Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member

Are you sure the company involved didn't do anything, or have any sort of standing with the authorities?

 

My knowledge of the Canadian situation is less complete, but I've known people get all kinds of paperwork - even H1s for the USA - on practically no notice and with practically no evidence, if there's a wealthy corp pulling the strings.

 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Canadian Immigration website, film crew working for foreign companies don't require a work permit. If you are working for a Canadian company, then you need a permit, but as long as the work is temporary, and you satisfy certain other basic conditions, you should have no problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Canadian Immigration website, film crew working for foreign companies don't require a work permit. If you are working for a Canadian company, then you need a permit, but as long as the work is temporary, and you satisfy certain other basic conditions, you should have no problem.

 

If you want to work in Canada then a work permit is for sure needed. When the American shows come in, they need to get work permits for their crew they bring into Canada, even if they are American and it's a US show. They now charge $1000.00 a person for this, it used to be free. Canadian immigration typically only allows foreign dept heads to come in, they certainly won't allow a grip or AC from outside of Canada to come in. They make exceptions when the person has a resume that proves they an "elite" or special skilled person.

 

That immigration website may be talking about a foreign film crew coming in to shoot a doc etc, and the prod co is based outside of Canada.

 

I had to get work permits for all the US crew and actors I brought in for The Dogfather, and Against The Wild Part 1.

 

Then I needed a work permit for South Africa, and so did my DOP, and all my actors I flew in. It was an extensive process with South African immigration, but very cheap, $80.00 CDN per head.

 

The US has no program I aware of to allow Canadians to work in the US on a film, there is the O-1 Visa, but that is only for huge people that can prove they are stars in their field.

 

There are certainly people from all over the globe working on US shows in Canada. Mainly because none of these people can get into the USA, but Canada has an open door immigration policy and takes in anyone and everyone. The British are treated the same as any foreigner here, which is bizarre to me.

 

You are far better off showing up as a Syrian refugee than a British citizen. Syrian refugees are allowed to work on the spot and are given free healthcare, free housing, free dental, and free prescription drugs. They have better healthcare than any Canadian citizen who has lived here their whole life does.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure the company involved didn't do anything, or have any sort of standing with the authorities?

 

My knowledge of the Canadian situation is less complete, but I've known people get all kinds of paperwork - even H1s for the USA - on practically no notice and with practically no evidence, if there's a wealthy corp pulling the strings.

 

P

 

There are substantial fees attached to the US permits and US immigration lawyers which charge about $5000.00 per head to get the whole thing moving faster are often used by a wealthy corp as you put it.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

In fact, I'd say it would be near impossible to recoup even a $25k budget, even over 10 episodes, with any real profit to speak of.

Yes, impossible is the right word.

 

For that reason, this is why I said to make sure you produce a PROFESSIONAL series capable of going beyond YouTube. You MUST treat it like a TV series, and not a 'web series' in the traditional sense. If you treat it like a TV series, your options are much wider. For example, if you shoot your series at 22 min or 45 min episodes, you might get a TV network be interested in picking up the show, or if worse comes to worse, companies like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon are always looking for GOOD, HIGH QUALITY content they can release as originals. Because you didn't follow the typical web series format of 5-8min episodes, your competition for these spots is a lot less.

That's a pipe dream. Producing 10 high quality 22 minute episodes is a HUGE expense and no network is going to buy it. Netflix doesn't talk to random people, nor do they buy other people's properties anymore. They don't care how good your series is. Now, if you're a reputable producer/director with a lot of credits and you have a great idea for a new show. You can shoot a pilot and shop it around to the networks. However, you need successful credits first and you can't build those from youtube. Even if you get a meeting with some execs, you'd have to live in LA or NYC where they are for those meetings to be successful because they want people who are serious and if you live in Ohio, they know you're not serious.

 

As for a web series that has taken off, there are a couple of examples: 'Sanctuary' was one, 'Ruby Skye PI' was another...

Both series had decent budgets and were produced by TOP industry professionals with lots of success behind them. Nobody is going from ground zero without any previous success and producing a successful web series that goes broadcast, it just doesn't happen. Now if you wanna put cat video's online or do stupid fart jokes, you can make a killing on youtube if you're willing to sell yourself out. A few hundred thousand hits, doesn't even pay for your catering on a single day of shooting.

