Oscar nominee 'Beasts' - 85 of 120 VFX shots created with free labor

[hscully]

The entire system of graduate studies is largely 'unpaid internship'. Some brighter undergrads may also have the 'opportunity' to serve for the cause as well... even post-doc work is often 'unpaid', as the 'grant money' never seems to be enough to pass around to all...

I don't think an 'internship' should consist of 'make work' or of 'no benefit' for a company offering the intern an opportunity to work in an area they are training for. I think such laws and the enforcement thereof will shrink the availability of internships and would defeat the intent of the activity altogether.

There are many aspects of 'labor law' I don't like... and ignore as an employee...

Any further comment would probably lead to pit of the dreaded 'political discussion'...

I'm not particularly interested in labor law either and really not interested in devolving into a political discussion. I just looked all that stuff up based on something Gary said that I didn't know, that the company should not benefit.

I have seen this in the software business, pretty much the same pattern of internships without benefit to the interns. More often than not they can't be there long enough to do any production code anyway or learn anything much. It's for their resume, a sort of initiation rite more than a useful training. Outsourcing over the years notwithstanding, there's still plenty of software work around.

These kids were doing it, not training. It's too bad but I think we are sort of eating our own seed corn. I understand big Hollywood movies going overseas for VFX for Transformer type movies, whose primary concern is turning a profit but that this was the solution for an "indy." It's just weird to me.

This particular story is an exception, I think, because the filmmakers were bequeathed their services by a third party (Cinereach, a non-profit). Plus the whole 2 weeks of 15 hour days right before preview... what was the plan before then? They trained the pigs! What was the thinking about how to get them in the picture that they didn't have a budget and a solution knocked out beforehand? I'm sure I'm missing a lot but it is just bonkers to me.

 

[hscully]

Here's a news flash... while you are discussion 'unpaid interms'... every single no/lo budget film that uses the 'free' work of anyone, is potentially in violation of current Federal Labor Law.

A 'for profit' company can not 'accept' free work done by anyone, neither employees nor non-employees. Unless a filmmaker creates a non-profit organization, they would be classed as a 'for profit' business, despite 99.99999% never making a dime...

One would have to 'spend money' on lawyering to come up with a complete understanding of what can or can not be done with using 'services provided for 'free''...

Yes. This is how I do my shorts. You don't have to be a 501c3 yourself, you can use something like Fractured Atlas to act as an umbrella. Where I live there is a non-profit film center that also provides that. Then you can take tax deductible donations from donors, use Indie-go go directly to Fractured Atlas and raise the money you need. You have to account for it and, as you say, you can't take a profit. You can pay actors and designers, hair and makeup, grips and gaffers and sound people, rent gear, pay for locations, even editors and VFX people AND you can have people volunteer their time.

I'm from New York and this is how most "non-profit" theater is done, which has provided a pretty good model for raising enough dough to get your project in. In this case, it's an art project, not a money making movie and the model doesn't work for all purposes but it sure makes better sense than emptying the family coffers!

Tangentially, it is why I am so curious about the provisions for crowd funding for investment purposes in film that the JOBS act provides. It portends a micro investment strategy instead of straight donations, where you can take a profit and if you're successful, provide a return.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

This particular story is an exception, I think, because the filmmakers were bequeathed their services by a third party (Cinereach, a non-profit). Plus the whole 2 weeks of 15 hour days right before preview... what was the plan before then? They trained the pigs! What was the thinking about how to get them in the picture that they didn't have a budget and a solution knocked out beforehand? I'm sure I'm missing a lot but it is just bonkers to me.

In many trade schools there are 'classes' that essentially take business work orders, and produce results. In some cases the 'costs' are free, but some have fees in addition to materials, and in almost all cases the 'students' are not compensated.

The kick off post of this thread referred to a WJS blog entry, which was not particularly detailed on exactly what the relationship was between the filmmakers, Cinereach (other than providing funding...), and San Francisco Art Academy University students who worked on the VFX portions of the film.

It occurs to me that this was not a 'craigslist' intern cattle call. Whether everyone involved knew upfront what was eventually going to be required... don't know... but it could have very well been a case of starting a project, and adding more as the project progressed... never heard of that in Software ever... we in Software always have lock tight specs and only implement things narrowly to that spec... and we never ever end up locked up in a hotelroom down the road from the customer site, making changes based on the customer's growing dissatisfaction... right...

As a personal note, I think the Wife should have gone to the SF Academy of Arts... but alas insufficient money at the time after she got her BA... anyway...

 

[Batutta]

Where does it say that Life of Pi used free labor? It doesn't say that in the article you linked.

They were let go without pay when Rhythm and Hues went bankrupt. No, not free labor, that's why I put it in quotes. Just being a little playful.

 

[Jawa Ex Machina]

Do what you love.

Best wishes for your book!

What I love doing is write screenplays and direct them. But last time I did that I pretty much bankrupted myself.

 

[LyleGorch]

In many trade schools there are 'classes' that essentially take business work orders, and produce results. In some cases the 'costs' are free, but some have fees in addition to materials, and in almost all cases the 'students' are not compensated.

The kick off post of this thread referred to a WJS blog entry, which was not particularly detailed on exactly what the relationship was between the filmmakers, Cinereach (other than providing funding...), and San Francisco Art Academy University students who worked on the VFX portions of the film.

To tell the truth I don't have as big an issue with some "practicum" being incorporated into the curriculum of an accredited school program, in the end students hopefully receive a certificate/diploma as well as something to put on their CV. However, I think there is an ethical issue in this case for the SFAA because of the commercial nature of the project (and probably unexpected high profile), and in a lot of respects this has blown up in their faces.

What can a school legitimately offer students when paying work in the field they are choosing is being poached by the school itself?