Life of Pi without R&H

Status
Not open for further replies.
Postmaster

Postmaster

Dark Side of the Camera

The visual effects industry is in danger from foreign subsidies that are distorting the price of visual effects. Movie Studios are getting big checks from foreign governments, that force American VFX houses to cut corners, over work employees, cause a nomadic culture of subsidy farming, and is toxic to the long term health of the industry.

For more information check out VFX soldier: http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/
 
Hilarious. See also:

lflIpFi.jpg
 
dustylense said:
But don't be picking on the movie and the director of Life of Pi.
Click to expand...

+1

also I enjoyed Life of Pie for its story, psychology and acting. The directing and acting at the end were perfect "... and so to it is with God" great delivery on that line.
 
dustylense said:
Yep, there was a big protest outside the Oscars over this. Of course the media kept it real quiet during the ceremony.

But don't be picking on the movie and the director of Life of Pi. They are the ones that tried to say something during the ceremony when Rhythm & Hues went speak of the protest and were played off the stage to Jaws music.
http://www.deadline.com/2013/02/oscars-2013-life-of-pi-vfx-rhythm-hues-bankruptcy/
Click to expand...

To be fair, most of DVXuser didn't seem to care either.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?303001-Oscars-VFX-protest

And Ang was "picked on" due to some comments he made, it wasn't just an arbitrary thing because he directed the film.
 
Blah, blah, blah. We all know what the problems are. Everybody and their dog can get their digs in, and their own complaints. Great. But what should be done about it? As soon as you ask that question: crickets. It's easy to point to the problem, but strangely hard to come up with a solution. Besides it's impossible to discuss this without touching upon issues of economy and politics, and that's against the TOS here.

We'd all like production to be cheaper. But people cost money. And when you make things cheaper, at some point, people lose jobs. How do you reconcile these two? And let's not be hypocrites - all we ever read on these boards is how we want "cheaper, cheaper, cheaper" equipment, services, pay for labor. At some point you can't make it cheaper without outsourcing to places like China/Whereever... I don't see you refusing to buy a camera/gadget because it's made in China. You don't care about jobs lost in the U.S./Europe/Wherever when you're buying your stuff - you only suddenly care when it's YOUR job on the line.

What do you propose as a solution? Tariffs - like what lead (in part) to the Great Depression? And even if we outlaw all products from across borders (which result in them banning our stuff too and world-wide depression), what have we really solved? Do you really want for production costs to skyrocket again, so that only big, big, big studios can afford to make a film anymore? Goodbye indies - we may as well shut down this board cause the only people who could afford to make films away from studios would be people with Howard Hughes kind of cash.

So you want cheap stuff - understandable, because otherwise you can't afford to even be in the game. But that results in job losses - perhaps one day your own. What do you propose as a solution? Spare me the complaints and the whining and the crying - it's tough all over... we get it, we know it, we live it. Tell me instead - what do we do about it...????

Crickets.
 
Maybe some of the people posting here can afford to hire VFX studios, but I think a lot of people on a forum like this have to live with what they can do in After Effects so this isn't really an issue that's going to spark a lot of interest.
 
Old joke in there: The VFX guy is on set explaining to the producer the old saying .. Fast, Good and Cheap, you can only pick two.
The producer says, “I’ll take cheap twice.”

Cheers.
 
From Cryptonomicon (1999) - a novel by Neal Stephenson,

Hollywood was merely a specialized bank — a consortium of large financial entities that hired talent, almost always for a flat rate, ordered that talent to create a product, and then marketed that product to death, all over the world, in every conceivable medium. The goal was to find products that would keep on making money forever, long after the talent had been paid off and sent packing. Casablanca, for example, was still putting asses in seats decades after Bogart had been paid off and smoked himself into an early grave.
------------
David Mamet elaborates: Mamet begins by quoting Neal Stephenson, who's never identified, but who is reported to have said that everybody misunderstands Hollywood. He called it a bank. "Or, perhaps better, it's a market," writes Mamet. "The studios exist to acquire properties, talent, commodities, at as low a fixed price as possible, and then to flog them for whatever profit they may extort."

Studio executives are likened to "traders on the floor of a mercantile exchange, screaming, making antic gestures to attract attention, and waving slips of paper at one another - these not orders to buy or sell stocks but scripts and the names of talent. All trying to buy low, to sell high, now to outthink the other fellow, now to collude with him, to defraud a third party. Just as in the stock market."

Many another writer has felt raped by Hollywood. Though with the money that writers get out there, belly-aching seems churlish.
 
OldCorpse said:
Blah, blah, blah. We all know what the problems are. Everybody and their dog can get their digs in, and their own complaints. Great. But what should be done about it? As soon as you ask that question: crickets. It's easy to point to the problem, but strangely hard to come up with a solution. Besides it's impossible to discuss this without touching upon issues of economy and politics, and that's against the TOS here.

