Crediting an actor as a Producer as well?
- Thread starter DecadenceFilms
- Start date
Capt Quirk
Veteran
At least you'd have a movie.
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
Yeah, and if you just sprung for one of those portable DVD players too, you could show your movie to all of your bum friends under the bridge!
Chris Santucci
Veteran
Producer's do not necessarily "put up money" for a film. It's ideal that the funds for a film come from investors but at a certain budget range (very low) investors or investing generally doesn't come into play. In the Indie realm it's a common practice to give investors an executive producer credit, but really they shouldn't have any control over filmmaking decisions and they rarely do.
A lot of times, well-to-do people with stars in their eyes will set out to produce a film that they are financing all on their own. They sometimes call themselves "director" and hire an experienced AD to help them direct. Some write scripts even though they are not writers. Some act as producers and exert creative control even though they have no experience.
For first time or unproven filmmakers, it's generally left to the filmmakers to finance their film, which could be the director, producers, and possibly even the DP. Until you can prove you can make good films that can be sold, you're pretty much stuck financing your own films completely or with any additional scratch you can obtain from sympathetic friends or family. I'd imagine the old model of maxing out credit cards is still in use, but it's a lot harder to declare personal bankruptcy as it once was, so I'd not be in a hurry to take that bet.
I've seen slews of hopeful filmmakers take their own money and sink it into their first film only to see it sit on a shelf after they ran through the festival submission cycle and got rejected by distributors. When you do that with investor money, guess what? You don't get to make a film again unless you're ok with using your own money because investors won't touch you. So there are advantages to using your own money. It may be less money, but at least a failure won't get you black balled and you will have total control. And if you succeed, it's all you.
I've seen filmmakers manage to convince investors that they had a potentially marketable film with very little to prove they could pull it off and come away with mucho dinero. If you can put on a good show, it's possible.
Every situation is a little different with respect to financing and who controls what. What you never want to do is give any control to investors, especially if they have no film experience. It's not really their job to have any control. That's the filmmakers job. If you hook up with a producer who manages to pull money in, it doesn't mean they are equal to the director in terms of creative decisions. If you set definitions up front, you shouldn't have issues with control. I've seen producers making suggestions to inexperienced directors come away with very good films.
As for where the money comes from, it's either individuals with money, finance entities, or banks. Certainly the first option is the easiest and if you yourself don't know people with money to throw around, try and find people who do. If you have elements in your "package" that make your project valuable it's always easier to raise investor money. If you have no "name" actors attached, no proven track record as a filmmaker, that's far worse than even having a marginal script.
Sometimes there are grants that can be had for filmmakers, but the competition is fierce for that money. I think the key things are to have an awesome script in hand, possibly as best a cast as you can manage, and try and raise a reasonable budget from whomever you might have access to. And it can't be a situation where you walk up to someone and say "Hey, wanna invest in my movie." You need to put on a show, which means an "event" so that when attendees show up and witness the pitch, they will also be witnessing ALL the other folks you have invited, which may impress just enough of who's there to give you some money.
.
taormina
Hates to Rent
Nope, plain 'ole producer.
filmman
Veteran
Very complicated, Chris.
Of course, the whole model of filmmaking is gone -- I guess. I think the digital age is responsible for this to a great extent. Everyone can do everything now.
Also, my fear is that there are no real producers left anymore. From what I can see (especially on this website) is that someone decides to "direct" a movie -- they raise the money themselves and then do the whole thing: casting, finding a crew, producing and sometimes even DPing the movie.
There are variations of course. Many start out with short films and then move on to a feature film.
We all know it's hard to make a movie and sell a movie. We also have a hard time finding the money. But we can at least try and break down the process into clearly defined roles. Giving actors credit as producers seems like nuts to me. I apologize for coming out and saying this, because I don't mean disrespect to filmmakers or actors. But please what does producing a movie have to do with what actors do? Actors are supposed to act. They are not supposed to do anything else. They are IN FRONT OF CAMERA PEOPLE, not behind the camera people. You can't be in front of the camera and behind the camera at the same time.
Do you know what I mean? And here is the thing, my position on this point is not unusual; it's the other position that's unusual. Of course, there are exceptions. Clint Eastwood -- ok. Long story.... not usual at all.
