Production Insurance

[Fylms Insurance Services]

Have their been any unfortunate experiences with your agent/insurance company due to lack of coverage? incompetence maybe? To begin with, movies that receive outside financing from banks or other sources—which nowadays are most movies—need a completion bond. This bond guarantees the financiers that they will be repaid the entire cost of the production if for any reason a catastrophic loss takes place. These elements, which often include the star and the director, are defined by the guarantor that sells the bond. In the case of Terminator 3, the producers bought a completion bond from International Film Guarantors for $2.54 million that named Arnold Schwarzenegger as an essential element. If Schwarzenegger had been disabled during shooting or had abandoned the film for any reason, IFG would have repaid the bonded cost, which was $181.6 million. Thoughts?

 

[aceinc1]

normally, you need people like Arnie on board to get you that kind of insurance.

In India, too there was insurance for a few movies, a film directed by SHUBHASH GHAI (he is nicknamed as the showman of Indian cinema), filmography 25 years, 13 films, 11 films that are not just hits but blockbusters, landmark movies in Indian cinema history.

AAMIR KHAN got his film LAAGAN (nominated for Oscar - lost to NO MAN'S LAND) got that film insured as he was the producer/actor.

Insurance people are not dumb.

now, the concept of insurance is," you think you're gonna lose say $10 in some event, there is an insurance guy who'll diagnose the situation and says you'll not lose the $10 and is so sure of himself that he will pay you that $10 if you lose but he'll want to be paid $1 for his services ".

this is how it works, following this concept you should pretty much be able to figure out on what basis you can land insurance.

regards,
ace.inc1

 

[Fylms Insurance Services]

Yes when bonds are involved the size of the production tends to be on a very large scale. Any production that incurs expenses has the chance of loss. Regardless of the talent that is involved the exposure to loss can be detrimental to an uninsured/underinsured entity. I have yet to come across an individual that does not need coverage for their shoot. Securing production insurance provides peace of mind and most importantly protection.

 

[Gonzo_Entertainment]

It's great stuff, love to have it, but on a $5000 budget for a short it would cost me 10% or more of my budget, so just not realistic. It's the stuff I lie about having when I need to.

 

[TheBuck]

I think you should have insurance but I can tell you from exp when dealing with indie flicks and people who give you to a place film once they hear insurance they normally pull out even if you tell them that YOU have it and they do not. They just don't want the head ache.

 

[Gonzo_Entertainment]

I think you should have insurance but I can tell you from exp when dealing with indie flicks and people who give you to a place film once they hear insurance they normally pull out even if you tell them that YOU have it and they do not. They just don't want the head ache.

Yeah, even if I had it I'd never bring it up unless they asked. If you bring it up all you're doing is planting the thought in their head "Oh yeah, somebody could fall, break their neck, and sue me".

 

[Fylms Insurance Services]

Very true but the thing most people do not understand about insurance is there is very specific wording built in to prevent that exact situation from taking place. Waiver of subrogation, hold harmless agreement, primary non-contributory are a few policy terms that prevent the landlord/supplier to be liable against your actions. All of this is on their end though, contracts are usually in place for these items. I have seen a lot of this wording on these short productions so the scale of the shoot does not matter, its a suit happy world out there just make sure you are taken care of from your end.