We'd all like production to be cheaper. But people cost money. And when you make things cheaper, at some point, people lose jobs. How do you reconcile these two? And let's not be hypocrites - all we ever read on these boards is how we want "cheaper, cheaper, cheaper" equipment, services, pay for labor. At some point you can't make it cheaper without outsourcing to places like China/Whereever... I don't see you refusing to buy a camera/gadget because it's made in China. You don't care about jobs lost in the U.S./Europe/Wherever when you're buying your stuff - you only suddenly care when it's YOUR job on the line.

What do you propose as a solution? Tariffs - like what lead (in part) to the Great Depression? And even if we outlaw all products from across borders (which result in them banning our stuff too and world-wide depression), what have we really solved? Do you really want for production costs to skyrocket again, so that only big, big, big studios can afford to make a film anymore? Goodbye indies - we may as well shut down this board cause the only people who could afford to make films away from studios would be people with Howard Hughes kind of cash.

So you want cheap stuff - understandable, because otherwise you can't afford to even be in the game. But that results in job losses - perhaps one day your own. What do you propose as a solution? Spare me the complaints and the whining and the crying - it's tough all over... we get it, we know it, we live it. Tell me instead - what do we do about it...????

Crickets.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand. I want to pay very little for everything, but I should still get paid very well. It's actually quite simple. It's just like how everyone who drives slower than you is a moron, while everyone who drives faster is a maniac.

This is all symptomatic of a society that values profit above all else. If we value making more money over the products we make, the people we employ, and any regard for the world around us, then this is where we go. Profit is good, but focusing on one thing to the detriment of all else is never, ever the answer to a problem.
 
Last edited:
stefancolson said:
You don't seem to understand. I want to pay very little for everything, but I should still get paid very well. It's actually quite simple. It's just like how everyone who drives slower than you is a moron, while everyone who drives faster is a maniac.

This is all symptomatic of a society that values profit above all else. If we value making more money over the products we make, the people we employ, and any regard for the world around us, then this is where we go. Profit is good, but focusing on one thing to the detriment of all else is never, ever the answer to a problem.
Click to expand...

I have to echo OldCorpse on this. Absolutely, Hollywood (The fictional narrative motion picture business) is capitalism at its worst and, for some, at its best. I am all for a world wide open discussion on the merits and evils of capitalism towards the development of a more egalitarian society, but that is not very likely to happen anytime soon. It is also not a proper topic of discussion on this forum. In the mean time, welcome to the picture BUSINESS!! Due to globalization, anybody who's job can be done by lower cost workers in other parts of the world does not have job security. If your job can be done over a wire, like large corporation customer service or VFX work, then you should expect that your job is going to be moved to be done by lower cost workers in an other country in short order. Like OldCorpse said, "What are we going to do about it?". If you can't answer that, oh well. I am of the opinion that addressing these flaws in our (World wide) system might be much more disruptive and destructive than the current very unequal system we have.

That being said... The video in the OP was hilarious!!
 
I think it's less an "industry" issue, and more an issue of our societal ideals. It's not a matter of something being broken so much as what we (as a nation) consider success to be. The way forward is not in disrupting the current system so much as it is in finding your own market and avenue to achieve your goals. It's easy to complain, but much harder to walk the walk and try to make your own way. If you want to be a part of the Hollywood system, then you have to play the Hollywood game. If that system isn't a good fit for you, then it's up to you to find your place, it's not on the system to make room for you. If you're willing to define success by your own terms, then you need to be willing to live by that same definition. If money is your ultimate goal, then the system as is pretty effective for those with ambition and drive.
 
Cameras are cheap and so are the computers and programs for the VFX. Go make your own movie if you don't like what Hollywood pays and you are an awesome VFX guy. I thought Monsters was a great movie. Loved the direction, the slow paced scenes that were tranquil yet had an element of tension at the same time and the VFX were very good.

Monsters
[h=2]Production[/h] The film was devised, story boarded and directed by Gareth Edwards, who also worked as the visual effects artist
 
Where's a good site that you can get VFX for a good price? Like you want a sign replaced in a shot and you don't want to spend hours figuring out AE yourself?
 
Gillvane said:
Cameras are cheap and so are the computers and programs for the VFX. Go make your own movie if you don't like what Hollywood pays and you are an awesome VFX guy.
Click to expand...