But you could be right in the way things are done and you ARE right about the fact that there are no rules to how movies are financed, produced, made, edited or sold.
So it's real interesting to hear you take issue with every traditional way of producing a movie.
You obviously don't approve of this! Well, that's my point too. This is not how it should be.
Of course, the whole model of filmmaking is gone -- I guess. I think the digital age is responsible for this to a great extent. Everyone can do everything now.
Also, my fear is that there are no real producers left anymore. From what I can see (especially on this website) is that someone decides to "direct" a movie -- they raise the money themselves and then do the whole thing: casting, finding a crew, producing and sometimes even DPing the movie.
There are variations of course. Many start out with short films and then move on to a feature film.
We all know it's hard to make a movie and sell a movie. We also have a hard time finding the money. But we can at least try and break down the process into clearly defined roles. Giving actors credit as producers seems like nuts to me. I apologize for coming out and saying this, because I don't mean disrespect to filmmakers or actors. But please what does producing a movie have to do with what actors do? Actors are supposed to act. They are not supposed to do anything else. They are IN FRONT OF CAMERA PEOPLE, not behind the camera people. You can't be in front of the camera and behind the camera at the same time.
Do you know what I mean? And here is the thing, my position on this point is not unusual; it's the other position that's unusual. Of course, there are exceptions. Clint Eastwood -- ok. Long story.... not usual at all.
But you could be right in the way things are done and you ARE right about the fact that there are no rules to how movies are financed, produced, made, edited or sold.
So it's real interesting to hear you take issue with every traditional way of producing a movie.
filmman
Veteran
Adam, there is no way anybody can argue with you. You have played the standard game of how to make a B-Movie and find an agent, and yet you broke all the rules! LOL
So you took an actor who had nothing to do with producing your movie and called him a producer. Please tell me, under the second to last credit (produced by) who do you have listed as producer(s)?
I'm going to be flabbergasted if you don't have your name on top.
In my opinion, and I really don't have the right to even say this, but to hell with it I'm going to say it LOL -- the last credit in the crawl should say: Produced and Directed by Adamo .... (sorry I don't find your last name under your profile on this site).
So if you're adding Tom's name to the producer credit, then you might also be adding your investor(s) name(s) as well. Or perhaps you're giving them a separate card, but I can't figure out how you will word that.
So I'm aware of the fact that you'll come up with something that works for you.
Martay
Veteran
Just this weekend, Drew Barrymore acted in a film called "He's just not that into you". Guess what? She produced it too. She got her own title card and everything.
There are many producer credits to be had at every level of the game. The academy awards might limit the No. of people who can walk on stage at the Oscars to 4 but there have been best picture winners with as many as 9 or more "producers".
Martin Lawrence is almost always an "Executive Producer" on films he stars in. Do you think he's doing much producer work or putting up his money for these films?
No. However, his involvement directly led to the film getting off the ground. Him merely agreeing to show up meant a lot to those productions (not to mention a lot of grips getting work, etc.). Whether the films are decent or not (which many are not any more in his case).
If someone, anyone makes a significant contribution to getting a film made, there should be at least an opportunity for them to get additional credit. Are there cases when the titles get thrown around a little too liberally? Of course. However, whoever is ultimately responsible for the particular project gets to decide those issues.
In terms of ownership? That's all contractual. You can have 50 producers but only 1 may have ownership of the project.
The fact that there is more than one way to skin a cat is true in terms of credit and work on films both large and small.
I understand your concern about "true producers". I feel they're more an anomaly today than ever and it's a problem. However, the truth is, it isn't because credits are being inappropriately given out. It's just a fact of the film business right now.
We do need more serious producers who don't just do their own projects, but find great ones and champion them. However, if an actor, or caterer goes way above and beyond on a project...don't begrudge them a producer credit.
-M
Capt Quirk
Veteran
When you are talking about people like Barrymore, Sandler, etc., these are people who have gained money, reputation, and most importantly, contacts. That is why they have transitioned into Producing as well, and they can choose who to work with, and what project to do.
taormina
Hates to Rent
The credits for producers on Corrado go like this:
All other opening credits...
Then Producers: Tom Sizemore and Lance Crayon
Executive Producer: Francis Patrick Magee
Written, Produced, and Directed by yours truly
Then the movie starts.
