trust me, to do it right, there are so many details you have to take care of as a producer, you won’t be able to do it all and get something that will actually win awards.

Have you pretty much just done your own things, or have you worked on other productions? It’s good to see how other people do things.

If you do decide to do a short, realize the market is extremely thin. You will most likely not get any money back, let alone enough to cover cost. On the other hand, it is a good way to get exposure.

All in all, it’s not a one-man-band, but it is the most exciting career I’ve found. I’m addicted to the set, that’s what drives me, so I make sacrifices where others may not. Good luck!
 
Muppets and Spanners

This is a really good question.

My personal experience is that it's good to have the best possible quality help in key technical roles. In particular sound. It's the one area that people make project crippling mistakes more often than not, and if I've only got money to pay a few key professional, I'd spend it on a good sound recordist first, a good 1st AD second and a good DOP third.

I know this may seem like a strange order, but a experienced 1st AD will keep the project on track and deal with any problems that your less experienced crew (free) will have, and by keeping the production on schedule, will probably save you money in the long run.

Now it may be that you can find good people to fill these roles who will work either for free, because they love you (or the project) or you may find that they'll work for defered payments. However, if it's a choice between raising extra cash for key roles and using muppets, I'd always try to find the cash.

As for the rest of the crew, I'd keep it as small as you possibly can to achieve the shoot. Small crews work faster, have better communication and are easier to keep on track (Oh, and cheaper to travel and feed). Plus with a small crew, everyone is kept busy, so not too much hanging around waiting for stuff to happen.

With cast, I think that it's always a mistake to settle for someone who isn't capable. There are plenty of good actors out there and if the project is interesting and the director knows how to work with them, they will come out to play. I've always used professional actors, even when I couldn't pay them. Drama schools have been a good source of talent, as have local actor centres. I think the thing to remember is if they are giving up their time for free, that they need to be treated respectfully (Actually that's true even when you are paying them).

I think the golden rule of no(?) budget film making is make sure you've got cash for petrol and food. A team that doesn't get looked after well, will either leave or will gripe. A well fed team will love you to death.

The only other thing I'd say is, don't have anyone on set who will not either be technically competent or a prepared to work like a dog. Muppets and spanners will cause more problems than they solve.
 
A film, or it might have been a word processing, tutor once said to me, don’t do anything for free. Some things I would do for free, like I would write a few letters if someone asked me to. But if someone asked me to spend a day and a night writing letters, then I would like to be offered something in return. It is just possible that, if several other film making enthusiasts were giving their time and skills for free for a couple of days or a week, that I would too.

Thought I would just pose this question. Say you're trying to put together a short that is watchable by, say, people that are objective. As in, something you would put on the internet or something you would submit to a local film festival. If you wanted to go beyond the novelty of being able to show your friends some movies that you've put together...

I may be naïve in thinking that it is easy to hire a place and a projector screen.

What level of experience and skill should you demand? You always needs to have standards... Personally I'm sure all of us would like nothing but the very best for our movies. Then again we all have to come to terms with our budgets (or budgetless movies). We can't expect the same passion for filmmaking from everyone we work with. So anyway, getting to my point:

When I attended weekly evening classes last year in 16mm film production, I was impressed by the skills of the other members, one in particular who was very good using the Final Cut editing suite on a Mac. I think that we have to be constantly on the look out for what skills people have, make a note of them, and keep in touch.

You've got some people who are willing to act in the roles but probably pretty badly and you've got some people (the same people as the actors) willing to hold a mic or carry some lights or something, even though they don't really want to invest the time of reading all the books about it. Is it worth bulldozing ahead and just getting it done? Or should you take a step back and try to find the "right people" for the job. The aspiring cinematographer... the hopeful young actor in your community theater? Even if these "gems in the rough" are more than difficult to find (to work for free/a piece of the "profits" that is). Of course I realize you have to be thankful for what you can get, and thankful for people who are willing to give up their time to help you out on anything at all....

Some of the work does not require experts. I held the microphone and operated the mini dvd sound recorder on my first shoot doing what the director told me to do. Similarly holding the boards that shadow the lights etc can be done by anyone in the room. But I would get people who know what they’re doing to operate the cameras.

I guess a second part of my question is: is it unreasonable to try to do everything in a movie yourself, from screen writting to lighting to mixing to directing to editing to... well... whatever I decide to do with it afterwards? Is that just too much to do well for a single person? Has it been done before with some sucess? I know that you can probably point to Clerks or something where they just did it all themselves, but I heard that movie, and others like it that "transcended" from indie to fantastically widely known where doctored by all sorts of professionals with lots of money to look and sound a lot better than they originally did. But all the same, I'm just putting that out there to see what everyone thinks. I've read books on all the different movie making areas, and feel as though i have a good base knowledge on things... But I can't exactly have a gazzilion eyes in my head.

No it’s not unreasonable, but it is hard. Would we not be giving ourselves unnecessary work? To direct everything is alright, but not to do everything as well.

Movies are very personal things, but it's pretty apparent that they're a group effort to get made. The entire "auteur" concept of a one man artistic machine seems less and less likely to me right now.

They are a group effort to get made, but they can still be our personal thing if we are directing it. Some directors give the crew and the actors freedom to develop the film, other directors keep tight hold of the reigns.

=================

Personally I feel that alot of begining actors ARE being paid. If nothing else they can use the footage from films they've done (for free) to produce a Reel that can be submitted to agents; not to mention, exposure from various film festivals.

As the film maker or producer I would give them a written credit as well, such as a half page report of what they did for me and how good they were. The more credit we get as filmmakers the more those reports will be worth.
 
Back
Top