Should aspiring actors pay movie directors to be in their independent movies? POLL

[Batutta]

This is the problem though, more and more actors are saying "I only do paid work." Many are starting to snub their nose at any filmmaker who would dare ask them to be in something unpaid.

Nobody wants to work for free. NOBODY. The only difference between you and the actor is that working for free is the only way you are able to tell your story. An actor is never going to be as invested in getting that story told as you are. They can just move on to something else.

 

[Gary Huff]

That's really what it's all about, fighting and pushing to do that one movie that gets people like Gary Huff to shut up.

Countless wannabes like you have come and gone and, guess what? I'm still here, Internet tough guy.

Or that you should just give up if you aren't getting thanked for all the work you do.

If you've so upset over not getting thanked for the all the work you are, allegedly, doing, then this business is not for you. Pure and simple. Why? Because you'll more than likely never get the "thanks" you think you deserve. It's also a very entitled attitude to have.

Just really stuffing a sock in their fat greasy talentless faces and proving yourself.

You can find my material all over this forum. What have you posted? Oh, that's right...nothing.

Dov Simens has got me fired up this morning.

I think you should return the favor then, and go purchase some of his material and watch/read it and spend the rest of the day daydreaming about that film you'll make one day. That sounds like just the ticket!

Oh, and if you ever do start something, please spare us the complaints about actors not showing up, not knowing their lines, ect. ect. ect. Given your attitude, I think you're the last person to demand "professionalism" from an unpaid actor.

 

[Darren Levine]

Why is it that when a photographer works on a photo concept with a model, the photographer is paid by the model. If an actor needs head shots, they pay the photographer $200+ or whatever.

However when a movie director works on a movie concept with an actor, the movie director doesn't get paid by the actor? Doing a movie is a lot more work than taking a few photos. You are talking sometimes over a year of someone's life working on something just so you can look good as an actor.


double standard?

wait. wait. wait.

first: a photographer doesn't get paid by a model when working on a concept shots, concepts are thought up by photographers and they hire a model to be in it, whether be pay or TFCD.

second: a model hires a photographer to do their PERSONAL headshots, it's work, and the photographer is getting paid because he/she is performing a job that was requested of them. You wouldn't flip this around and say the photographer should pay the model to do the headshots because it takes up the model's time...

third: An actor is being hired by the production, period. whoever does the hiring, does the paying. it does not get flipped around. get this thought out of your head or you'll annoy potentially good actors away from wanting to work with you. the only exception i've seen to this are kickstarter campaigns. but thats different, it's an incentive donation site and in some cases people have sold off a walk on role here and there. dov simens was talking about not paying actors on short films, OK, understandable, but having an actor pay to be on a short film is just laughable, a film is an investment, i think i can count on one hand how many short film investments have taken off.

fourth: just to get that last nail in this coffin: why don't you ask dov simens when the last time was that any hollywood actor paid to do a role, or even a low budget indie in the 50-200K range. it. does. not. happen. because it's like saying office workers should pay their bosses because their bosses are taking all that time to manage them.

short films rarely go anywhere, and unless you have actual traction in your filmmaking career, any real actor should laugh in your face if asked to pay to be in a role which has no likenesses of progressing their career.

and just to clarify my standpoint, im not an actor, im a filmmaker.

 

[MattinSTL]

I'd hoped people could discuss this mostly ridiculous question from a respectful perspective... debating the ideas w/o disrespecting each other.

It's too bad that anything potentially controversial deteriorates to a lack of respect for one another.


Not directed at you Darren... that was a very effective (and respectful) post... if this thread has to be closed at some point, I'll be glad to have your post on it.

 

[filmmakerguy]

wait. wait. wait.

Dov never said they should pay to be in a short, you went on that short rant and nobody disagrees with you..yes many shorts don't go anywhere. Dov was saying if they aren't willing to be a lead with an opening title credit in a feature that could ultimately launch their aspiring acting career for free..tell them to go do a short and see what they get paid on it. Yes..exactly $0 as he put it. And like you said, that short will do pretty much nothing for them.

Yet when you got a vehicle that CAN do something for them, suddenly you can't do deferred/backend deals anymore. Got to get paid up front. That was Dov's point. Re-read it, he's agreeing with you.

 

[Hectorxd]

I think it is about who is providing the service.
If you want an actor to do something they either get paid or don't.
If the actor comes to you and says they want some scenes filmed, not a whole movie, just some stuff to show off their talent than you get paid for that by them.

