Giving a copy of your feature to all the actors

M

Mickey Munday

Well-known member
question, i've seen this tossed around a few times amongst local actors and was wondering. after you've filmed your feature film do "you" give a copy to all of your actors or do you normally hold onto the master until you've entered into film festivals, got distribution, etc?

i've heard actors discussing how they don't expect a copy of the feature until it's being sold or whatever, i've also heard different actors that feel they should have a copy immediately after post production regardless.

i know what my stance on this is but am curious how other directors handle this on an indie level? and what's your reason?
 
Last edited:
I am on my 3rd feature and I don't give copies to anyone right away. I always wait until I sell a lot before I do that. But that's just me. And most of my actors don't even ask for them. I do have one that calls and calls and emails and texts me over and over.
 
lol...what do you tell him? so you primarily are selling your films on your own without trying to get distribution, etc?
 
For the most part, I try to hold out until the first public screening. However, at times I have given copies to cast and crew at the Cast & Crew screening if there is one prior to a premiere.

This of course is when it is a micro-budget deal and actors get low or no pay. If the production is fully financed then there is not a contractual stipulation that they receive a copy (at least in my deal memos). However, I still have provided copies after the film is either released or screened in a festival or two.


-M
 
I always provide a copy, but not until it's gone public. Doing otherwise would just be rude in my opinion, especially since I've never worked on a project with decent pay. Principal actors, at least.
 
Had an acquaintance once who gave each actor a copy of the film - consisting only of the scenes each individual actor was actually in.
 
Always provide a copy if it's low-no budget. I don't think there's any reason not to.

I can understand waiting until the first public screening, or the first screening for that matter, but it depends on how long after post that is. If it's 6 months or longer, just give em the thing. No skin off your back.
 
if it's a zero-budget film where the actors aren't paid, then giving them a copy of the final film is a good idea and costs almost nothing
 
i solve this by giving them select scenes for their reel. but i don't give them dvds until their available for purchase.
 
just to play devil's advocate - what's the difference if it's a zero budget film where the actors didnt get paid and a budgeted film where the actors didnt get paid?

i've seen cases where both types of movies look and sound great and where they also both turned out like sh*t and had a weak story.
 
Last edited:
Mickey Munday said:
lol...what do you tell him? so you primarily are selling your films on your own without trying to get distribution, etc?
Click to expand...

It's a She, and I just don't answer her texts, calls or emails. :Drogar-Evil(DBG): And I will pop the hatch of the car, post up and slang DVD's all day long. I sold over 500 copies of my first film at $10.00. After that the bootleggers got a hold of it and it was a wrap.
 
Mickey Munday said:
just to play devil's advocate - what's the difference if it's a zero budget film where the actors didnt get paid and a budgeted film where the actors didnt get paid?

i've seen cases where both types of movies look and sound great and where they also both turned out like sh*t and had a weak story.
Click to expand...

If they didn't get paid, I think they should just and they shouldn't have to wait for something to happen with the film. However, if you're paying them good money, you can make em wait as long as you want.
 
they can wait. unless they helped finance the film, a copy of their scenes for their reels is good enough until you screen it at a few festivals or sell it, whatever. their scenes from the film is what's gonna help them get the next gig or be the most useful to them IMO. most of the actors are working on 5 to 10 projects at a time anyway.
 
One of the conditions many actors (like me) will insist on, though it's commonly offered anyway, is a copy of the film when it's done. Food (almost always) and transportation (only sometimes) are also part of the deal.

Actors frequently devote tremendous amounts of time to a role between the rehearsing, travel and shooting, and certainly deserve something to show for it, especially if they're not getting paid. Generally the footage is used only for their demo reels.

Frankly, for myself, most of what I've shot isn't good enough for me to want to do even that. Between the dicey writing, technical, and directorial work by the all too often inexpert filmmakers, and my own lack of greater acting ability, most of the DVDs of what I've done remain on a shelf in my living room.

Having said that, I do have to cop to being highly critical of every aspect of what I do creatively. Many of the filmmakers I get hired by are far more enthusiastic about 'our' work than I am...
 
Last edited:
IMO, Actors should be treated with the greatest respect of all the groups of artists involved in film making. Yes, this means they deserve copies of their acting work (duh!) If your worried about piracy or such, cut them a section of their scenes and watermark it. Don't be lazy.

I've witnessed actors driving hundreds of miles to be in little crappy films directed by unprepared egotistical kids that couldn't organize a birthday party for their life and had zero idea of what a story entails. When I see this I want to somehow protect actors from these undisciplined pranksters. I love and highly respect an actor's passion for their craft. They inspire me with their dreams of making great films and the dedication they display. Many actors actually take classes on acting and learn, while many so called film makers don't take classes or learn anything much -- they know it all, or so they think.

Let's respect these people who go out in front of the camera, bare their soul and give it their all.
 
I'll certainly treat actors with the same degree of respect as I show other professionals, but this idea that they're in some way exalted over all other professions impresses me as kind of juvenile and mildly insulting. Do you think people in other fields don't drive long distances, work long hours, and invest themselves in their work?
 
Actors are not exalted, but they need to be respected. Providing them a copy of their work is basic respect. If you can't do this respectfully you will be greatly challenged finding work at a pro level. The top actors, directors and producers in Hollywood call the shots, they are Hollywood. Everyone else salutes.
 
I'm not disagreeing with you regarding the propriety of treating people with respect; it's the whole 'greatest respect' thing that I find objectionable. Anyone who doesn't treat grips with the same courtesy as actors is kind of contemptible.

Of course, there are a lot of contemptible people running loose out there.
 
Yes, everyone should be treated respectfully, no doubt. But in relation to a hypothetical "my buddy, the grip du jour", who just might be on set for the first (and last?) time, and has no professional training, someone who's invested in a lengthy and expensive acting education, spent hundreds on headshots, countless hours in fruitless auditions, traveled long distances and is working for no money might be entitled to something just a bit more...
 
Last edited:
Well, I won't dispute that they might feel entitled to a bit more...

...that first/last time on set / no professional training person just might be the one to prevent a 1K from falling on someone else's professionally-trained, long-distance-traveling, hundreds of dollars-spending head...

...not to mention frequently working longer on-set hours at a generally more physically demanding, lower-paid job, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top