Egos, Arrogance, and other time wasters

Will Vincent

Will Vincent

So, I just stepped down from a film project after the DP was "fired" for voicing an opinion (during preproduction, mind you)... He had spent obviously several hours over the holiday weekend developing a hefty shot list, to which the director said he liked it, but his interpretation of the script was from a different point of view. This spurred a several emails back & forth discussion as to what the strongest way to represent the story would be.

The final email from the DP was that it was his opinion the directors vision may weaken the story somewhat. The writer seemed to be on the same page as the DP... The DP did say that he was simply asking to ensure everyone was on the same page, and if the director still felt his interpretation was the best one the topic wouldn't come up again.

Ok, so in my mind this is a friendly discussion to determine how best to serve the story, and ensure the core production team is all on the same page.. The director, however, took it as an insult, calling the DP egotistical and unprofessional for questioning his vision (which, incidentally copying several other people on an email telling someone how unprofessional they are because they disagree with you seems a bit unprofessional in itself, but hell what do I know, I'm just a damn post-production guy...) ANYWAY, so he "fired" him.. I put it in quotes because, of course nobody is getting paid for this project anyway. *sigh*

Anyway... after a couple other emails I decided it best to back out. Last thing I need is dealing with something like that with an already jammed day job schedule.

Really, it's a shame because it sounded like it was going to be a fun project, but I've got plenty of other things to keep me busy.. :D

SO... Now it's your turn. Tell me about your experiences with clashing egos and the like -- especially on a no budget production. What happened, how did you deal with it, etc.. Also, I guess if you feel inclined to comment on this situation, I'd be interested in your take based on what I've written.
 
Sounds like he wants a DP that shares his vision or just does what the director wants. Understandable. This could have led to further conflict or not getting the shots he needs, etc. It's the director's film, vision, and money. However, he should be open to ideas.

Will Vincent said:
SO... Now it's your turn. Tell me about your experiences with clashing egos and the like -- especially on a no budget production. What happened, how did you deal with it, etc.. Also, I guess if you feel inclined to comment on this situation, I'd be interested in your take based on what I've written.
Click to expand...
I had a DP and a Gaffer telling me I needed close-ups, or anything besides the master. Of course, I kept shooting my style. I went to the bathroom, and came back to see the DP getting some close-ups and wasting my 16mm film. Just let it happen. Laughed it off. Didn't fire anybody.

I had an AC demand his pay plus the pay of a second AC added to his because I didn't hire one, and he was loading the camera, and pulling focus, so he said he was doing two people's jobs. This was on the set, the last day, and he was demanding this be retroactive to the first day, or he would walk off. Paid him. This was not the original arrangement either. He knew there was no second AC before the job. I was hijacked.
 
indietalk said:
Sounds like he wants a DP that shares his vision or just does what the director wants. Understandable. This could have led to further conflict or not getting the shots he needs, etc. It's the director's film, vision, and money. However, he should be open to ideas.
Click to expand...
I can see that... though he did say ultimately regardless he would do whatever the director decides is best, he just wanted to make sure they were on the same page. I could understand getting that offended or whatever on set, during production and whatnot, but during early stages of preprod... meh.. And, there's no money involved. ;)

Your situation would have probably drove me nuts, because you were shooting on film for one, and two you had written (I assume) agreements prior to shooting... and there was money, compensation, etc involved. You didn't end up using any of the close ups did you? :D
 
Oh god, why is it politics always seem to happen even on no budget fun shoots?

But seriously, the producer buys the script from the writer and brings in a director to shoot the picture.

It's the director's vision of the written material, whether that director dictates the shot list in total or in coordination with the DP, and 1st, that is happening on set. Not the DP's opinion on how the film should be shot. He is there to help transform the director's vision into what will serve the film's look best, NOT the other way around. If a DP wants to start creating his own shot lists and dictating shots, he should be a DIRECTOR not a DP. The reason it is this way is simple.. a DP is and should be thinking about lighting and the technical camera department details, not the style and flow of the editing, pacing, or acting. That is the director's job in near entirety, to shoot for the edit. And many times that involves wacky things like jib shots, whip pans, and not getting typical coverage (ala indie up there), which on paper looks crazy, but that is the way the director sees it. That's how they want to tell the story. And ultimately, the film's success, and creativity of visual storytelling will fall on them, not the DP unless there is a negative issue with the visual quality.

