Alex Ellerman

certain tax incentives are based on minority hiring practices... so... it happens. thought not usually to the degree the original poster mentioned.

If we all just Cinematography.com tattoo's and then post pics of ourselves with the tattoos = problem solved.

Gents; interesting points... i agree the $7k number probably is misleading when applied to Primer and to El Mariachi for that matter... there's just no way you could have sound/postprod included in that number which would barely cover film stock/processing... Anyway... $500k theatrical, split 50/50 with theaters... not much left over once everybody is paid. not sure what deal he cut on dvds... so how rich do you think his home run made him? more importantly, the cardinal rule of writing or making a film is to have a second project ready. producers are famous for saying, "i love this script but... what else do you have?" so Javier, if you're script is that good, have it reviewed by some peers who know screenwriting, and see what they think. if a script is lighting in a bottle, then truly, you can't keep it hidden. people will find out. An A-list screenwriter I know once wrote a post on a message board where he basically said "throw it out on the 101 (CA Highway) and lock the doors" because they will find you. so Shane Carruth might not be a bad omen, but certainly a cautionary one. Once you've been given a great chance, you've got to make something of it. as an aside on Carruth, i thought he was a real nice guy at the screening, i enjoy the commentary on his movie, and i think he showed a real auteur vision on the movie. i think he'll make another movie and i'll watch it.

Hey Javier- and after speaking with people around here... i'm led to believe that Carruth probably didn't even make that much $$$ on Primer... they say that on your 1st successful film the authors recoup the initial investment ( uh, 7k? ) and make a little green, but what you're SUPPOSED to be doing is positioning your next paid/backed project. i guess i thought that writing/directing/acting in a Sundance winner would reap a little more success, either financial or for your future. it's an interesting case study. I liked the film (especially considering the budget). I don't like what this portends for indie filmmakers.

aside on Carruth: At a screening of Primer, I asked Shane what his plans were next, if the film had opened a bunch of doors for him... I believe he said something to the effect of "i'm writing a movie rom-com about an oceanographer falling in love." here we go, from an interview with village voice columnist [and my film teacher] Amy Taubin: "It's a coming-of-age romance between an oceanography prodigy and the daughter of a commodities trader. It's set against trade routes in East Africa and Southern Asia. " seeing the (lack of) progress he's made since winning Sundance... can't say that makes me feel great.

Thought it was awesome! I think if anybody saw that they would ask you to write up an outline for their next music video! the lighting stuff you did was really cool, but i was mostly intrigued by the vision you were able to create from that script.. when the mind is forced to work in strict confines, we are able to be the most creative, TS Eliot said something to that effect. congrats. I would cut the funny bit at the end; totally undermines a great piece.

You might find it useful to compare it with "Dark Star." it's a comical version of Alien that O'Bannon wrote/starred in? apparently drew some inspiration from the celebrated sci-fi story "Who Goes There," which had previously inspired "The Thing from Outer Space." Obviously, O'Bannon went on to make Alien, but it's interesting to note that Carpenter went on to (re)make "The Thing." IMDB summary Dark Star: Low-budget story of four astronauts in deep space, whose mission is to destroy unstable planets in star systems which are to be colonised. The late Commander Powell is stored in deep freeze, where he is still able to offer advice. As their mission nears completion, they must cope with a runaway alien which resembles a beach-ball, faulty computer systems, and a "smart bomb" who thinks it is God.