 

Well, we have Cinematographers, Gaffers, etc. here as well, though most are more adapt to working on commercials than features, or they are type of do it part time when a production roles into town that needs their services; or they are like me, and mostly do their own thing, except in the rare case someone might want their services. As for $100/day, I'd say it depends. Currently, there is a web series shooting in Columbus, Ohio - Aidan 5 - using local professional crew and even some professional cast, who volunteer 100% of their time with no pay at all.

Adian 5 is a green screen series, it could be made by one person and a few actors. Plus it has very few hits. I have a youtube series about riding dirt bikes that has far greater hit's then Aidan 5.

 

I assumed that any production that expects perfection would be Union, or at least SAG.

You can use Sag actors on NON union shows, it's called "SAG WAVIER" and the vast majority of lower-budget films work that way. Paying union scale for standard crew is cost prohibitive in most cases, where you'd rather pay for a technocrane.

 

So no, I cannot get behind that mentality that someone who wants to produce quality product should aim for major theatre release. And who are we kidding, a minor theatrical release is a joke in terms of viewership numbers. In a limited release setting, how many people actually see that film in theaters? Maybe 5,000; or maybe 10,000 if you're very lucky with a wider 100 screen release.

The numbers don't really matter. What matters is that the right person see's your product. If you make a narrative feature, the venue to score the right people is going to be theatrical. It takes a boat load of marketing and word of mouth to get the qualified people to see your film. Right now there is a movie called "Too Late" shot on 35mm for ultra low budget, being screened around the country in 35mm that's getting a lot of buzz. Heck, even I went to see it because I wanted to know what it was about. They did a great job marketing it and the 25 people in the theater, were all suit and tie adults, I felt so out of place wearing my T shirt and jeans. Talk about "qualified" viewers. That's what it takes and honestly, if you release something theatrically, you get A LOT of brownie points.

 

In the mean time, Game of Thrones has 4 million viewers per episode, which vastly outweighs anything a theatrical release could do - even a major international release of a blockbuster couldn't touch those numbers for a whole season. Arguably, some of the best shows (at least in my mine) are not on the big screen or DVD, they appear on TV. And as best I can tell, your success formula doesn't even count these types of shows as success...

First off, what I'm explaining has to do with young filmmakers who haven't made a name for themselves yet. It has nothing to do with people already in the industry looking for another job, like the guys who made Game of Thrones, or any other television show you've seen. That's what you don't quite understand, nobody cares about youtube series, they just don't. You aren't going to be producing the next Game of Thrones from something you made for online distribution, it just doesn't happen. Your examples have been debunked above and the more you throw at me, the more I will debunk because nobody and I mean not a single person has done the path you're planning on doing and been successful. Yet, the path I lay out has been done by EVERY SINGLE successful filmmaker from Spielberg through Nolen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet, the path I lay out has been done by EVERY SINGLE successful filmmaker from Spielberg through Nolen.

 

Can you quickly summarize please? Yes, I am too lazy to read the entire exchange and parse this out. Thanks.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

And is microscopically unlikely to work for anyone in particular. You're committing a straightforward logical fallacy - picking something that has already happened and assuming that the circumstances that led to it are the best route to get there

 

Not that Landon has any greater leg to stand on. Breaking out of youtube into the mainstream offers no greater hopes for success.

 

Personally, I'd have more interest in getting something crowdfunded, since then you know you're financially secure without any of the conventional props. If you're producing a series for YouTube via kickstarter, then, de facto, you are producing a series, and I'd hope everyone would be making a living wage. That, though, is just as difficult these days.

 

There is no way in that is not reliant on massive quantities of luck, though it's impolitic to say so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

It really comes down to two types of filmmakers: Those who want success at all costs, and those happy to produce whats in their vision - and who will attempt to find an audience down the road. As for getting a job in the industry as per the original thread, I still stand by my statement that LA is not the end all be all. What's more important is WHO YOU KNOW, not necessarily where you live. If you want to be a 'hired director' working in feature films, I will wish anyone the best of luck trying that - though I would caution that such jobs are few and far between, because many films made nowadays are produced or created by the director, so the whole 'hired' director thing is mainly an option for epic blockbusters, where that whole 'who you know' thing again comes in handy.

