Multimedia
Blogs
Forum
Affordable HD
Whitepapers
Newsletters
Events
Advertisers
Blogcast
MillimeterGive and Take
Nov 1, 2000 12:00 PM, Marsha Scarbrough
Nike was criticized for paying third-world workers less than a living wage to assemble expensive sneakers, yet filmmakers brag about making a killing at the box office with movies put together by unpaid artists and technicians. While farm workers struggle for fair wages, film professionals willingly work for free. What gives?
Keeping production costs low by using donated labor and services is a time-honored practice, but recent advances in digital technology coupled with last year's huge financial success of The Blair Witch Project spawned a cottage industry of no-budget productions. The blessing is that it is infinitely easier and cheaper for filmmakers to realize their artistic vision without corporate interference. The curse is that profits rarely trickle back to the artists and technicians who work without pay.
The issues are not all black and white. Both hiring free labor and laboring for free have advantages and disadvantages. Millimeter recently spoke to several ultra-low-budget directors and producers who hire free help, as well to a few cast and crew members who volunteer their services. Shawna Brakefield, indie outreach director for Screen Actors Guild, lends her thoughts on free labor - and the law.
The Unpaid Picture: Producers and Directors
Besides saving the filmmaker a lot of money, using donated talent and labor also creates a built-in support system.
Reggie Rock Bythewood, who wrote, produced, and directed Dancing in September on a budget of $1 million, used volunteers to fill positions from P.A. to producer. He did it, he says, to gather a committed crew.
"If somebody is going to work for nearly nothing," says Bythewood, "it means their commitment goes beyond financial concerns. They are either committed to the individual who is making the film, the subject matter, the script, or the vision of the piece. Basically, you have a crew of people who are passionate about the project."
The appeal of a supportive team also motivates writer/director Dean Noble, who has produced four short films with volunteer cast and crew, including his latest project, Kung Fu Kitchen. "When I'm feeling down about my career and what I've accomplished artistically," Noble observes, "I just have to step back and say, `These people have believed in you and have stepped up to the plate. They have spent time, precious resources, and talent in support of a project that you initiated.'"
On the downside, though, filmmakers admit that unpaid can mean unreliable. "I wasn't sure how many crew members I was going to have, who was going to show up day to day, or how long they could stay," says Noble of his experience with Kung Fu Kitchen. "You're just happy to have them for as long as you can get them." Bythewood concurs: "It's really hard to keep people committed over an extended period of time. The people who remain committed, you just cherish."
With unpaid labor, filmmakers must also juggle shooting schedules around actors' availability. "In one case, it was so somebody could go to lunch with her aunt," remembers Noble. Don Haderlein, writer/director of Moonbeams, a no-budget digital feature with a cast and crew made up entirely of family and friends, takes the flexibility in stride. "If someone was tired or had to go, they could leave freely," he says. "If a paying job came up for somebody, they were allowed to be absent, so no one resented being there."
Producers and directors must also remember that many technicians who work for free are rookies seeking experience. Their lack of expertise can cause delays, compromise quality, and even lead to serious mistakes.
Some mistakes were made in Kung Fu Kitchen's production sound, and, as a result, the entire film will probably have to be looped. But Noble remains unfazed. "If you don't have money, you have to spend time," he reasons. "And yes, you will spend time correcting mistakes."
The Unpaid Picture: Cast and Crew
Cast and crew members also have pros and cons to examine when considering whether or not they should work for free. Are the creative opportunities and experience that ultra-low-budget films often deliver worth the weeks off a paying job?
Warren Yeager, SOC, Kung Fu Kitchen's director of photography, is a member of IATSE Local 600, yet often volunteers on short or spec projects as a way to stretch his skills, add credits to his resume, and experiment on someone else's dime. Equally important is the opportunity to build working relationships with directors who can hire him in the future or recommend him for paying work. "That's the real advantage of it," he notes. "You have to get into somebody's loop, and you have to do it with enough people - because most people in the industry aren't going to make it."
Although Yeager asks for a written deferred-deal memo on any project that he feels has commercial potential, he has only seen one project pay off. So, since his chances of actually making money are slim, he volunteers mostly for shorts with limited schedules that do not interfere with paying jobs. "If it was a two-month feature for free that they were really trying to market, then that would be exploitive," he says.
Others are more liberal with their time. Special-effects make-up artist Brian Sipe first spent a month creating three Chinese demons for Kung Fu Kitchen and then hours on the set applying his creations to the actors. If Noble had had to pay for the work, it would have cost him over $20,000.
Sipe explains the reasons for his generosity: "We're given a chance to shine for ourselves rather than shine for somebody else. Dean gave me all the creative control I wanted or needed. Now I can add that to my repertoire."
With unpaid work, actors often have the chance to show off a fuller range of skills than their paid work allows. But ultra-low-budget working conditions - with their nonexistent dressing rooms, brutal hours, and fast-food catering - can also be punishing.