Writer's blog Great explanation of why writer's get residuals (not royalties) and what the strike is about. excerpted: "... I used the example of a guy who lays down sheet metal. He doesn't get a payment every time GM sells a car. When you’re paid for your work, you’re done. Why on earth would screenwriters feel we deserved anything more? ... The point that has been made to me again and again in my discussions with pro-residuals strikers is that a work of art is unlike a panel of sheet metal in that it can be reproduced - "cloned" as it were - over and over ad infinitum, and sold for profit each and every time. In other words, the guy laying out sheet metal produces one panel, then one panel is sold. He produces another, another is sold. Etc. But when a movie is made, it’s made once, then reproduced (not recreated) as many times as there is a buyer. In this scenario, it is not the labor that is the key issue. It’s authorship. ... What's different about screenwriting from other forms of writing is that the author does not, in fact, retain authorship. "Authorship" implies control, something the studios are not willing to give, and so a system has been devised whereby the writer works on a for-hire basis, as an employee. This makes the studio the legal "author" of our writing, which in turn entitles them to do whatever they want with it creatively. (And if you’re one of the people who thinks Hollywood is a big poop factory, I’ve just given you a giant clue as to why.) For the privilege of owning and controlling our work, they have to pay us more up front. Because the studio is the legal author of a film, there can be no royalties to the actual writers. This is how the weirdo concept of residuals came about. They are in practical reality different from royalties only in that they are considerably less than royalties, which is due to the fact that we get paid more up front. Joe Novelist gets less up front, controls his work, and makes more on the back end. Joe Screenwriter gets more up front, has no control over his work, and makes less on the back end. That’s the story with residuals. They’re about authorship. "

Congrats - poster looks great - must be fulfilling / gratifying / relieving!!!

Richard - been meaning to ask you - does your distribution film affect your interest/ability to send your film to festivals? is that something you pursued prior / after signing with distributor, something you are even interested in? thanks, ae

Richard - i get what you're saying, and it's great that you paid your crew and treated them well... that fact notwithstanding, we're talking about a miniscule backen paid to writers. if you wanted writers to put equity into the production, then their backend would rightly increase to 20-30% of a production... and guess what??? The studios would rather give them low six figures against mid six and a miniscule percentage. what you are advocating would most likely never meet with studio approval.

" writers get $0.04 per dvd... you figure a $25 dvd. that is a little over a tenth of 1%, ie 0.0016" Just how much should a writer pay in order to get more than 1/10 of 1% ??? a couple million into the production? you tell me. how does what you propose make sense? should songwriters start bankrolling the CD's? i mean, then wouldn't we just abolish studios and their control? more importantly, i believe the WGA has given up the dvd fight in order to fight on Internet and downloads. b/c as the video someone posted aptly pointed out, pretty soon, you'll get TV on your computer. and the studios would pay nothing! they're focused on getting max Internet dollars...

great info. thanks for showing the ropes to everyone. good luck with your movie & Berlin! ae

It's making sense now.... periodically, the Hollywood Reporter publishes the "going rates" for film territories. Japan is worth more than Malaysia, etc. etc. I can't find the report, but it's usually a page, something like Japan is maybe $70k US if i roughly remember correctly... do you approve/disapprove of foreign sales (dollar amount; i'm sure you're not turning down sales) at this point, or does the sales agent have discretion to close deals and report to you? also, you can sell dvd's / downloads off a Dark Reprieve site and/or Amazon or specialty sites and keep the money for yourself? ty, ae

Rich - congrats! on the sale... to be a little more precise - you option all the rights to an established film company (option, yes? for a certain time period? how long?) and they have sold some territories, but not all, which is why you head to Berlin next... and then your pay scale is off the territories sold, not the overall units? rather than me guess, could you explain :) ae

i've been doing a little research on this when i bought Scrivener to help me outline... Movie magic looks to be overtaking Final Draft in terms of continued, ongoing development, free customer support (final draft makes you pay after awhile), and more bells/whistles... sure, FD is industry standard, but if you're sending PDF's, does it matter?

I read about many indie films that have contracts with benchmarks, eg, "if your film makes $10m theatrical, then we give you a $500k bonus." and the distributor pulls the film when it has $9.9m in revenue. wouldn't that suck??? further, writers are getting $0.04 per dvd... you figure a $25 dvd. that is a little over a tenth of 1%, ie 0.0016

What you're arguing is anti-thetical to the system. the system is: the creator gets a salary and % of iterations. the studios want to limit as many iterations as possible. You want them to pay back money if the movie is a failure. Please cite me an example of a successful system that runs in this manner so that I may see its benefits. I can cite you systems that work analogous to the aforementioned (music springs to mind, as do books). (do you think dvd's are a big financial risk? i doubt it. it's pretty easy to gauge the audience and adjust. your point is better made on theatrical releases)