Yea but I'm sorry, you aren't going to meet the right people living in Ohio. You will meet the right people going to screenings and parties here in LA. Heck, 90% of the people I know, I met having a job as a computer technician at the best shop in LA back in the day, the shop everyone went to. I've met Janus Kaminski, Stevie Wonder, Quincy Jones, Hans Zimmer, Peter Starr, James Torme, and so many other actors, directors and producers, just from that job. The few people I stayed in contact with, have led me to where I am today. You aren't going to meet those type of people in Ohio, it just doesn't happen. Again, "qualified" people are the key.

 

What frustrates me is that you somehow feel like you know something about this, having never worked in the film industry and unless I'm missing something, haven't made any real watchable products yet. Yea, I saw the trailer for your wizard of oz documentary which was clearly shot with a handicam. Now you're making "educational films" on how to make movies, especially dealing with contracts? I appreciate your enthusiasm, but until you've experienced a different reality outside of your home town, it's hard for you to comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Can you quickly summarize please? Yes, I am too lazy to read the entire exchange and parse this out. Thanks.

Ohh sorry, yea you're right, long winded huffin' puff.

 

Here are my suggestions:

 

Focus on your craft, if it's directing, shooting, writing, editing, lighting, sound, you need to constantly be working in and around that specific trade.

 

If you're a generic "filmmaker", make movies! Shorts, music video's, narrative/documentary, doesn't matter. Focus on quality, not quantity. A solid 3 minutes is better then an OK 5 minutes. Make stuff you're proud enough to submit to festivals and don't stop submitting. I also suggest people hook up with well known bands to produce music video's that will be seen on their sites. Another way to practice the craft is to produce educational content. Write, shoot, learn from your mistakes and do it again next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

And is microscopically unlikely to work for anyone in particular. You're committing a straightforward logical fallacy - picking something that has already happened and assuming that the circumstances that led to it are the best route to get there

Actually, the information I've been typing is common knowledge. If you follow the straight forward path and do a good job, you can make it. Most everyone I know who has made it, has taken the same path. Those who didn't take that path, generally had outside help financially OR industry jobs through nepotism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You aren't going to meet those type of people in Ohio, it just doesn't happen. Again, "qualified" people are the key.

 

Well, I dunno? I'm not even in the United States and I have completed four feature films. All of them are in mainstream distribution. I do better on distribution in the USA than I do in Canada and I don't even live in the US.

 

If I lived in LA I would still do 99% of my communication with the distributors and agents etc via email and phone, same as I do now, so I'm not sure what advantage I gain by being there? Like I said earlier, it's only really an advantage taking meetings for big budget studio films.

 

I'm the guy that brings the "LA people" to work with me, not the other way around.

 

I have delivered a 132 page draft of my latest screenplay to my agents, and I am now writing Against The Wild III. Again, all from my computer in my basement, 3,000 miles from LA. Need to get my latest draft of a script to LA? Ok send via email, even faster than being in LA and driving it there myself in LA traffic. Also now developing show bible for Against The Wild the one hour episodic TV show. Again, how does being in LA help me here?

 

One thing I will say for LA, the weather is fantastic and I would love to live in Santa Monica, I love that place! Not sure how it will help me in any practical sense?

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Well, I dunno? I'm not even in the United States and I have completed four feature films. All of them are in mainstream distribution. I do better on distribution in the USA than I do in Canada and I don't even live in the US.

No doubt! :)

 

At the same time, I wasn't referring to the; "I've already made a successful film" filmmaker. I'm referring to the "I've got my ducks in a row and I'm ready to make movies" filmmaker.

 

Do I also dare suggest that Ontario is probably a more "artistic" city with more connections to proper commercial filmmaking then say MOST US cities.

 

Not saying Los Angeles is the only place, far from it. Only saying, if you really want to make something of yourself, it's not a bad idea to try and do it here.

 

Also... you can make short films with friends anywhere. Ya only need to come here when your good and ready. I came here a bit early unfortunately. In hindsight, I should have come much later, once I had a few bigger projects finished in Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do I also dare suggest that Ontario is probably a more "artistic" city

 

Uh, Ontario is still a province, not a city. :)

 

That's ok, I lived in the US for a long time and many Americans find the location of Canada on the world map to be quite baffling.