 

[Darren Levine]

Dov never said they should pay to be in a short, you went on that short rant and nobody disagrees with you..yes many shorts don't go anywhere. Dov was saying if they aren't willing to be a lead with an opening title credit in a feature that could ultimately launch their aspiring acting career for free..tell them to go do a short and see what they get paid on it. Yes..exactly $0 as he put it. And like you said, that short will do pretty much nothing for them.

Yet when you got a vehicle that CAN do something for them, suddenly you can't do deferred/backend deals anymore. Got to get paid up front. That was Dov's point. Re-read it, he's agreeing with you.

I was actually regarding both scenarios of shorts and features. my point being that in either sense, especially with the amazing attitude that dov states it, if you say just that to an actor(pay me or get lost!) you'll lose good talent

 

[Luis Caffesse]

There has already been one warning in this thread.
I think it's an interesting topic, and one that could have a fruitful discussion.
But let's keep it on topic.

This is it - this is the warning.
No more personal bickering, no name calling, no personal attacks.

Next off topic or personal post gets the thread closed down without warning.

Let's keep it civil and on topic.
Thanks.

 

[filmmakerguy]

I was actually regarding both scenarios of shorts and features. my point being that in either sense, especially with the amazing attitude that dov states it, if you say just that to an actor(pay me or get lost!) you'll lose good talent

I agree and believe me I'm not stupid enough to say it. I'm not even implying I would EVER ask an actor to pay me to be in my movie. I couldn't do it, but I think it shouldn't be so frowned upon as if we don't bring anything to the table like Gary is implying. Like they got all the balance of talent and the movie couldn't happen without them.

We move on and we find someone who it can happen with. No worries. You work with what you got.

 

[Darren Levine]

"Now, you’re offering all these millions of actors that are looking for an Opening Title Credit in a feature film an opportunity to launch their career"

Now that i've read that dov statement again, it's just appalling that hes being taken seriously at least on this subject, and here's why:


If you're a filmmaker, a real filmmaker, a director, who directs, when casting you're either doing it yourself or have a casting director make suggestions and you make the decision, and at no point does the "real" filmmaker "sell out" on a role. (a lead/major one at least)

You cast a person for a role because they are RIGHT for the role, not because they can buy it from you.

Yes, im sure there are plenty of instances where a bribe was slipped, or rank pulled to get someone into a role, but if you want to consider yourself not "sold out" then you don't sell parts, you pick the right actor.


more to the point, here's a scenario:

you have an amazing lead role, you have two actors to choose from:

one is the PERFECT actor for the role, they nailed the audition so much so that you almost became aroused(almost)

and the other, is the most god awful excuse for an actor ever to grace this earth. BUT... They can pay for your entire shoot...

which do you choose?

 

[filmmakerguy]

There has already been one warning in this thread.
I think it's an interesting topic, and one that could have a fruitful discussion.
But let's keep it on topic.

This is it - this is the warning.
No more personal bickering, no name calling, no personal attacks.

Next off topic or personal post gets the thread closed down without warning.

Let's keep it civil and on topic.
Thanks.

Thanks Luis, I agree, lets keep it civil. I think it's a controversial topic and would love to hear more thoughts on what Dov Simens said.

 

[filmmakerguy]

"Now, you’re offering all these millions of actors that are looking for an Opening Title Credit in a feature film an opportunity to launch their career"

Now that i've read that dov statement again, it's just appalling that hes being taken seriously at least on this subject, and here's why:


If you're a filmmaker, a real filmmaker, a director, who directs, when casting you're either doing it yourself or have a casting director make suggestions and you make the decision, and at no point does the "real" filmmaker "sell out" on a role. (a lead/major one at least)

You cast a person for a role because they are RIGHT for the role, not because they can buy it from you.

Yes, im sure there are plenty of instances where a bribe was slipped, or rank pulled to get someone into a role, but if you want to consider yourself not "sold out" then you don't sell parts, you pick the right actor.


more to the point, here's a scenario:

you have an amazing lead role, you have two actors to choose from:

one is the PERFECT actor for the role, they nailed the audition so much so that you almost became aroused(almost)

and the other, is the most god awful excuse for an actor ever to grace this earth. BUT... They can pay for your entire shoot...

which do you choose?

I agree, that is the fallacy in his statement. You can't directly say whoever pays me gets to be in my movie. Otherwise you compromise the entire project with mediocre talent.