When the movie ends, I first have the same credit, then the cast, etc.
All other opening credits...
Then Producers: Tom Sizemore and Lance Crayon
Executive Producer: Francis Patrick Magee
Written, Produced, and Directed by yours truly
Then the movie starts.
When the movie ends, I first have the same credit, then the cast, etc.
taormina
Hates to Rent
Actually I'm the last credit before the film plays, and the first credit you see whent he film ends.
Martay
Veteran
Chris Santucci
Veteran
What I have issues with are people not knowing their limitations. If you have money and are intent on making a movie, and you have zero experience in filmmaking, it's a lot smarter to just hire people who know what they're doing and stay out of the way. You can easily call yourself a producer and who knows, you might end up being a producer on a good film rather than a writer/director of a piece of crap.
Of course if someone is paying for a film, it IS their money and they can certainly exercise their filmmaker fantasy if they want to.
With low budgets that's just the way it is. Sometimes, filmmakers just don't want to lose control over certain aspects of a film's production. Sometimes they don't know HOW to play with the other kids. Sometimes they can't find other potential crew to help out because they live in an area where there just aren't any potential crew.
I also think certain film schools don't teach students how to work collaboratively with other students. It seems in a lot of cases, all the kids that go to film school want to be directors, so you have this condition where all the students are sort of competing with each other rather than chipping in and pulling off good films.
There ARE real producers out there but they usually only come into play when the budget allows for it. I'd tell anyone who wants to make a film that they should consider hiring a real producer (who has produced features before) whenever possible.
As I mentioned before, credits don't mean anything. Surely you don't want to credit 2 people for doing the same thing when only one of them really did the work, but on features when you have possibly a dozen producers, it's generally understood that each producer sort of concentrates on specific things. Yeah, actors act, but if an actor does something crucial that facilitates the completion of the film, that's very much exactly what a producer does.
Actors (movie stars) often lend their names to projects so they can get financing. Sometimes an actors friend who needs that crucial "name" attached to the project will sign on in a role thereby opening the vault door for the filmmaker. Sometimes an actor's parents finance the film. Sometimes an actor helps secure something for free which allows money to be used for other things.
.
filmman
Veteran
Well, Chris, I think we agree, ironically; we're just saying it from different perspectives.
Yes, a producer isn't supposed to direct the movie. So, give him credit for putting up the money, namely: PRODUCER!
And give the director the credit for directing the movie, namely: DIRECTOR!
You want to give credit to an actor because of a favor? Why not give the actor director credit then if he or she does you a favor too?
If a pitcher covers first base while the first baseman is fielding a ball between first and second, do they give the pitcher first base credit. The pitcher and the first baseman! LOL
Let me ask you thin: how would you feel if the actor calls the distributor of your movie and says, "I never got paid a dime, and I'm one of the producers of the movie -- just look at the credits..." ? Tell me how would you feel when the distributor calls you and tells you, "is that true?"
I must admit that's one time when digital comes in handy. With 4,000 release prints out there, to replace the credits at the beginning and end of the movie, you'd have to spend a few million dollars.
But the real damage is that you may end up losing all that money -- maybe everything you have. Of course, if we're talking about student films and shorts that end up demagnetized ... well
I guess you're right too. I take back what I said. LOL
Yes, a producer isn't supposed to direct the movie. So, give him credit for putting up the money, namely: PRODUCER!
And give the director the credit for directing the movie, namely: DIRECTOR!
You want to give credit to an actor because of a favor? Why not give the actor director credit then if he or she does you a favor too?
If a pitcher covers first base while the first baseman is fielding a ball between first and second, do they give the pitcher first base credit. The pitcher and the first baseman! LOL
Let me ask you thin: how would you feel if the actor calls the distributor of your movie and says, "I never got paid a dime, and I'm one of the producers of the movie -- just look at the credits..." ? Tell me how would you feel when the distributor calls you and tells you, "is that true?"
I must admit that's one time when digital comes in handy. With 4,000 release prints out there, to replace the credits at the beginning and end of the movie, you'd have to spend a few million dollars.
But the real damage is that you may end up losing all that money -- maybe everything you have. Of course, if we're talking about student films and shorts that end up demagnetized ... well
I guess you're right too. I take back what I said. LOL