Freelance Living Wage

[Guest]

 

As a producer it is a surprise you do not understand capitalism. A cameraman selling stock footage he shot is not a capitalist. he is selling work he produced with his labour.

 

And I am selling the movie produced with my labour. Which in the case of Against The Wild was THREE years from start to finish. And I don't want to hear your BS about making calls to pull the financing together not being work. I also wrote, directed, and edited, the movie.

 

The very idea that you are not engaging in capitalism to sell your stock footage, is fall on the floor hilarious. I mean seriously, are you saying these idiotic things just to get a rise out of us?

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

My understanding of it is that you are justifying extreme wealth on the basis that those who acquire it deserve it, although you haven't provided any reasons why they deserve it, especially given that the people who tend to profit most greatly from filmmaking tend, as we've discussed, to be those who have put the least real work into it.

 

To recap, I've described the economic problems caused by a large imbalance of wealth, which would make the practice undesirable even if it didn't inevitably lead to financial hardship for other people. But of course, it does.

 

Ultimately it is difficult to conclude anything but that you consider yourself to be better than everyone else, and worthy of infinite reward, and that you are willing to overlook the hardship of others in the pursuit of your own wealth.

 

If you think that's OK, you are showing many of the signs of psychopathy ("Egocentric, grandiose behaviour, completely lacking empathy and conscience") - but then again, lots of CEOs do.

[Guest]

You said the Canadian Film Board made terrible films, you were wrong, they made one of the best films of the last few years. This is not based on what I say but on what thousands of people say.

 

Ok Maxim we need to clear up a number of incorrect points here. First off, I was talking about TeleFilm, not the Canadian Film Board or National Film Board (NFB) as it is more accurately called. They are two different things.

 

You are very confused as to how TeleFilm works. TeleFilm does not make movies. There is not an office where government workers plan out a movie and get it made. TeleFilm provides funding to a *gasp* PRODUCER!! Yes you heard me correctly, TeleFilm gives the money to the producer, they don't *gasp* write cheques directly to the crew.

 

Also TeleFilm can only, by law, fund up to a max of 49% of the production. This means the producer must find the other 51% someplace else. And if you think finding 51% of 2 million is easy, think again. Oh wait, duh, that is what we have been debating for 16 pages. YOU do believe that finding money for a film is easy because you have done it and it takes no time at all, sorry, I forgot.

 

So anything with the TeleFilm logo on it that you happen to like, was made by a producer(s). In some cases a rather hefty cheque amounting to millions of dollars is handed to the producer, to do with as he chooses. It must just make you sick inside to hear this. The idea is that the producer gets all the money and then puts the crew on his payroll.

 

TeleFilm does have government bureaucrats reading scripts, they call them "analysts." The analysts would not know where to begin when it came to actually making the movie if their lives depended on it. That is the producer's job.

 

R,

[Stephen Williams]

But he's not selling his labour, is he? He's marketing a product made by him, and expects to profit from that one day's, or week's, work many times. If he had a crew, presumably he paid them by the day. They sold their labour.

He's a capitalist alright.

 

Of course thats correct, Max is a capitalist, he just does not accept it as he earns 10's of thousands rather than 100's of thousands.

[Guest]

Ultimately it is difficult to conclude anything but that you consider yourself to be better than everyone else, and worthy of infinite reward, and that you are willing to overlook the hardship of others in the pursuit of your own wealth.

 

I have demonstrated to you several times Phil that this is not the case. The fact that your reading comprehension skills are not at a high enough level to understand this is not my fault. Maybe your parents didn't buy you a book until you were 16?

 

R,

[Guest]

 

Of course thats correct, Max is a capitalist, he just does not accept it as he earns 10's of thousands rather than 100's of thousands.

 

I'm sure I've competed against Maxim for stock footage sales. Maybe the fact that my footage is 10X better than his is the reason why he only earns a few thousand and I earn substantially more? It looks like Richard Boddington working on his own with his own gear to shoot stock footage, is better than Maxim Ford on any day of the week.

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

I have demonstrated to you several times Phil that this is not the case.

 

No, you've claimed that it isn't the case, then gone on to say lots and lots of things which give cause to believe it absolutely is the case. Your behaviour directly and obviously contradicts your claims.

 

This complete inability to understand the concept of one's own actions being wrong is common in psychopaths.

[Guest]

No, you've claimed that it isn't the case, then gone on to say lots and lots of things which give cause to believe it absolutely is the case. Your behaviour directly and obviously contradicts your claims.

 

This complete inability to understand the concept of one's own actions being wrong is common in psychopaths.

Phil explain to me how paying my crew "union level" wages, putting them up at a beautiful resort, and paying them when they had to leave set for a family emergency, makes me a psychopath?

 

The only psychotic personality on this forum is yours.