The screenplay was bought on its own merits. if someone else's fingerprints make the movie awful (like a guy in a suit with an MBA from Yale), then the writer shouldn't have to pay back money. By your logic, the guy who designs cars for GM (and the workers) should give back all profits as they just suffered billions in losses. Does that make sense? and lest we forget, no one in Hollywood wants net profits b/c studios show most movies as having lost money. that sinks the whole idea right there.

reposted from thewritersbuilding, re: the WGA viewpoint ----------- Some of us have been screwed for a while now, and not in the pleasant sense. The below is an email post from Micah Wright, posted on the WriterAction (WGA-only board). I requested and have his written permission to spread it like the plague. ~ Tina (FYI, to set the scene, the tone of Micah?s intro is in response to another WA poster unhappy with our leadership). Well this is ONE angry Horad that?s confused about your stance. The AMPTP clearly never intends to pay us one single cent for internet delivery. The music business model clearly indicates that internet delivery for most, if not all content is the future. What then were we supposed to do when faced with rollbacks and refusals to bargain in good faith? Pray? Or just swallow the bullshit they were trying to shove down our throats, and forget about not only what we?re making, but also what every person who ever follows us into this union will ever make? People like you keep bitching about the DVD negotiating point, and yeah, you?re right: DVD was lost 20 years ago, but there?s no magic rule which says we can?t reopen that topic. More importantly, though, DVD didn?t take off for almost a decade after the ?88 strike? the Internet is here NOW, and it?s here FOREVER, and if we give in and allow them to pay us ZERO on Internet delivery, we can just kiss the idea of ever getting paid residuals goodbye forever. It?s not self-righteousness which is driving this negotiation? it?s quite simply the greed of the AMPTP, which clearly sees this as the year in which they intend to break the WGA on the rack once and for all. But you don?t see that? you seem unable to get it through your head that the AMPTP doesn?t want to ever pay us anything. If you think these people are so reasonable and that they deal in good faith, then try talking to writers who work in Animation and Reality? THAT is the future that the AMPTP has in store for EVERY WRITER IN THE WGA. Because if they don?t have to pay residuals to the woman who wrote The Lion King, then why should they ever have to pay one to YOU? Or anyone else? Oh, and before you give me some fu**ing sob story about the disastrous strike of 1988, let me bring you up to date with a more RECENT story: mine. I came to this guild having had a ?successful? career writing Animation for $1400/week for five years. During that time, I wrote on several of Nickelodeon?s highest-rated shows. My writing partner wrote and directed 1/4 of the episodes of ?SpongeBob SquarePants? and I was responsible for 1/5 of the episodes of ?The Angry Beavers.? The current value that those shows have generated for Viacom? $12 Billion dollars. My writing partner topped out at $2100/week. In the year 2001, tired of not receiving residuals for my endlessly- repeating work (even though the actors and composers for my episodes do), I joined with 28 other writers and we signed our WGA cards. So, Nickelodeon quickly filed suit against our petition for an election, and set about trying to ferret out who the ?ringleaders? were. In the meantime, they canceled the show that I had created 4 episodes into an order of 26. Then they fired the 3 writers who?d been working on my show. Then they fired 20 more of my fellow writers and shut down three more shows, kicking almost their entire primetime lineup for 2002 to the curb, and laying off 250 artists. Then, once the WGA?s petition for election was tied up in court over our illegal firings, Nickelodeon called in the IATSE Local 839 ?Cartoonists Guild? ? a racket union which exists only the screw the WGA and its own members ? and they signed a deal which forever locks the WGA out of Nickelodeon, even though we were there first. Neato! Then Nickelodeon?s brass decided ?out of thin fu**ing air? that myself and two other writers had been ?the ringleaders? of this organizing effort, so they called around to Warner Bros. Animation, the Cartoon Network, Disney Animation, and Fox Kids, effectively blacklisting the three of us out of animation permanently. And why did Nickelodeon do this? Why were they so eager to decimate their own 2002 schedule, fire 24 writers, break multiple federal labor laws, sign a union deal, and to even bring back the fu**ing blacklist? They did all of that to prevent us from getting the same whopping $5 residual that the actors & composers of our shows get. For five lousy fu**ing bucks, they destroyed three people?s careers and put 250 artists out of work and fu**ed up their own channel for a year. Ahh, but my episodes run about 400 times a year worldwide, though, so obviously Sumner Redstone (Salary in 2001: $65 million dollars) and Tom Freston (2001 salary: $55 million) were right to do what they did? myself and those other 23 writers might have broken the bank, what with each of us going to cost them another TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS each! OH NO! That? that?s? FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS! A YEAR! So don?t come crying to those of us who have EXPERIENCED what the AMPTP plans for all of the rest of you, that people who are deciding to stand up to bully-boy tactics like that are the crazy bunch of ?horads? lustily marching ?throught? the streets searching for blood. The AMPTP are the barbarians sacking Rome in this scenario. The AMPTP and their glittering-eyed weasel lawyers are a bunch of lying, blacklisting, law-breaking scumbags, and the fact that they haven?t budged off of ANY of their proposals in the last three months proves that what they have in store for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU is exactly what they did to us at Nickelodeon, and what they can do any day of the week in daytime animation. Or reality. Strike or no strike. That?s their plan: to winnow down your membership, to snip away at your MBA, to chew away at your health & pension plans until there?s just nothing left of the WGA. Why? Because they?ve had a good strong drink of how much money they make off of animation when they don?t have to cut the creators in for any of the cash, and now they want to extend that free ride to all of live action as well. THAT is why they have pushed for this strike at every step, with their insulting press releases, with their refusals to negotiate, etc. ? because they?re HOPING we go on strike, and that enough cowards and Quislings come crawling out of the woodwork after six weeks that they can force us to accept the same deal that Reality TV show writers have. If you doubt me, go read their contract proposals again? there?s not ONE of them which isn?t an insult and a deal-breaking non-starter. So can we PLEASE stop hearing about how it?s the current WGA management which is the fu**ing problem here? Because, frankly, that canard is getting a little stale. Or perhaps you prefer presidents like the President of the Guild back in 2001 who just threw up her hands when we were fired and blacklisted out of our careers and said, and I quote, ?oh well, it was a good try??

