I have been working on a low budget feature for +3 years... in fact, the first day of shooting was 3 years ago this week (June 17, 2002). On this first day of shooting, the DAT machine broke-- and there was no usable dialogue.

So I continued to shoot the film and hoped that I could edit around and dub... fix it in post. I had no other choice since I had a very strict deadline to complete shooting (limited access to locations and the place I was staying which was the primary location).

I began post a few weeks after wrapping. Several months later it became appearant that other scenes were needed.

So I contacted the actors and crew and got together another shoot the following summer. We shot for several days straight during the summer then one day per weekend because of their schedules. I also began to film another project with the actors simultaneously because of the limited access to locations. The actors' moods had noticably changed from the first shoot, however-- they began to complain about the pay ($480 per day on a low budget indie...) and the heat and the cars and the air,,,, but otherwise the shooting was going along well.

Then in mid September 2003, the actors showed up +90minutes late to one shoot, and have not shown up to any shoot since. I have scheduled 3 shoots since, and given them over 20 days notice (the contract specifies that I give them at least 2 days)-- still they were no-shows.

I sent many many emails and waited and waited... nothing. Then after sending several legal threats, was told to speak to one's agent. So I called and emailed him. He asked if I would pay airfare for the shoot. I agreed,, (though I am not contractually obligated to do so). Several days later I was told that the actor was not available for my project.

So I had an attorney review their contracts. He said they are valid and it is clear that they must appear if I give them 2 or more days' notice... So he wrote them each a letter asking them to contact me to resume filmming. Nothing from one,, only a non-working phone number from the other.

I was advised to not include any names because this information may harm the actors, and I will yield to that despite the fact that their actions are interfering with my ability to finish my film. This has been the case for over 20 months now of them not showing up for 1 day of neccessary reshoots. I do not believe it is libelous for me to post provable facts about someone interfering with my business. If I were making false claims to harm them I could be opening myself up for a suit against myself-- I have no desire to do that. Right now, I'm trying to gain some other perspectives and to hopefully help other people to avoid going through the same unneccessary trama.

Does anyone have any comments or suggestions ???


Thanks,


JB

(edit; punctuation)

Sounds like your attorney will be earning his/her keep. :)

It is not libel or slander for me to publically post provable facts...

It's not particularly smart though, especially when you are still trying to work something out.

Good luck. :cool:

I posted this message earlier, but was asked by Admin to remove the actor's names because this may harm their careers even though their actions are harming my ability to finish my film-- this has been the case for over 20 months now of them not showing up for 1 day of neccessary reshoots. It is not libel or slander for me to publically post provable facts about someone interfering with my business. If I were making false claims to harm them I could be opening myself up for a suit against myself-- I have no desire to do that. Right now, I'm just trying to get some other perspectives and to hopefully help other people to avoid going through the same unneccessary trama.

...I feel bad for you, its too bad some people can't manage to be professional. However, maybe it would be better for you to not name names. I don't know what kind of power your actors have. Maybe not harming their careers would also not harm yours. And if this is how they act, maybe you need to escape without any major scars more than they do. You want to be able to still work. Maybe what you need to do is cut your losses and protect yourself. :no: Geez, I don't know what you should do....

--spinner :cool:

Wow - you are really hitting all the boards on the net with this. I count eight now.

I suspect a lawyer would be a better bet than people on a messageboard - or on LOTS of messageboards.

Maybe not harming their careers would also not harm yours.


I'm not out to harm their careers-- just to make their actions known. They ARE harming my career and my investment right now and have been for over 20 months. Why should I be the sacrificial lamb for their actions ?

The contract is clear, and my conscience would be even clearer if I can enable other people to not have similar unneccessary trama. I think it's fine to post their names-- they are adults and made their decisions. It is not my problem if their choices hurt their careers.

Wow - you are really hitting all the boards on the net with this. I count eight now.
I suspect a lawyer would be a better bet than people on a messageboard - or on LOTS of messageboards.

Someone else must be copying my messages. I haven't posted that many.

My lawyer has already reviewed the contracts and sent them letters... I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas of anything to do besides a lawsuit even though that seems pretty inevitable now...

Just to make it known, it was the moderators who all agreed to not post the names of the people involved on this website. From my standpoint, the legal system works by those who are proven guilty by a court of law, not by someone advised by his lawyers on a message board, and therefore since *we* don't know whether or not it is legally liable or true or not, it is best we don't have things that could be construed as libellous or demeaning on indietalk. That said, I totally understand the frustration, if I was in your shoes I have no idea what I would do other than to unleash my wrath upon those two actors with as much financial damages as possible.