That's not how it works. These people are career VFX artists who are being taken advantage of. They are being treated like cheap data-entry clerks rather than the integral and valuable part of a film's production that they are.
 
refocusedmedia said:
That's not how it works. These people are career VFX artists who are being taken advantage of. They are being treated like cheap data-entry clerks rather than the integral and valuable part of a film's production that they are.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Why don't you respect people that do data entry? People get paid the going rate for their services. You don't pay someone to fix yoru computer more than the going rate do you? If you pay the going rate are you taking advantage of someone that fixes your computer or does data entry? If not, then what makes VFX artists different that they should be paid more than the going rate? Why are VFX artists so special that the normal market rules apply to everyone else but not them?
 
refocusedmedia said:
That's not how it works. These people are career VFX artists who are being taken advantage of. They are being treated like cheap data-entry clerks rather than the integral and valuable part of a film's production that they are.
Click to expand...

This isn't how the people cutting the checks and making the hiring decisions see it. The non-creative types in the film industry are concerned with one thing: profits. No studio head ever got their job because they create a great work environment or because put their employees first. Decisions that result in more profit are good decisions, and those that don't are bad. Even the few executives who are champions of quality are such only so far as it results in a product that garners a larger audience and more profit.

What would happen if an exec made the decision to contract a domestic company for VFX on a film when a foreign company could do the job for half, resulting in a loss of millions of dollars to the studio? At the end of the day upper management reports to the board of directors who report to the shareholders. The driving force behind most of these decisions comes down to quarterly reports, stock price, and the bottom line. If an exec delivers great quality products that don't make a profit (or don't meet the arbitrary profit metrics set by a room full of suits) then they get canned and someone else comes in. It may not be "fair", but you better believe that the system is working EXACTLY as intended for the people whom it benefits. Just as it's the VFX artist's job to deliver as high quality of a product as possible, it's the producer's job to deliver a product as cheaply as possible without cutting too many corners. It's unfortunate that we have a system that puts teammates at odds against each other like this, but we're all slaves to the almighty dollar.

If you highly value stability and ultimate quality of non-work life, then the film industry is probably not the best place to be seeking employment. Volatility comes with the territory for us, and we have to find our own balance between work that is fulfilling and personally satisfying, and that which pays well. There are a great many opportunities out there with companies who treat their employees and contractors with dignity and respect, you just can't expect them to fall into your lap. CG Artists are incredibly employable at the moment, it just so happens that employment in Hollywood comes with a special set of drawbacks (in addition to the obvious perks).
 
Gillvane said:
What do you mean? Why don't you respect people that do data entry? People get paid the going rate for their services. You don't pay someone to fix yoru computer more than the going rate do you? If you pay the going rate are you taking advantage of someone that fixes your computer or does data entry? If not, then what makes VFX artists different that they should be paid more than the going rate? Why are VFX artists so special that the normal market rules apply to everyone else but not them?
Click to expand...

No offense, but this response makes me think you aren't very informed about the VFX protest and surrounding issues. It has nothing to do with a "going rate", and your devaluation of these artists in your phrasing is precisely the problem at hand. Here is an excellent summation from a Reddit comment:


"Since some people here don't fully understand the situation, I will try to provide some insight.

VFX studios are having a very difficult time making profit on movies they work on, even if that movies goes on to make millions or over a billion dollars. VFX studios make 5% profit on a GOOD year, but most of the time breaking even or even losing money on a job. This in turn has a very negative effect on vfx workers working at those companies. The entire fault does not lie with movie studios or vfx studios, but both contribute to the bad state of affairs in different ways.
  2. The most noticable, is that other countries offer tax subsides that do not allow even competition. If a VFX studio in California bids on work for a set price, then a VFX studio in Vancouver can bid that very same price AND offer a 30-35% (not sure of exact figures) tax rebate on that work, but the VFX studio doesn't get that money, the movie studio does. So they (the movie studio) automatically get 30% of their VFX paid for by tax payers instead of out of their already wealthy pockets. The California VFX studio therefore cannot compete with this situation, so fair competition is impossible.
  3. Low rung jobs such as roto/paint fixes are being outsourced to China and India by movie studios because they can get the work done far cheaper there.
  4. Movie studios put vast pressure on VFX houses to lower costs AND do more work at those costs. They also put huge pressure on VFX studios to open offices in subsidized locales so they (the movie studio) can take advantage of tax breaks. Most VFX studios who refuse or can't afford to offer a subsidized location don't get the work and go out of business. However, movie studios expect the VFX studio to take care of all the costs of moving to the new country themselves. And still have the nerve to ask for cheaper labor.
  5. In addition to movie studios asking for more and cheaper work, they want it done in less time. VFX on a movie used to be 1 year long, and now they are trying to take the process down to 6 months or less. Because of this...
  6. VFX studios often have their staff put in TONS of overtime. 10-12 hour days are a norm, and during crunch time 16 hour days, heck, spending the night at the studio, is not unheard of and in fact common. These horrendous hours can last 3-6 months, 7 days a week. On top of this, several VFX companies are not paying for that overtime, because movie studios refuse to pay for the extra hours (remember they are putting on the pressure for cheaper), even though they have insane deadlines for VFX delivery.
  7. Every other movie trade except VFX has a union to prevent such gross injustices. VFX artists don't have a stable 9-5 full time job. They are just temp contract workers, jumping company to company, project to project. As such, they do not have portable benefits, as other unionized trades in filmmaking do.
  8. Artists are too afraid to speak up against these injustices because they'll just kick you out the door for causing too much trouble, because there are 100 dumb young kids who would jump at the chance to work on a Hollywood movie for peanuts. Without a union, they don't have much leverage.
  9. VFX studios are too chicken to take a stand against the movie studios, because really, they only have about 5-6 clients such as Paramount, Universal, 20th Century Fox, Sony, etc. If a VFX studio stood up to one of these companies about their unfair practices, they'd get black listed as trouble makers and never asked to work again, thus driving them out of business. Likewise, if a VFX worker complains to a supervisor about unfair hours and no overtime pay, he is similarly black listed to not be hired again on the next project.
This is just a handful of problems, but I feel the major ones. VFX artists in Hollywood are treated like s*%t. VFX artists have a huge passion and love of their skill and trade, and because of it are taken advantage of. It's time for them to stand up and just be treated like decent hard working human beings."