Sometimes the director loves to take in 2,5, 10 opinions and make his own after that. Sometimes he has a clear way he sees the picture and when someone starts proposing their own way to shoot the movie and claims his vision is no good for the picture, he sees it as an insult and that person is not seeing the story in their way which means that they cannot work with them. That person could be a DP, an actor, an editor, a wardrobe designer... whatever.

The same would happen if a DP had a gaffer that decided he wanted to start setting up the lights the way he thinks would serve the film best, ignoring the DP's wishes. Or the camera op starts creating his own camera movements that differ from the shot list.

It's the director's vision, and everyone is hired to make his vision happen.
 
Last edited:
Will Vincent said:
I can see that... though he did say ultimately regardless he would do whatever the director decides is best, he just wanted to make sure they were on the same page. I could understand getting that offended or whatever on set, during production and whatnot, but during early stages of preprod... meh.. And, there's no money involved. ;)
Click to expand...
Actually, it's better it happened before production. You don't want any problems like this during production, and hopefully he can find the DP needs now.
 
Talk about egos... Unfortunately, I can't name names but about 2 years ago, our prodco gets a script from a major actor who wants to direct their own film.

No problem...

The script is over 300 pages long.

It was sent to us to CUT it down to maybe 150 to 180 pages... Again, no problem.

Until we read it.

Without getting too detailed, the script focuses on the beginning of an organization and takes us through many years of the development of that organization.

The problem?

The script was drama of course -- a work of fiction -- but the historical events depicted in the script were supposed to be SOMEWHAT true.

They weren't.

In fact, they were WAY OFF BASE...

When we pointed that out to said actor/director, he replied, "Don't worry about it. Write around that."

We decided we couldn't be a part of a film that was going to, as an aside, focus on historical events that were not true but would certainly make some audience members THINK and FEEL that these things did in fact happen as depicted in the screenplay.

So we called said actor/director and explained the situation to him.

He could not believe we were walking away... LOL. Especially with the amount of overall money involved.

He cussed us out and threw shit around the room -- at least we surmised that behavior since we were talking to him and HIS PEOPLE over the speaker phone and heard the crashes and the bangs... LOL.

The real problem being that we work pretty fast and he needed the material really fast and now he was going to have to find somebody else who was not as fast and he lost an additional week for us to tell him we wouldn't do it unless the historical facts were legit.

Bottom line? Ego would not allow us to keep the actual historical facts true as they actually happened.

In essence, the film changed history just enough for millions of people to believe that certain events happened as per the film yet they did not actually happen that way.

How do you get an ego out of a tree?

Cut the rope.

filmy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It sounds as if you made the right decision Will. If you're having this kind of problem in the pre-production, how do you think the rest of the project will go?

I have to admit that it's hard to deal with all the "opinions" when you're trying to do a project, but it's easy to say, "Hum, that is one way to look at it. I'll think about it." And then a day later say, "that was a good idea, but I'd still like to try it my way first."

Let's face it, the time of the dictator Director is gone. You lose too many people and too much time.

By the way Indie, you must be Mother Teresa!! I wouldn't have been able to take that hijacking. I would've nicely given him two choices: 1. Break your contract and leave. 2. Meet your obligations and finish your job. (Of course it's always easy to be tough when you're not there!!)

Chris
 
cibao said:
By the way Indie, you must be Mother Teresa!! I wouldn't have been able to take that hijacking. I would've nicely given him two choices: 1. Break your contract and leave. 2. Meet your obligations and finish your job. (Of course it's always easy to be tough when you're not there!!)

Chris
Click to expand...
In the real world I would have stood my ground, trust me, but on a film shoot, and on the last day, when camera equipment and lighting is rented for a week and due in the next day, everyone is on set, etc., etc..., point being, he knew I would have to pay or the film would have been screwed. That's why I call it a hijacking.
 
I know there are alot of people here who are much further along with their professional filmmaking careers than I. My view, as always, comes from a person who is maybe not as far along, but at least has done a couple of film/video projects and trying to make a name for myself.