I see as couple of points here.

1) If the actors have contractual obligations then the place to settle them is in court. If the case is so clear cut then it should get resolved that way. In the situation that you've described I'd be looking to sue for the cost of remaking the film in total with a new cast. However, at this point in the proceedings I'd be keeping my evidence and position very quiet, because by publishing it you are practically giving their defense team your game plan, whilst they are disclosing nothing.

2) Actors don't walk off projects or demand more money unless they aren't enjoying the work or feel that they are being taken advantage of. You've already admitted here that a) You had a massive technical problem on first day of principle photography that you didn't address, creating addititional work in post, that b) You've asked actors back to shoot extra scenes after you've wrapped, c) that when you ran into location problems you asked them to work on another project, d) that they had made complaints about the working conditions and you didn't address those issues. (This is the reason you don't post this stuff in public, there is enough in that posting alone to completely undo your contract in court)

3) The reason that moderators took your posting to one side and talked about it before letting you post was to protect YOU. With the legal complications that you have at the moment the last thing you need is a counter suit for defamtion of character. You may believe that your case is rock solid and that there is no doubt that you are right, but until that's been settled in court there is a very real possibility that you may lose your court case and at that point any published statements that you've made about the situation are open to litigation.

4) Consider this. If your case was so rock solid their agent wouldn't be stonewalling you. I've never met an agent yet who didn't have a complete grasp of his or her client's legal obligations. If they absolutely had to be there or lose thier shirts their agent would have driven them to the airpost to make sure it happened. The fact that this isn't happening should at least make you sit back and think about the situation for a few minutes.

5) Producing and directing a film is more than just setting up shots and editing, anytime it ends up in court you've already screwed up by not understanding the people that you're working with and what they need to stay "on side." It's easy to blame them, but you cast them, it's your project and buck has to end with you.

Thank you very much. I appreciate your comments.

Let me just say though-- I know without question that I am responsible for the validity of the information posted about these people. I have 100% confidence in my ability to prove what I have posted about them, and in my intentions for posting it-- therefore I have absolutely no worries about a suit. If they come at me they will be forcing me to prove their breaches and interferences-- why would I be liable for their provable actions ? If I were maliciously bending the truth to make anyone look unprofessional, then I could be asking for trouble.

I am simply cataloging provable actions with the intention of preventing similar problems for others--- I do not see any legal problem with that. I believe I can prove every note I've offered thus far (and others) beyond a reasonable question in any legitimate court/venue. Also,, I am definately not posting my whole case, nor any of the more delicate details by any means-- just a few of the major major points.

EDIT: I have detailed answers for the other points but decline to post them now.

You want to be able to still work. Maybe what you need to do is cut your losses and protect yourself.


I appreciate what you are saying, but I don't understand why taking these people to task for their actions would prevent me from working... is that not the professional thing to do ? Am I supposed to jump on their sword instead ?

Also, I don't know how to cut my losses right now-- I am 1 day of neccessary reshoots away from completion... all these people have to do is show up for 1 day of paid work which they are contractually obligated to do. I don't know what else I can do in this situation besides making it known to others to prevent similar problems. I have no intention of harming anyone's career-- on the contrary I have been trying (for over 20 months) to get them to show up and perform as per their contract so I can complete the film and pay them.

EDIT: I don't see any fault in my desire to finish my project.

OK. Maybe I'm not making myself clear enough.

Can I suggest that before you post anything else about this issue you tell your lawyer what you're doing and ask them whether it's a good idea or not.

I know you think you are right, you may well be, but what is right and what is legal are two separate issues.

I don't disbelieve a single word you've written, why should I, but that's not the issue.

Seriously, take a deep breathe, forget what they've done wrong for the moment and consult your lawyer before continuing your campaign.

As a producer myself, I'm telling you that I'd be firing anyone who did what you're doing at the moment. You've got to think beyond this film and think about your long term career.

Okay-- I appreciate your advise and will consult my legal team further.


but note; I strongly believe there will be no career for me if this film is not completed. I have no malice, but am 100% in a bind either way because of these people and I don't think that is cool or fair or legal.


I'm telling you that I'd be firing anyone who did what you're doing at the moment.