 

R,

 

I just re-read the Rhodes vs Boyle thread, geez that's some funny stuff. Clearly you have issues Phil, clearly. You state that one of the signs of a psychopath is the inability to recognize when ones actions are wrong. That thread between you and Boyle is a classic example. You did everything perfectly on set, you were the only competent one, and your dismissal was not your fault in any way shape or form. It was everyone else's fault.

 

Clearly Boyle pointed out how you consistently sabotage your own career.

 

**Before I get flamed for bringing up this thread I want to point something out....Phil was the one that started the thread in the first place. And then Phil publicly challenges Boyle to a fight:

 

 

Posted 04 August 2007 - 12:41 PM

So, Geoff baby, want to talk? No? No. Didn't think so.

 

Phil

 

Seriously....who does that?????????

[Phil Rhodes]

 

Phil explain to me how paying my crew "union level" wages, putting them up at a beautiful resort, and paying them when they had to leave set for a family emergency, makes me a psychopath?

 

I don't know; I wasn't there. My interest is in your constant willingness to make excuses for people getting so rich it risks destabilising society, and excuses for other people getting screwed.

[Guest]

I don't know; I wasn't there. My interest is in your constant willingness to make excuses for people getting so rich it risks destabilising society, and excuses for other people getting screwed.

 

 

Then perhaps you should talk to some members of that crew before you shoot your mouth off regarding topics you just admitted you have no knowledge of.

Again, you spew a pack of lies that have no reference point from this thread or any other. Please show me where I make "excuses for other people getting screwed." I have consistently said.....crew should be paid a fair living wage, and that is what I have done on my own shoots.

If you can't find such a reference I will expect a retraction.

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

 

[Producers] deserve a lot of credit when they have a success on their hands. And... they deserve the financial rewards...

 

How is the producer "abusing" the 1st AC, if he makes a million dollar return and the 1st AC makes $2500.00/week?

George Lucas sits atop a massive pile of money. He deserves every penny of it.

The producer is the single most important person on any project

The producer IS the single most important person on any film project.

And, YES, he bloody well should be [entitled to a much larger than average share of the proceeds]!!!

 

I have a natural innate desire to be #1 at all costs.

 

[Margaret Thatcher, who had just been described as "an equal-opportunity screwer-over"] could of[sic] made millions in the film industry!!

 

I certainly cannot accept that a film producer should not earn 50 times what a "burger flipper" makes

 

[money stays in the hands of the owners, of the cinemas, the distributors, the producers.] And quite rightly so.

 

Evil capitalists like myself will have you replaced in two seconds.

 

 

Sure, Rich. You're a darling.

[Mark Dunn]

 

People who can't make an argument attack the person.

I didn't attack you. I explained what you were doing when you sold stock footage. You make profits and invest some of them in your business.

[Guest]

NONE, of your above referenced quotes are any indication that I want to see crew get screwed over. Let's take an example, "George Lucas sits atop a massive pile of money. He deserves every penny of it." Yes, and did not the crew get paid in full for their services on Star Wars?

 

As for, "Evil capitalists like myself will have you replaced in two seconds." You know this comment was in fact a way to mock both you and Maxim. Same for, "I have a natural innate desire to be #1 at all costs." I was poking fun at my British citizenship, you know that, and the history of the empire in general.

 

So try again, there is nothing to back up your claim that I advocate for the screwing over of film crew. Lies Phil all lies. I especially like how you edited and added to the Margaret Thatcher quote. You can't even copy and paste with any degree of honesty.

 

Same as what we see from you on the Mutant Chronicles thread, that were successfully exposed by Geoff Boyle. Your consistent attempts to spread lies on the internet may have in fact finished you in the film industry. Finally you have me agreeing with you on a point you like to make on a regular basis. The fact that no one will hire you and you can't move forward in the film industry, by gosh, now we all know why!!

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

"George Lucas sits atop a massive pile of money. He deserves every penny of it." Yes, and did not the crew get paid in full for their services on Star Wars?

 

Define "in full".

 

Lucas is presumably a billionaire, based on work almost entirely done by other people.

 

All I did to the Thatcher quote was add the required context without laboriously quoting the text you were responding to. This is common technique and is not a misrepresentation.

[Guest]

 

Define "in full".

 

Lucas is presumably a billionaire, based on work almost entirely done by other people.

 

Oh gimme a bloody break Phil, this is not kindergarten.

 

Yes Lucas is a billionaire, and good for him. He is 100% self made, FYI. And his genius has provided high paying work for thousands of people. Would there be an ILM employing all those people if it were not for George Lucas?

 

Look at how many jobs you have created......ZERO.

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

his genius

 

We're talking about George Lucas, yes? Writer and director of The Phantom Menace?