Some additional reading for you to read up on, should you care to:

http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1969o6/more_than_400_vfx_artists_protest_at_the_oscars/

http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/about/

http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/2013/02/24/an-open-letter-to-ang-lee/

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...naway-visual-effects-20130324,0,1842816.story

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/vfx-at-a-crossroads

http://fxrant.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/john-parenteaus-thoughts-on-vfx-industry.html
 
Last edited:
I'll repost here my comments at prolost:

**********

That article by Scott Squires (http://effectscorner.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/oh-mess-were-in.html) is full of insight. Not just your average conspiracy theories, but a comprehensive list of problems and their causes, analyzed with the necessary knowledge of basic economics to discern what means what.

Now, going on from there...

* The downside: fair or not, international competition is here to stay. If you ponder "What's Ang Lee going to do, take his VFX to China?", well, think about it...

* The upside: most VFX-heavy films make a lot of money, even if they're not great movies by many standards. The best way out for the VFX houses that can manage that is to produce and distribute their own movies. If most of the budget of Life of Pi was spent on VFX, what the VFX house needs is a bigger share of the pie, and for that they may have to produce and distribute the film themselves. You "only" need a moderate success for your first film, then a moderate success for your second film, and you're in business. I know that's a very weird definition of the word "only", but hey, how did Pixar become a major force in the movie industry?

**********

Yes, I know (that my definition of "only" is not just weird, it is absolutely ludicrous). And still, I think *some* will try, if only because there are not many other ways forward in this landscape. They surely won't have at their disposal all the means they would like to have, and of course failure is a very probable outcome. But I think *some* will try, and there's a chance that a few of those *some* may succeed.
 
Samuel H said:
I'll repost here my comments at prolost:

**********

That article by Scott Squires (http://effectscorner.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/oh-mess-were-in.html) is full of insight. Not just your average conspiracy theories, but a comprehensive list of problems and their causes, analyzed with the necessary knowledge of basic economics to discern what means what.

Now, going on from there...

* The downside: fair or not, international competition is here to stay. If you ponder "What's Ang Lee going to do, take his VFX to China?", well, think about it...

* The upside: most VFX-heavy films make a lot of money, even if they're not great movies by many standards. The best way out for the VFX houses that can manage that is to produce and distribute their own movies. If most of the budget of Life of Pi was spent on VFX, what the VFX house needs is a bigger share of the pie, and for that they may have to produce and distribute the film themselves. You "only" need a moderate success for your first film, then a moderate success for your second film, and you're in business. I know that's a very weird definition of the word "only", but hey, how did Pixar become a major force in the movie industry?

**********

Yes, I know (that my definition of "only" is not just weird, it is absolutely ludicrous). And still, I think *some* will try, if only because there are not many other ways forward in this landscape. They surely won't have at their disposal all the means they would like to have, and of course failure is a very probable outcome. But I think *some* will try, and there's a chance that a few of those *some* may succeed.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. You want a piece of the pie? Make the movie and take the risk of losing all your money you spent on production.

At least you can offset some of the cost by doing your own VFX so you can put some of your labor into it instead of money.

This reminds me of United Artists:
United Artists Corporation (UA) is an American film studio. The original studio of that name was founded in 1919 by D. W. Griffith, Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, and Douglas Fairbanks,[SUP][1][/SUP] with the intention of controlling their own interests rather than depending upon the powerful commercial studios.

No reason a VFX company can't do the same. Instead of being hired to do the VFX, THEY WILL DO THE HIRING, they'll have to pay for a script, production crew, actors, a director, etc.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top