One of the things we all want is to be seen as professional. But truth be told, at this point, many of us are just starting to make a name for ourselves and are for the most part, untried, unproven professional. To me that keeps me humble. So say for example I am the best director in MyTown, Michigan. What does that count for? Not much in an arena where some of the best indie directors are still unknown. It is not my goal to only be the best in MyTown, but be that as it may, I am still too new to be having a hissy fit.

And that being said, I am an independent filmmaker/director, who is relying on the good will and ambition of my crew, who by the way are VOLUNTEERING to give up their time and effort to HELP ME. They are there in the hopes that lightning will strike and the project will take off and be a stepping stone for everyone involved. As an indie, I need their good will. The last thing I am going to do is act like a prima donna. And yes we all have those moments when we just give in to frustration. I know I have, but I am quick to apologize to that person.

That DP might be the next big thing. Is he going to work for that director again? I would think not. And the fact that someone else quit because of his crap attitude? Is anyone going to jump at the chance to help him again? Your guess is as good as mine, but my guess is no. And since the pool of people who know what they are doing in indie film is small, you better believe they all talk to each other. Let's just see what kind of ripple effect this has on this new director.

Yes, its the directors vision. But be a big enough indie director person to say, "well the reason I need it done this way is because...." Everyone knows that ultimately the director has final say, but I don't see anything wrong with the DP trying to make sure he understands what the director wants, and then dropping it after the situation has been explained. (Will's post said that the DP said that if the director still wanted to do this, the subject would be dropped.)

The best piece of advice I have heard of late, came from of all places, Gene Simmons Family Jewels. The advice is:
Be Nice To EVERYBODY.

-- spinner :cool:
 
Last edited:
spinner said:
The best piece of advice I have heard of late, came from of all places, Gene Simmons Family Jewels. The advice is:
Be Nice To EVERYBODY.

-- spinner :cool:
Click to expand...

Good one. I like that quote, it's quite authoritative even without the "or else" of the happy dictator, but my clammy Canadian brain (actually it feels like humid-Vegas right now) like the sentiment.

But sometimes there are just dumb mutherf***rs out there that are just asking for a good ruding and I wouldn't blame anybody for taking an unethical stab every once in a while. Emotion builds up and needs an outlet, and as long as you understand that (talk to your HR Dept if you don't) it makes it much easier to understand why being a jackass is sometimes a normal, healthy thing... like a bowel movement.


I've had two "freak out moments" in my work... the first was back in high school though, while making Macbeth 3000 with my best friends (so take that bias into account). Going into the project I was the writer/actor and Geoff was the director, and every once in a while we would have creative differences. Thankfully we were filming digital, so the solution was always "we'll shoot it both ways and see what works in post". But as we continued to film, the differences began to branch out- Geoff was orienting more towards Action and I was going more towards Comedy and Shakespeare- and on one militant shoot in Geoff's basement, because an Actor had to reschedule the shoot, Geoff wanted to change a scene which was the payoff to an earlier setup, but despite my efforts he wanted to shoot it that day anyway. Outside of his verbal directions during the shoot, we barely spoke that day because we were so emotionally charged (and not with sexual tension, you pervs). It turned out to be one of (what i felt was my) best scenes in the movie though, because my character actually looked really pissed (he was!). Filming was halted for about 3 months after that day, and at the pinnacle I was "banned" from a party with fellow friends because the director wasn't speaking with me. Anyway, we ended up going to Tim Hortons and making buddy buddy and have been best friends and cohorts since. Because really, what's the point of lasting conflict? So we got back together (this sounds so gay) and finished the film, and have worked and are working on several projects today. But that's friends, not necessarily "hires". If it was a "hire", then there's also a "fire". But with friendlies, you can light them ON fire, throw them off a bridge into a river and kick them in their eyeballs and they'll still be friends.

