the real indi film

the real indi film world is a far cry from what the public percieves it to be. there are serious intstitutional injustices occuring daily that need serious reform. I am a writer, director, producer and have worked in all facets of the industry. please help me gain support for reform. learn more about it at www.intelligencia.us
this is a non profit movement, let's take the power away from the dillusional executive producers and put it in the hands of the truly talented.
 
Last edited:
:welcome:

I deleted your double post, please only make one.
 
Welcome Walkerzero!

Interesting manifesto. While you bring up some interesting points, I would suggest a little diplomacy...it almost sounds like you have a personal ax to grind rather than trying to enlighten your audience about universal inequities within the 'system'. Those choosing to take jobs which pay 'half of minimum wage' (in order to pursue their dreams) cannot be equated to 'slave labor'.

Anywhoooo, any solutions? :hmm:
 
As a member of two Unions and one Guild I’ve never found “Hollywood” to be similar to a garment sweatshop. While it’s true it isn’t easy to gain membership, once a union or guild member the workers are protected from producers.

Not so in the independent, non-union world of filmmaking.

But as bird mentioned, I willfully accept jobs at well below Federal Minimum wages in order to further my dreams. In fact, I often PAY to direct a movie. Since I do it of my own free will, that cannot be considered slave labor.

So walkerzero. What do you propose be done to producers like me? I make movies using unpaid labor or less than half minimum wage. I don’t pay into healthcare. Perhaps you’re talking about unionizing?

But you sure seem to dislike unions.

Or is this post just a way to get traffic to your page?
 
Welcome to the page.

I've been away all weekend on a retreat with friends, one of whom is an independent filmmaker who made his first film in 1974. He gave me a lift back home last night and we got to talking about the business.

We talked about lots of things but two things in particular stood out. The first was that he couldn't even start to think about how much money he's sunk into film projects over the years and how little had come back from those investments. Secondly he believes that new technology has de-skilled the industry meaning pratically anyone with a little money and an idea can easily make a film now, and as a result of that the only real skill left in film making is producing.

Now, I'm still thinking about both of these statements. But, what I do know is that independent filmaking is rarely about making money and more ofen it's pursuing a creative project because a group of people believe in it.

I also believe that making a film is most often a self educational process that gives you skills that you can then sell elsewhere to pay your for your next film.

It's easy to become bitter and disillusioned, but ulitmately a waste of creative energy. If you really want to do something about the independent film industry, find something positive to do, use your skills and energy to create something, because the bottom line is that complaining isn't going to change anything.
 
I was going to post this NY Times article in ViewFinder forum originally, but it seems somewhat relevant here.

Direct article link



June 20, 2005

Billy Jack Is Ready to Fight the Good Fight Again

By SHARON WAXMAN

SANTA ROSA VALLEY, Calif. - It has been more than 30 years, but Billy Jack is still plenty ticked off.

Back then, it was bigotry against Native Americans, trouble with the nuclear power industry and big bad government that made this screen hero explode in karate-fueled rage. At the time, the unlikely combination of rugged-loner heroics - all in defense of society's downtrodden and forgotten - and rough-edged filmmaking sparked a pop culture and box-office phenomenon.

Now the man who created and personified Billy Jack, Tom Laughlin - the writer, director, producer and actor - is determined to take on the establishment again, and his concerns are not so terribly different. Mr. Laughlin (and therefore Billy Jack) is angry about the war in Iraq and about the influence of big business in politics. And he still has a thing for the nuclear power industry.

"I'm going to say a lot of egregious things," Mr. Laughlin, 73, announced at the start of an interview at his home here in the rolling horse country east of Los Angeles. His face is creased with deep lines, his hair a bleached gray, but he is still entirely recognizable as the handsome Billy Jack.

"We despise both political parties, really loathe them," he said. ("We" might be Mr. Laughlin and his alter ego, or it might include his wife, Delores Taylor, who played Billy Jack's pacifist partner, Jean; but one doesn't interrupt the man lightly.)

"We the people have no representative of any kind," he continued. "It's now the multinationals. They've taken over. It's no different than the 70's, but it's gotten worse. And if you use words like 'impeachment' or 'fascist' you're a nut on a soapbox."

So Mr. Laughlin and Ms. Taylor are planning to bring their characters back to the big screen with a new $12 million sequel, raising money from individuals just as they did to make their films three decades ago.

In this new film, they say, they will take on social scourges like drugs, and power players like the religious right. They say they will also outline a way to end the current war and launch a political campaign for a third-party presidential candidate.

