Bad Baz

[Mr.Row]

I was talking to an australian, and he said that the Oz film community "hates" Baz Luhrman because none of the crew of Moulin Rouge (and he seemed to mean technical crew, gaffers etc.) was given "points".

He said "in america, they make much more money because they get points in the film".

 

Is this true??? Gaffers get gross points?

Sounded like poop to me.

I told him Australians get paid less because they are a primitive species.

[David Mullen ASC]

IATSE crews in the U.S. do not get points generally. There are exceptions (for example, the non-union low-budget Indigent productions give points to the crew.) The accounting system in the studios is so crooked that unless you have GROSS points it's almost useless to insist on net points.

 

However, I believe that SAG, DGA and Writer's Guild members do get residuals. This includes assistant directors, for example.

 

So I don't know where this guy got the impression that U.S. crews get points.

[Manu Anand]

>>>>The accounting system in the studios is so crooked that unless you have GROSS points it's almost useless to insist on net points.

 

 

Excuse my ignorance but what do you mean by points ?

 

Manu Anand

New Delhi

[Wendell_Greene]

>>>>The accounting system in the studios is so crooked that unless you have GROSS points it's almost useless to insist on net points.

 

 

<Excuse my ignorance but what do you mean by points ?>

Points = a percentage of the profits. They range anywhere from a half point (0.5) but usually start at one point (1%) or more. Net points are supposed to be paid from profits, after the studio has recouped the production costs of the film and gone from the "red" (or negative) into the "black" (positive, profit). But if anyone remembers the famous Art Buchwald lawsuit against Paramount over the Eddie Murphy film "Coming To America", you'll realize that "net points" are as about as real as the Easter Bunny, and mean nothing in terms of real dollars.

 

In the Buchwald case, he challenged the studio's "creative" accounting practices, which indicated that despite a worldwide gross well over Hundreds of millions, that the film actually LOST money. Since the film was still in the "red" according to the studio's accounting, people like Buchwald who were promised net points would never see one red cent.

 

Don't recall the outcome of that lawsuit, although suffice to say, it didn't cause a Senate subcommittee investigation that called for studio accounting reform. The case, was probably settled out of court, like most Hollywood lawsuits, for an undisclosed sum of money.

 

So if you're "Above the line" (and I use this expression only from a strict studio financial perspective) and are a producer, director, actor, or writer, you hire an agent who will get your lucre upfront, or a large chunk of it at least. And if and when you become "A" list, you'll start getting points of the gross. If you however, you are "below the line", don't hold your breath, thinking that the "trickle down theory of Reaganomics' will apply. Although every once and a while you meet someone who will offer you a reward in the form of gross points.

 

 

I remember reading in "Skywalking- The George Lucas Story" where Lucas after the success of the first "Star Wars" film decided to award people by giving some cash bonuses and to give a few others points on that film. But later he wrote he regretted it, and would never do it again, because of the amount of tension and in fighting it caused among those who were angry with him because they were entitled to a larger percentage, or at least a larger percentage than another crew member. Worse of all were the hurt feelings and anger expressed by many who thought they deserved to be included, but were left out.

 

Perhaps this was/is the case with Baz and his crew.

[Manu Anand]

Thank You Wendell

 

Points are unthinkable in India for crew members.The HIGHER UPS guys do get them though in some films. But certainly not lowly cameraman <_<

The term used here though is "back end'

 

This does remind me of a film made in the 70-80s in India .

 

A film called Manthan by Shyam Benega-a true story about dairy farm co-operatives.

The film was funded by 500,000 farmers who each gave 2 Rupees( 44rupees=one dollar today). The film was a success and was viewed in more than 150,000 villages with 16 and super 8 projectors. Villagers arrived in droves to see the film in trucks lorries on foot.

I'm not sure but i think they even got some return on their investment.

Do you know of any films funded like this ?

 

Manu Anand

New Delhi

[Mitch Gross]

The Coen brothers' first film "Blood Simple" was famously co-financed by a group of dentists, all of whom I believe were paid off when Circle Films purchased the movie.

 

Art Buchwald won his lawsuit against Paramount but the judge awarded him something like $1 over legal costs. Part of the suit was that Paramount questioned Buchwald's claim that his 1/2 page treatment was the actual origin of what became "Coming to America." Anyone who ever read the treatment (I believe Harper's published it from the court papers--there's an example of the Fair Use doctrine that Phil mentioned in another thread) might easily agree with Paramount. So the judge handed Buchwald a somewhat hollow victory.

 

Many low budget features offer crew members back-end deals, and we all like to joke about that double entendre. Sometimes it's points and sometimes it's a deferred salary payment. I can tell you that I have lots of such paperwork gathering dust in my files but have never seen a dime, although I do know of a couple of productions that have handed out such money.

 

Alec Guiness used to wax philosphical about his money from "Star Wars," which suddenly made him a rich man. I believe the first star to ever negotiate a back-end deal was Jimmy Stewart for (I think) "Winchester 76," and the studio did it by listing him as a Co-Producer because they were afraid of the precedent. Jack Nicholson made an insane amount of money from "Batman," something like $80 in the first two years and still going.