Anyway, my 2nd "incident" was pretty simple. I had a deadline for a short and my composer/DOP wasn't coming through with anything 3 days before the deadline, so in DIY fashion I whipped up a few tracks myself which I felt turned out pretty good (fit the intent). Anyway, the DAY OF the deadline, he finally tries to upload his file, but it fails, and he calls me, telling me to wait on exporting my final final cut until after work, but that only left me 4 hours to download, synch, export, upload and submit my final cut. So I submitted the work I'd done, and when I finally got the file, I listened to the score. If I had had it the day before, I could have sent him some notes and worked with it, but it just wasn't the score I had been looking for, and we got into an email pissing match right down to slagging each other's works, looks and sexual prowess. It was heavy and hot, but I pulled the "director card" and stuck with my guns. He's also a director/editor (in fact, we were both also in a rock band together briefly), so I told him to edit his own "Cinematographer/Composer's Cut" of the film which he could pimp as he liked, and we didn't speak for a few months. Soon enough though he was doing his final film school project and I ended up helping as a PA for a day and since then we've been good friends again.

Ta-da. Canadian warfare in action on film sets. You spat, you bitch, you forget and play nice. But this is on a level with no real discernible budget and in an atmosphere of creativity where everyone has an input- because why else would they be there? Once you throw some money in the mix, then you can't do the months of bitchy silence and resent. So you have to creatively problem solve on set- compromise or negotiate or something. Work it out. Maybe have a good cry together. That's right, huddle all up and take 15 minutes out of the day to have a snuggle party with all the people that make you mad. Sometimes (I'd say rarely), the right move may actually be an outright explosive confrontation- get everything out at once and start the reconciliation process... and when bones heal, they're stronger than before.... so perhaps in pre-production, if there's an Alpha Dog scenario between the DOP and the DIR, an explosive battle of power could end up causing the DIR and DOP to bond... and so long as the director wins the fight, all is well (I hear the cries of all the DOPS out there right now). Relax it's all in jest. Life's a game.... no, life's a movie. So there's no sense getting all in a huffy in the first place, really... but if you have to, there's got to be nothing "wrong" with that. You just have to know how to act during the fallout phase to keep playing "nice". It's all a big 10 dimensional character arc.

But whatever you do, don't do this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F86s4Vq59Ks
 
Egos overeasy

There are many talented people, but at the end of the day the director is the one that is blamed or praised for the choices made on the film--because the assumption is that it's the director's vision. It's important to get people who want to collaborate and keep the production the central thing. I like the drama in front of the camera. I think it's important to know before going in if the DP, AD, etc. want to be a director. Unfortunately, I have been in productions where the ego of one made everyone uneasy, but there was a plan b with someone waiting in the wings.
 
To me it sounds like he hired the DP without meeting with him first and discussing the film. Probably a craigslist post and hire.
 
Filmy... LMAO, seriously... on the floor right now in actual physical pain... I can SO visualize the scene you're describing! ;)

Nice thread Will... and I feel kind of weird about this, because I've NEVER had any problems like that on any production I've done.

In the main I tend to work with close friends, who I've known for years and also I make it real clear from the outset that the final say on set is mine.

I've seen enough over the years to know absolutely that films can't be made by committee, there has to be one person at the top of the chain, either the director or the producer who says "this is how it's going to be done" whether that person is right or wrong.

What I took from that situation is that here are a DOP and a Director who shouldn't work together. It doesn't mean that either of them are wrong, just that they're not in sync creatively.
 
I think a large part of the problem was that this director, still very "green", until this point was being very "inclusive" in that he wanted everyones input on pretty much everything.. For example, I being the editor/vfx/etc.. POST production guy -- was asked to be at the casting session. Seems a bit silly to me.

So, I can understand how that kind of inclusion would make the DP feel he was not out of line to ask/say what he did. Either way I know he didn't mean any harm by it but whatever.. it sounds like the whole project is falling apart now.
 
Yeap, that would make sense. Green director fails to take charge of the situation, turns the process into a committee and then has a major league paddy when people do what he's asked of them... caused mainly because the DOP nailed him for his lack of vision, in terms of directing.

Sounds like the director is also going down the standard indie director/producer route, so that's a double failure in leadership. If indies would learn just one thing, I think it's an appreciation that a director and a producer are two different roles for a reason. In the above situation a good producer could have pulled the production back into line, supported the director in getting what he needed and mediated with the DOP to keep the ego clashes to a minimum.

There is a serious conversation to have in the indie scene about the role of producers... and how it's one of the two major skill sets that are generally lacking in indie film making.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top