with respect to Mr. Most, we are speaking about the originator of the work, the author. just as someone creates a work of music, or patents a process, they deserve to be paid in future iterations, especially in the case of spec work. perhaps in the case of a "work for hire" i would consider Most's point more valid. consider the case of the actor: An actor appears in a national McDonalds commercial becomes indelibly linked to that burger, and can certainly not audition for Subway commercials, and probably can't audition for health food products if the commercial is popular. You have to consider these unique instances and protect the participants & their likeness. further, they have no "equity" financing in the product, likely, but they are in a sense spending money in the production in the sense of "debt." it's the time / value proposition. If i'm working on your project when i could be working for someone else, then i'm contributing value (ie money).

not sure where you pulled 5% from? the acceptable terms for a good writer are defined by the WGA. A lot of producers use that as the standard for deals that are non-WGA as well. I assure you writers are not getting 5 million on a $100m movie. maybe you're talking low budgets, but i'm still not sure that your 5% example works. i've more commonly heard 2-3%, aka 200k on a $10m movie.

This is lame. People like you ruin it for other filmmakers. "oh we can't let you use our property. we let these kids use it once and they tore it to pieces." Think before you post. Think before you film. Think more.

i've seen it... it's kind of a guilty pleasure... i remembered this quote from the imdb fun facts page: The tag line for the film was "Tonight is what it means to be young." When producer Joel Silver saw the poor box office numbers from the opening weekend, he quipped "Tonight is what it means to be dead." i guess a lot of the guys responsible for the movie had just done 48 Hours, so this probably was a bad career move. the music is fun - kind of anthemic, opera rock. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagnerian_rock

Saw 2,3,4 were part of an established franchise (Cary Elwes anyone?), built in audience. Point still taken, but probably not the film to make your point.