 

I also cut all four films on my Mac laptop, in my basement. A fact that is terrifying to those that have made huge investments into post houses.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are far better off showing up as a Syrian refugee than a British citizen. Syrian refugees are allowed to work on the spot and are given free healthcare, free housing, free dental, and free prescription drugs. They have better healthcare than any Canadian citizen who has lived here their whole life does.

 

R,

 

Same in the UK. It's interesting as I've always thought that the way posh people seem obsessed with poverty in Africa is because it is far away so they don't have to confront the issues at home but with refugees you are kinda bringing the issue home with you.

 

I don't really get why poverty in overseas countries is so terrible but here in England it's all a bit of a giggle and we make comedy TV shows about it. I guess I maybe don't really understand the extent to which posh people in the UK hate the lower classes or something? I don't get it. Maybe it's because the overseas connection makes it a bit abstracted from their own situation or maybe it's because they have families that have been directly involved in stuff in their past.

 

Fascinating to watch it going on though and all the guilt and hand wringing.

 

Would be good if we addressed the issues of poverty right here in the UK in a more general sense. Perhaps it's the sheer scale of it that is a problem though. With 1/3 of the population here sliding into poverty situations over the last few years, it's a big job and it's always easier to just futz around with stuff at the edge of the problem isn't it? To be seen like you are doing something but not actually making too many changes.

Edited by Freya Black
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And is microscopically unlikely to work for anyone in particular. You're committing a straightforward logical fallacy - picking something that has already happened and assuming that the circumstances that led to it are the best route to get there

 

I think there is a lot of this going on in this thread.

 

I thought this really does a good job of covering a lot of the stuff that goes unsaid...

 

http://filmmakermagazine.com/84977-ornanas-jim-cummings-on-how-to-combat-the-digital-recession-and-lessons-to-learn-from-south-park/#.VvgoS92VuCP

 

...unfortunately this guys more positive advice seems to be to first have a huge hit tv show and then start a web page.

He is right of course, that would probably work. I just can't help but think that there's a step missing there somewhere though. A bit like the underwear gnomes:

 

 

I don't think he is as good at that side of things. Perhaps because he hasn't had much success yet himself.

 

Worth checking out though because he is spot on with a lot of things.

Edited by Freya Black
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The US has no program I aware of to allow Canadians to work in the US on a film, there is the O-1 Visa, but that is only for huge people that can prove they are stars in their field.

 

 

And if you happen to be in LA, and see an actor ad for 'authentic canadian accent'... and don't have a Green Card... don't show up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And if you happen to be in LA, and see an actor ad for 'authentic canadian accent'... and don't have a Green Card... don't show up...

 

Has that actually been pulled off by INS? Funny if it has been.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

It wouldn't surprise me if they did-- and I honestly think that would make an interesting story-- the INS contracts a private eye to crack down in immigration in LA, he pulls stuff like that to help catch immigrants (though you know; make it larger than just one type of person) and eventually, though, he gets a conscience and feels bad about it-- and helps them all get onto their feet or something as such-- its blade runner meets tedious paperwork!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like way too much emphasis is going to me when it should be going to the original question: Why LA?

 

Just to reply to some of your statements though:

 

1. My experience in the film industry is really irreverent to the discussion. Why? Because the information I give is readily available in the trades, and even in the good old standard, non-film-world news... LA and California in general is a dying zone for filmmaking. It has been for a long time now, primarily ever since CA cut back its incentives when other states started offering better ones. Even before this, Canada had been sucking up a lot of US productions due to favorable tax treatments and incentives. Really, this is common knowledge and can be verified in multiple reports. Therefore, logic tells me (and it doesn't need to be filmmaking logic either), that if you want to work in the industry - your best bet is to move somewhere where the industry is the most active and has the most staying power. That is no longer LA.

 

The only advantage LA might have is twofold:

A. The ability to meet with studio execs anytime one pleases (considering you can get the meeting). This is all fine and dandy, except the fact that the only people meeting with the studios are Producers. Anyone else might have an occasional meeting with a studio or production head, primarily the director or other key personnel. However, the Director need not also live in Los Angeles, any more than Johnny Depp needs to live there to be a successful actor (and he doesn't live there most of the time, btw). Plane tickets are cheap, and so are hotel rooms. If the Director or other key needs to be there for a meeting, it's not challenging to set that up in a days times.

