My first movie job...OMG!!!

[safarijoe]

First let me say that although I've been interested in working on a movie for sometime, I'm a videographer with no pretentions of being anything else. Last weekend I was hired to replace the camera man on a small indie shoot. The main reason they came to me was because I'm in craigslist. I agreed to take the job for far less than my normal rate because it was a chance to work on a real movie. (To be fair there is a clause for additional defered payment but frankly, I don't expect to see any of it). The director had his own DVX but after some discussion it was reveiled he had no mikes, boom, lights etc. I agreed to bring my lights , my boom, my mike (the mike I chose was my 416), my mixer (FP33a) and cables, all at no additional cost. I even brought a monitor, although it was never used.
When I arrived on the set, I discovered that there was no one to run the boom. It was an outdoor shoot (day) and they had no reflectors, flags matte box, not even an umbrella. One of the locals was appointed to operate to the boom and after I set everything up and attempted to explained to proper use of a boom, we began. It went downhill from there. When we moved to the next location , I got a new boom operator who refused to follow directions, I had to setup the lighting for every shot, I had to suggest and setup several different shots, I had to monitor the sound and intervene with the talent.
My question is this, isn't the director supposed to handle the crew and direct the movie? Also, is it normal for the director to not have a clue about the technical stuff? Shouldn't they have had a shot list? The crew/cast seemed to be more interested in socializing than making a movie. Is that normal? As a videographer, I'm used to getting the job done and go home. On this job, the only person interested in working was me. Is it always this way?

 

[MikeWilkinson]

I agreed to take the job for far less than my normal rate because it was a chance to work on a real movie.

What is your definition of a real movie? Producers/Director just LOVE to talk up their projects to everyone, and will make a $50 indie sounds like a $50 million dollar sundance-bound masterpiece to get you to work as cheaply as possible.

The director had his own DVX but after some discussion it was reveiled he had no mikes, boom, lights etc.

Was he not looking to hire crew and rent equipment for all of this? I'm assuming no, which is why..

I agreed to bring my lights , my boom, my mike (the mike I chose was my 416), my mixer (FP33a) and cables, all at no additional cost.

I'm all about being helpful and working doing what you love... but this was a mistake. Equipment you spent hard earned money on should make back some when working on projects like this.

I had to setup the lighting for every shot, I had to suggest and setup several different shots, I had to monitor the sound and intervene with the talent.

I'm not surprised.

My question is this, isn't the director supposed to handle the crew and direct the movie? Also, is it normal for the director to not have a clue about the technical stuff? Shouldn't they have had a shot list? The crew/cast seemed to be more interested in socializing than making a movie. Is that normal? As a videographer, I'm used to getting the job done and go home. On this job, the only person interested in working was me. Is it always this way?

Yes.
Yes, assume they know nothing. When they "have their own DVX" don't expect them to be able to use it.
A DP should have a number of pre-production meetings with the director to determine the shotlist.
Yes it is normal for people like talent-less talent to kick back and have a good old time while you are sweating from setting up 7 lights and blocking the scene.
On projects like this, absolutely. People on set are not being paid, and therefore will good off. On "REAL" when there is a large crew people are more in line. They definitely have a good time no doubt, but they work when it's time to work. Only YOU know how much work you'll have to do to make it look good. You have to make the director know as well, and that's how you justify getting paid properly.

As you may have been able to tell, I've done something like this before and am a bit jaded from it. It happens, and you've just got to learn from it. if you are struggling to find work and doing nothing else, keep working and make sure everyone knows you and your talent, you might get hired to shoot someones (shudders) wedding or demo reel or something... getting more contact is a good idea. NEVER burn bridges, but if you are being taken advantage of, get out and warn everyone else who may get conned into working on it.

A few tidbits extra: (IMO)

NEVER agree to do work on this kind of a scale without a sit down meeting between yourself and the producer/director/check writers. This is where things like "you have a shotlist, right?" get brought up.