They have already formed a 527 nonprofit committee with the aim of ending the war, and say they will run full-page ads in major newspapers beginning next month explaining their plan to withdraw from Iraq. (Money raised for that committee is separate from the film project.)

"We both have our reasons for doing this," said Ms. Taylor, who joined the conversation midway through. "Mine is for our children - we have three - and four grandchildren. I feel right now America is in a big, big problem. I feel America is falling apart."

"We're not delusional," Mr. Laughlin added. "We'd disappeared from the business. We devoted our time to psychology and religion, teaching and lecturing. We're not wealthy retired people. We're surviving, we're fine."

Still, at least one industry veteran who worked briefly with Mr. Laughlin said he thought the filmmaker would not be successful.

" 'Billy Jack' had a huge impact on me," said Gavin Polone, a television producer who made "Revelations," on NBC this past season, and who approached Mr. Laughlin years ago about making a sequel to his trademark film. But, he said, Mr. Laughlin was unwilling to work within the Hollywood system, and his new project would probably suffer as a result.

"You can work inside the business and try to figure it out, get good writers, build your career," Mr. Polone said. "Or you can say: 'I'm smarter than everyone else. I'll make my own movies, finance them' - and you're never heard from again."

But three decades ago Mr. Laughlin defied the odds and made his mark on movie history with his homegrown tale "Billy Jack" and the sequel "The Trial of Billy Jack." The films unexpectedly connected with audiences during the social miasma of Vietnam and Watergate, but also had an impact on Hollywood marketing and distribution techniques.

"He was the model for Rambo, for 'Walking Tall,' " said Robert Sklar, professor of cinema studies at New York University. "When you think of what 'Rocky' meant for the culture - Laughlin was ahead of all that. He represented the indomitable outsider, and he was the first one in that era. It was also true in the sense in which he fought to make the film, and fought to get it distributed with this terrific idea of self-releasing."

Because exhibitors were reluctant to gamble on "Billy Jack" in 1971, Mr. Laughlin pioneered what is known as four-walling a theater: renting space from theater owners and collecting the box-office profits. He said he hired Mormons all around the country to work the ticket booths, figuring they could be trusted with the cash, and the film took in an astonishing $32.5 million.

With the sequel in 1974, Mr. Laughlin spent $3 million, then a huge sum, on advertising to promote the film. He demanded cash upfront from exhibitors for the right to show it, and opened in 1,000 theaters, defying industry conventions of the time. The first week of box-office sales resulted in a banner headline in Variety: "Billy's Sequel's Grand $11 Mil Preem; Tom Laughlin Stuns Old Film Biz Pros."

After that, he suffered some setbacks. He sank millions into a film distribution company that became a money pit. A second sequel, "Billy Jack Goes to Washington," about corruption in the nuclear industry, was made in 1976 but never made it into theaters. Mr. Laughlin said the film was blackballed under pressure from politicians involved with nuclear power.

Another sequel, this one about child pornography, had to be shut down during production when Mr. Laughlin was injured on the shoot and unable to finish filming. Later he developed tongue cancer, now in remission.

Then in 2002 Mr. Laughlin made a deal with the film company Intermedia for the rights to make yet another sequel. That endeavor ended in a lawsuit, though he eventually got the rights back in 2004. After that experience, Mr. Laughlin says he is done with the Hollywood studios, and back where he is most comfortable: as an outsider. When the new film is finished, which will be early next year if financing materializes, he will seek an independent or major distributor to release it, as with "The Passion of the Christ."

Ms. Taylor said: "This is something we have to do. We don't know if it will be successful, but we're committed. We have to do it. Just like 'Billy Jack.' "
 
...though I do believe the OP is waaaaaaay more "left" than I am... with a lot of sillyness...

...and that says a lot!
smiley_pac.gif
 
...Clive, you always have something interesting to add :yes: ....


he believes that new technology has de-skilled the industry meaning pratically anyone with a little money and an idea can easily make a film now, and as a result of that the only real skill left in film making is producing.

...I don't necessarily agree here, though. Sure just about anyone can get the equipment to make a film. But it takes alot more than the right toys to make a movie. Lots of people make films but not all of them are good films as witnessed by some of the festival judges on the board....

...welcome back, hope your vacation was nice....

--spinner :cool:
 
How does the public perceive the indi film market? My perception is different to yours and as you know pereceptions are built based on our own individual environements so I wont say you are wrong. The independant film makers I know sweat it out as more than anyone in thier crew, and most have a real desire to make a great product, and in the interests of thier cast and crew, insofar as having someone from thier production recognised.
 
Back
Top