 

As for those wanting jobs in occupations such as grips, these people NEVER meet with studio execs. At best, they are hired by the production dept. heads who hire mostly from people they have worked with in the past, not based on resumes and reels. In a lot of cases, when a production moves outside of LA for most of their shooting, they do not cart ALL the production people from LA. In fact, I'd say the only people carried from LA to Georgia to make a movie are the production dept. heads, while all local crew comes from the local pool of technicians. Now this may not be the case all the time, but I'd bet my new Hyundai that it happens most of the time.

 

And lets be realistic here: This is 2015. We have phones, email, instant video meetings, etc... Does anyone REALLY need to have in person meetings with department heads? Just this morning I had a video conference with one of the executive producers working on our project --- and get this --- She lives in Manchester. Across the pond so to speak. No problems whatsoever. As such, the only people who really believe that the only way to make friends, keep in contact, or have meetings is to live in the location where it all happens are simply living in the last decade.

So, let's say someone in LA called me up and said 'Hey Landon, we like your idea and want to meet with you tomorrow'.... You know what I'd do? Go online and book a flight for $200 that will get me to LA in roughly 12 hours after booking, get a hotel for $100 and rent a car for $50.... Show up the next day, have the meeting, and go back home. That is of course considering the producer / exec was also living in the dark ages and has not yet heard of video conferencing. You know what, Even though I spent $400 on that trip, I still saved a boat load of money over living in LA full time.

 

So, to sum this section up, I will stand by my stance that LA is probably not the best bet, and certainly not the only bet. If you want to work on productions, your best bet right now is Vancouver BC, and Atlanta. Sure, LA has it's share of productions, but many of those are by 'up and coming' filmmakers who moved there thinking they were going to strike it lucky, and never did.

 

 

2.

"What frustrates me is that you somehow feel like you know something about this, having never worked in the film industry and unless I'm missing something, haven't made any real watchable products yet. Yea, I saw the trailer for your wizard of oz documentary which was clearly shot with a handicam. Now you're making "educational films" on how to make movies, especially dealing with contracts? I appreciate your enthusiasm, but until you've experienced a different reality outside of your home town, it's hard for you to comment."

Well, I certainly wouldn't say I'm a newcomer to the film industry, or more per se the entertainment industry in general. True, most of my entertainment experience comes from Theatre, which as an artistic persons I feel qualifies me to make artistic judgement in regards to film and film production as much as anyone who worked in film for an equivalent time. From a pure production and directorial standpoint, film and theatre production are a lot more alike than many would believe, especially if you never worked in both industries - only film.

I helped to produce around five different stage shows - obtaining funding for them, handling marketing and advertising, getting good cast members, and even directing a couple of them during my time as Executive Artistic Director at BRT. I have been involved in the artistic end of theatre for well over 15 years now, having served in practically ever roll from Director all the way down to stagehand hanging lights for local traveling shows.

 

The surprising thing is, if you throw a camera into the stage of a theatre show - it's amazing how the final outcome would resemble a film. This is not to mention I have been hobbying in the film industry since I was 14, have been a member of this (and other) forums since that time. Over the years, what I have picked up from filmmaking has mostly been 'book' knowledge and research when it comes to the producing end of filmmaking. However, a lawyer also mainly has 'book' knowledge of the law when he graduates, yet that does not preclude him from becoming a lawyer and practicing law right after graduation.

 

And you mention that 'I'm now making videos about business aspects of filmmaking when I have no experience'... Well, I'd love for you to actually debunk my advice as false. I have already obtained a degree in Business Administration (and am currently working on a Masters in Education), and also minored in business law, which I did pretty well at if I do say so myself. I feel this makes me pretty qualified to give advice about the business end of any industry, including filmmaking. Why? Because it's not that much different. An LLC is an LLC, and members are members no matter what the industry.

 

So far the two videos I have posted include 'how to structure an LLC film when you can't pay your actors' and 'how to make a boom pole'. Being versed in business and LLC law, I feel very comfortable making assumptions about how one could legally setup a film production in a manner that is fair in such a situation, and do it legally - unlike a lot of advice I have seen from actual filmmakers who suggest others follow illegal routes, like hiring crew as independent contractors.