However, after you find the best actors you can find..he's implying that those actors should pay you for the opportunity you are giving them to potentially launch their careers. Because hey, they act in shorts for $0..and that does nothing for them.

That is a fairly controversial thing, so I'm surprised he posted it publicly like that on his Facebook page. It's already gotten like 40+ likes.

 

[filmmakerguy]

I would love to see someone who disagrees, respond to it with why you disagree and see what he says. I DARE YOU to do it..lol

 

[Darren Levine]

out of curiosity, have you, as a reader of dov's statements, done research as to what film credits he has?

the only thing i know about him are the weekend workshop ads ive seen in magazines. but what actual sets has he taken charge of?

 

[filmmakerguy]

out of curiosity, have you, as a reader of dov's statements, done research as to what film credits he has?

the only thing i know about him are the weekend workshop ads ive seen in magazines. but what actual sets has he taken charge of?

That's a great question, honestly I don't know. Maybe someone else does?

 

[Luis Caffesse]

As far as the topic itself goes - I think a lot of important points have already been raised.
First off, in a case where an actor would pay to be in the film it would completely change the dynamic between the director and actor. At that point it is questionable who is in charge. A decent analogy would be being hired to do commercial or corporate work - I get hired by many companies to do work which includes the CEO as the main talent, for example. In those cases the final creative say often goes to the CEO, because they are the ones footing the bill.

Secondly - how would you cast your film? The actor who is willing to pay the most money to be in the film? That is not a recipe for a strong cast.

Thirdly - the entire concept of saying that the actors should be paying the director immediately devalues the contributions of the actors, and begins from a place of disrespect for their craft. I just don't see a good relationship evolving from that starting point at all.

And lastly - a very sharp filmmaker on this site once gave me a great piece of advice.... "remember, no one will ever care about your project as much as you do, so don't expect them to." Aspiring actors dream of acting for a living... they don't dream of being in MY film. There is a big difference between putting everything into your project to see your dream come alive. To ask others to pay to be a part of making your dream come alive is unrealistic. There are plenty of films out there - and if an actor is unwilling to work for free on many of those why on earth would they be willing to PAY to be in one?

The way to get actors respect is to respect their craft and their talent in the first place. And the way to get people to donate their time and their energy to your project is to have it become part of their dream as well. I'm not proud of it, but I've done many project where the actors donated their time to work with us - and the reason they did was because we offerred an environment where their talents were always appreciated and respected (and, I like to think, because they believed we knew what we were doing). And anytime we saw some return on our projects, we took that and gave it to the people who made it possible... built up some good will... so the next time we had a project we were able to get them on board again.

Film is a collaboration - and when it comes to director/actor it is a relationship like any other.
The moment you start keeping score of who put in more time or who is more 'important' the relationship will start to disintegrate.

Respect begets respect.
That's my view anyhow.

 

[Batutta]

However, after you find the best actors you can find..he's implying that those actors should pay you for the opportunity you are giving them to potentially launch their careers. Because hey, they act in shorts for $0..and that does nothing for them.

DOV's mistake is saying they SHOULD pay. Would it be nice if they paid you, sure, who doesn't like free money? But saying that they should is kind of like saying, that girl should have sex with me because I paid for dinner.

 

[john threat]

sometimes actors pay to be in productions - its like extortion! or they believe in the director and the project. I think its a ace good idea! Why not? actors get exposure and get to fulfill their egos and their dreams and get unconditional love and increase their reel and their IMDB entries. Sometimes big movies , stars take cuts or lend some $$$ to get something done.

Come on guys! this is an idea whose time has come! Actors get your credit cards out and trust funds $$$. It always took $$$ to make it as an actor, now they can spend it more on productions than silly overpriced headshots that are not a movie!

I approve this post! good job! Pay to play goes in effect now!

 

[Darren Levine]

I would love to see someone who disagrees, respond to it with why you disagree and see what he says. I DARE YOU to do it..lol

done and done

 

[Darren Levine]

done and done

and just in case my post over there magically disappears..... "“They should pay you”. They’re happy with (A) Food & (B) Credit << Really? If the intent of this is as it's written, it comes off as a sure way to scare away good talent or at best begin a condescending relationship between actor and director. Also begs the question, if an actor buys a role, then how can you not expect the actor to demand that they do the role as they want, not as the director wants, after all it's their purchase and will want what they believe they bought."