Personally– I'd get out of it asap or ask for a just amount of money for all the equip and work you WILL have to do for a sub-par project (not saying that your work is sub-par, but there is only so much one person can do by themselves when working for someone else)

I personally have a questionnaire that I bring to the first meeting that covers all of my questions. Once i know the EXACT scale of work and THEY SIGN A CONTRACT THAT OUTLINES EXACTLY WHAT MY JOB ENTAILS AND THAT I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR NOTHING MORE, I deliver. Oh, and I include an escape clause in my contract for times like these.

Good luck.

 

[safarijoe]

I already do weddings...and birthdays and plays and whatever else the client wants me to shoot. As I said, I'm a videographer. Normally, my clients are required to sign a contract and put down a deposit. Also I didn't mean to imply that I was hired as a DP...although that certainly seems to be what I ended up being(along with grip,sound guy and director). I just wanted to know if my experience was par for the course or an aberration. Thanks for your advise. It tells me that there ARE some serious indie folks out there and I shouldn't close the door on the market. And you're right, I did let the idea of working on a "real" movie dazzle me.

 

[Barry_Green]

My question is this, isn't the director supposed to handle the crew and direct the movie?

The director should be directing, yes. But the director normally has nothing to do with the crew management, that's handled by the production manager. Next time you get one of these calls, ask who the production manager is. If they give you the name of a competent-sounding go-getter, well, it might be worth going further. If they say "my what?" then you pretty much know you're safe to hang up the phone...

Also, is it normal for the director to not have a clue about the technical stuff?

Not necessarily. The requirement for a director is that they be a visionary artist. There are plenty of technical people who can handle all that other stuff (but yes, if they don't have a handle on the technicals they should have had someone in place who did!)

Shouldn't they have had a shot list?

Of course. Not having a shot list is ridiculous.

The crew/cast seemed to be more interested in socializing than making a movie. Is that normal?

Frequently -- and those are the first people I fire.

As a videographer, I'm used to getting the job done and go home.

Good attitude!

On this job, the only person interested in working was me. Is it always this way?

No, it's that way on unprofessional know-nothing shoots. On a legit/actual/professional shoot you'll find lots and lots of dedicated hard-working people who all want the end product to be the best it can, and who all want to go home sooner rather than later (unless you find certain people who are bucking for "golden time", which unfortunately does happen).

 

[brianluce]

don't forget, all that equipment he's using for free is depreciating. So it's like you're paying HIM to work on HIS movie.

Another thing, not having read the script or knowing anything about the actors etc, it sounds like you've signed on to a train wreck. You sure you want your name associated with it?
You may be co-piloting the Hindenberg.

 

[safarijoe]

Another thing, not having read the script or knowing anything about the actors etc, it sounds like you've signed on to a train wreck. You sure you want your name associated with it?
You may be co-piloting the Hindenberg.[/quote]

I did read part of the script and the synopsis. Hard Rock Zombies (which I consider the all time worst movie I've ever seen) maybe in trouble for the bottom spot.

 

[Mattykins]

Yeah, when taking people up on film shoots, (if you are 'above the line' (DP, UPM, what-have you) make sure to get a look at the script, shot lists, shooting schedules, location lists, equipment lists, breakdowns, all that fun stuff.

Most people won't have this, FYI. They might have a storyboard but no concept of getting things done. I was once on a student film that went till 3:30 in the morning (we started shooting at (9:00AM the prior day). I was a boom op. We wrapped when the talent said F-this and walked off set. That was a fun day...similar to your experience. Though they were burning a ton of money - shooting super 16. Haha.

And I wouldn't do anything for free, or deferred, using that much equipment on a faux production. It it is with a pro company then do it.

Professional crews are godly as opposed to student or 'for-fun' films. The producer keeps the director on time. (since they are renting gear). Mostly everyone wants to get out of there fast, since they are paid by the day. It just runs so much smoother. Sorry to hear it wasn't a great shoot.

 

[tmnt]

Whoa dude, there are so many red flags there I don't know where to start. I think it's fine to work for free as long as you're getting something very valid from it, a la, experience.