[Guest]

Knock Phantom Menace all you want. 1977 Star Wars set the whole thing in motion and spawned an entire industry that employs thousands.

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

See, you're doing it again.

 

"Doesn't matter, as long as it makes me richer."

[Guest]

Really the founding of ILM is making me richer? Hmmm, I had no idea, I should talk to Mr. Lucas about my back end.

 

In the meantime I think charities should stop hitting up all those rich people for money.

 

R,

[Maxim Ford]

Yes it was so good of the pharaohs to create work for all those slaves, and they were kind enough to give them a living wage, the pharaohs were rich but they built the pyramids themselves.

 

It was so good of the aristocracy to give work and let them have "a living wage" the Aristocrats were rich but they made the wealth themselves and built their own palaces

 

George Lucas created jobs for thousands, gave them a living wage, and made millions for himself, made films for children with IQs less than their weights...but hey.

 

Had nothing to do with American control of the worlds cinema distribution and exhibition where monopoly control allows product to be sold at inflated prices....

 

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth

 

WOW those rich people must really put in the hours, and yet they still find time to play at the worlds exclusive resorts.

 

And that bottom 80% of the population with 7% of the wealth, what lazy **(obscenity removed)**ers, just cleaning hospitals, building, policing, making films... just not prepared to put in the hard work like a producer.

 

As I said to the Make Up Artist on Les Mis, if you only prepared to work 16 hours a day don't expect the big bucks, just imagine how hard the producers had to work to turn that $66 million budget into $400 million.

 

I don't understand why producers hire crews at all, they could save on the wages and make even more money just doing it themselves.

[Guest]

I don't understand why producers hire crews at all, they could save on the wages and make even more money just doing it themselves.

 

At long last you've actually said something that makes sense. Congratulations.

 

In my case I could in fact do that, all I would need is at least one actor. I've already proven several times I can do everything myself.

 

But really, where is the fun in that? Much more fun for me to sit in a high chair and bark orders at the Phil Rhodes and Maxim Fords of this world! :D

 

In fact Maxim you've inspired me, on my next shoot I am going to dress like a Pharaoh and actually whip the crew. Do you know if there are any laws against whipping the crew? Hey probably not in Romania. :lol:

 

R,

[Stephen Williams]

Does he use capital? No he uses his own labour to make something himself. He then sells it. No other person is involved. No one else makes any contribution, no one is exploited.

 

To exploit other people you need the ability to pay them while they work CAPITAL . They have to produce value greater than their wages = PROFIT.

 

This is CAPITALISM.

Often films make a loss a capitalist has to accept that.

 

BTW I have seen the CV of a camera assistant who claims he has been your camera assistant shooting time-lapse....................

[Keith Walters]

Yes it was so good of the pharaohs to create work for all those slaves, and they were kind enough to give them a living wage, the pharaohs were rich but they built the pyramids themselves.

 

 

Actually, mainstream Archaeological opinion is that they pyramids were built by paid workers, nor slaves, The bit about slaves seems to have originated in Biblical texts, which are not generally backed by hard any historical data.

There's no historical evidence that the Romans ever threw anybody to the lions either; it appears to be more early Christian propaganda.

[Keith Walters]

I just re-read the Rhodes vs Boyle thread, geez that's some funny stuff. Clearly you have issues Phil, clearly. You state that one of the signs of a psychopath is the inability to recognize when ones actions are wrong. That thread between you and Boyle is a classic example. You did everything perfectly on set, you were the only competent one, and your dismissal was not your fault in any way shape or form. It was everyone else's fault.

 

Clearly Boyle pointed out how you consistently sabotage your own career.

 

**Before I get flamed for bringing up this thread I want to point something out....Phil was the one that started the thread in the first place. And then Phil publicly challenges Boyle to a fight:

 

Sorry, what thread was this? I must have missed that one. :rolleyes:

 

Look, I'm afraid there's very little hope for Mr Rhodes.

For pity's sake; he can't even get along with a standout nice guy like Jim Jannard, one of nature's true gentlemen, an indefatigable fountain of good cheer, fellowship and technological excellence. Jim hasn't posted on Reduser for about 3 months now, I don't want to point the finger but...

 

I mean, you're a nice guy Richard, but let's face it; comparing you and Jim is like comparing a stale Dunkin' Donut to a three layer Black Forest cake with four types of Belgian chocolate (like the ones I make).

 

I mean ... well, I don't know what I mean....

 

Nurse!!!

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

comparing you and Jim is like comparing a stale Dunkin' Donut to a three layer Black Forest cake with four types of Belgian chocolate

 

What does that make me, two thirds of a partially-eaten cheese scone? Like those huge, inedible ones Tesco make that'll feed a family of four for a week, as long as they've got cast-iron digestion?