"Everyone is not at their best," comments actor Craig Ng, who played a role in Kung Fu Kitchen. "It starts out as really fun project, but by the end of the shoot, it's just a mess."
On the up side, though, Ng appreciates how low-budget films have allowed him to become more involved in the creative process. In addition to acting in Kung Fu Kitchen, he helped with casting, brought in the stunt choreographer, and even suggested locations. "It just kept my creative process going so much for everything that when it came to acting, I was able to put more of myself in there," he says.
The Unpaid Picture: Unions
On Kung Fu Kitchen, Ng worked under the SAG Experimental Film contract, one of five low-budget contracts that Screen Actors Guild (www.sag.org) designed to protect its members while allowing them to do ultra-low-budget projects. Dancing in September was also done under a SAG low-budget agreement.
Shawna Brakefield, SAG's indie outreach director, explains that the low-budget contracts have various budget caps ranging from $75,000 to two million dollars. The contracts offer much-reduced rates, and the experimental contract allows performers to defer their entire salaries. The contracts are basically sub-agreements of the SAG theatrical contract, so rules governing overtime and working conditions apply, and residuals are due performers if a film makes a profit. (At press time, SAG was revamping the agreements, and officials expected to announce new revisions this month. For more information, contact SAG's theatrical contracts department at 323-549-6828.)
"Sometimes actors need the union to protect them from themselves," comments Brakefield. "It's the biggest myth in Hollywood that actors want to work for free."
Brakefield also points out that the SAG contracts protect filmmakers from losing actors who get a paying job in the middle of an unpaid project. "The actors are hired to do a job, and they must render professional services. They can't not go back to work," she explains.
Not everyone goes through unions. Mark Pirro, who has been writing, producing, and directing ultra-low budget films for 18 years, says he can always find actors who are willing to work for nothing without the protection of a SAG low-budget contract. "There are so many people in this town who want to do it for the footage," he says.
Pirro resists the SAG low-budget agreements for "the same reason I don't want to get married even though I can live with a girl the rest of my life. You're further complicating an already complicated thing." Pirro finds the SAG conditions too structured for his ways of working and says that he is not able to pass profits along to his actors according to their contributions because he keeps no records.
Although he is not against unions, Pirro does think that they should never have the right to stop anyone from working, especially when those workers are unpaid. "If actors aren't getting paid, then they are not working," he reasons. "I don't see how any union can stop anyone from volunteering their time."
To Brakefield, this argument is just making the union the "bad guy" and taking the easy way out. "The more responsible way is literally taking responsibility for your show, keeping good administration, exchanging with everybody, and putting in a deal memo," she counters.
Brakefield also says that Pirro and other ultra-low-budget producers who do not carry liability insurance or workman's compensation are breaking the law. "If you are telling someone to show up at a certain time and work a certain number of hours, you are instantly classified as an employer," she explains. "State law requires employers to carry workman's compensation."
Signatories to the SAG low-budget agreements must provide workman's comp for their actors. "If the producer is smart," adds Brakefield, "when they buy their workman's comp package, they don't just buy it for the actors. They buy it for everybody, so the entire crew is covered."
Pirro doesn't see it that way. "If somebody's there and they get hurt, they aren't really my employees if they are not getting paid," he states.
The Unpaid Picture ... Unpaid
After producers and directors consider the pros and cons of using unpaid labor and official union contracts, and after cast and crew decide whether or not unpaid work is a good career move, one fact remains: The chances of an ultra-low-budget film becoming the next Blair Witch Project are minuscule. In reality, even a modest profit eludes most productions.
This fact, like unpaid labor itself, can be good and bad. "I guess I don't feel exploited," concludes Ng, "because I've never seen anything I've worked on amount to anything."
SIDEBAR
DGA Goes Ultra Low
SAG is not the only organization creating contracts that sanction members' involvement in low-budget work. Directors Guild of America (www.dga.org) also has contracts that allow members to volunteer under certain conditions.
For example, an agreement with American Film Institute allows DGA members to work on AFI student projects without pay. Students learn from professional assistant directors and UPMs, while DGA members make connections with up-and-coming directors. The agreement also allows DGA members to advance their careers by gaining experience and credits in higher categories: Second ADs can work as First ADs, and First ADs can work as UPMs.
DGA also has an experimental agreement that allows members to work for free on projects intended as demo reels or for the festival circuit. These films cannot be longer than 30 minutes or cost more than $50,000. If profits result, the contract provides for negotiated payment.
"If it's not to make money and our members want to do it, we're flexible," states Brian Unger, DGA's Western executive director. "But if somebody comes to us and says, `I want to make this thing for $30,000, and a big distributor is going to distribute my movie', we say `no'. You don't get a break when there is that kind of potential."
Continue the discussion on “Crosstalk” the Millimeter Forum.