 

So there is what I have to offer. Take it or leave it I really don't care, but your going to hard pressed to argue with the fact that I don't offer advice that I can't back up with facts. Just because you have one suggestion for those wanting to work in film does not make your suggestion the only right one. And earlier you stated that every filmmaker has followed your path - which is false. I happen to know at least one - Robert Rodriquez - who is very successful, and who used a self-produced feature as his calling card, and he also breaks your current 'must live in LA' mentality, because he lives and produces in Austin TX. Sure, he made short films when he was little practice, but he did not attempt to use those as calling cards, like you're suggesting. And short films are great to hone ones skills, just like working in theatre is great to hone ones director skills for theatre and film.

 

As for the OZ project, that was something I came onto later in the process - working as an editor mostly, and helping to raise finishing funds. The Director, Aaron Pacentine, shot that over a period of about 8 years on varying cameras.

 

 

Yes, impossible is the right word.


That's a pipe dream. Producing 10 high quality 22 minute episodes is a HUGE expense and no network is going to buy it. Netflix doesn't talk to random people, nor do they buy other people's properties anymore. They don't care how good your series is. Now, if you're a reputable producer/director with a lot of credits and you have a great idea for a new show. You can shoot a pilot and shop it around to the networks. However, you need successful credits first and you can't build those from youtube. Even if you get a meeting with some execs, you'd have to live in LA or NYC where they are for those meetings to be successful because they want people who are serious and if you live in Ohio, they know you're not serious.


Both series had decent budgets and were produced by TOP industry professionals with lots of success behind them. Nobody is going from ground zero without any previous success and producing a successful web series that goes broadcast, it just doesn't happen. Now if you wanna put cat video's online or do stupid fart jokes, you can make a killing on youtube if you're willing to sell yourself out. A few hundred thousand hits, doesn't even pay for your catering on a single day of shooting.


Adian 5 is a green screen series, it could be made by one person and a few actors. Plus it has very few hits. I have a youtube series about riding dirt bikes that has far greater hit's then Aidan 5.


You can use Sag actors on NON union shows, it's called "SAG WAVIER" and the vast majority of lower-budget films work that way. Paying union scale for standard crew is cost prohibitive in most cases, where you'd rather pay for a technocrane.


The numbers don't really matter. What matters is that the right person see's your product. If you make a narrative feature, the venue to score the right people is going to be theatrical. It takes a boat load of marketing and word of mouth to get the qualified people to see your film. Right now there is a movie called "Too Late" shot on 35mm for ultra low budget, being screened around the country in 35mm that's getting a lot of buzz. Heck, even I went to see it because I wanted to know what it was about. They did a great job marketing it and the 25 people in the theater, were all suit and tie adults, I felt so out of place wearing my T shirt and jeans. Talk about "qualified" viewers. That's what it takes and honestly, if you release something theatrically, you get A LOT of brownie points.


First off, what I'm explaining has to do with young filmmakers who haven't made a name for themselves yet. It has nothing to do with people already in the industry looking for another job, like the guys who made Game of Thrones, or any other television show you've seen. That's what you don't quite understand, nobody cares about youtube series, they just don't. You aren't going to be producing the next Game of Thrones from something you made for online distribution, it just doesn't happen. Your examples have been debunked above and the more you throw at me, the more I will debunk because nobody and I mean not a single person has done the path you're planning on doing and been successful. Yet, the path I lay out has been done by EVERY SINGLE successful filmmaker from Spielberg through Nolen.

 

 

 

What frustrates me is that you somehow feel like you know something about this, having never worked in the film industry and unless I'm missing something, haven't made any real watchable products yet. Yea, I saw the trailer for your wizard of oz documentary which was clearly shot with a handicam. Now you're making "educational films" on how to make movies, especially dealing with contracts? I appreciate your enthusiasm, but until you've experienced a different reality outside of your home town, it's hard for you to comment.

Edited by Landon D. Parks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was offered a DP gig on an indie feature in Canada and we were going to get around the citizenship issue by making the DP a "voluntary" unpaid role. I'd basically do any billing of my DP day rate as an equipment vendor through that business I.D. and just donate my time on the film free of charge.

 

Not sure if this is an option on a bigger movie with EP accounting and all that for a microbudget indie it seemed to make sense. Then of course, once I learned they wanted to pay my negotiated rental billing in canadian dollars, I backed away slowly from the whole thing. haha.

Edited by Michael LaVoie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...