EDIT: Even without naming names ? If I were naming names, this could be just another Variety or Hollywood Reporter story. All I am doing is recanting my experiences in the hopes that others do not have to endure the same headaches. If the actors stand behind their decisions, how am I harming anyone by making note of my experiences ? If they do not stand behind their decisions, then they may need to make some changes in their position. If their current position harms their career, how is that my responsibility ? I'm trying to enable them to appear and finish the project.

Here's what I have gathered from the posts so far...

You had multiple actors quit on you.
You recognised (but did not address) their complaints.
You are taking private legal issues to the open internet.
You decline to wait for your legal reps to do their thing first.
You have to sue actors to work for you.

...and you're concerned about possibly not having a career?

Don't worry; at least you're working hard on making a reputation for yourself. :rolleyes:

It doesn't matter whether you are "justified" about bitching about the actors or not. You really think any of the big players would want to deal with a producer who can't deal with issues in a professional, private fashion?

You had multiple actors quit on you.
You recognised (but did not address) their complaints.
You are taking private legal issues to the open internet.
You decline to wait for your legal reps to do their thing first.
You have to sue actors to work for you.
...and you're concerned about possibly not having a career?



1. I am unaware of either of them quitting
2. I've addressed every complaint I've known about to the best of my ability
3. For fair comment discussion to see what others think and to hopefully prevent this problem for others
4. Not declining-- this is a parallel process
5. EDIT: Hopefully not. That's not my goal here.


You really think any of the big players would want to deal with a producer who can't deal with issues in a professional, private fashion?

Magazines and forums are filled with similar issues-- I'm hardly re-writing history here... I've been dealing with this privately for +20 months and now believe it may be beneficial for others to comment on and to know about so they can hopefully avoid similar situations.

...and stop editing your previous posts.

You've gone from (paraphrased) "wtf! :huh: Admins removed the names I posted. No fair!" to implying that you were advised by your legal team to "not include any names because this information may harm the actors' careers".

Imo... something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

To be fair...narcissus was advised, by me, to remove the names. The mods did not remove the names.

I have not been keeping up with this thread as I should have, and for that I apologize.

The thing here is this, Narcissus, you are getting advice from many people to keep your argument toned down in order to save yourself future heartache. It's good advice that should be heeded.

And everyone else, if Narcissus wants to dig a grave, let him. Indie Talk does not condone defamation of character and we have asked Narcissus to remove any names in order to protect ourselves.

Poke

you are getting advice from many people to keep your argument toned down in order to save yourself future heartache. It's good advice that should be heeded.

which is why I edited the post. I didn't mean to imply any "WTF?", and never said anyone removed any names.


And everyone else, if Narcissus wants to dig a grave, let him.

No one's name is posted... If it was they could threaten me to take it off.... but this is not the case here.

If I videotaped Leonardo DiCaprio beating up a homeless person and I posted about it, would I be digging a grave ? I don't understand what is so horrible about me posting my experiences in this case... Maybe I'm totally out of it, but I have no idea how I'm digging a grave in this case, and I am obeying with the Moderators' desire to keep the names out of this forum.

I appreciate the feedback and will stop adding case-specific information. What is grave-digging about that ?

...and stop editing your previous posts.

You aren't allowed to do that ?


You've gone from (paraphrased) "wtf! :huh: Admins removed the names I posted. No fair!" to implying that you were advised by your legal team to "not include any names because this information may harm the actors' careers".

I was advised by Moderator Poke about their policy,,, is that okay ?


Imo... something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

For rephrasing one sentance ? I did not want to imply any "WTF?" stuff about the Admin, and just simply said I was advised. That's all I changed. What is wrong with that ?

I appreciate the feedback and will stop adding case-specific information. What is grave-digging about that ?

Not grave digging if you keep things vague. I was just telling folks that it's your choice.

Poke

Not grave digging if you keep things vague. I was just telling folks that it's your choice.

Poke



Okay I appreciate that.


Here is some online info about defamation since I am appearantly being accused of it here;

http://jobsearchtech.about.com/cs/labor_laws_2/a/defamation_3.htm

excerpts from http://www.ivanhoffman.com/defamation.html

"claims of defamation are limited to living persons only and the living person must be identifiable in the writing or publication"
there are no names included in this thread

"A statement that is true is a complete defense to such claims in most states even though there are some states that require that the otherwise truthful statement also be published without the motive to actually harm the party written about."
that is doubly true here since there is no malice in my motive

"There are special provisions for defamation in a newspaper or by broadcast in which the California law limits a party to getting only special damages (i.e. provable actual damages) unless the party has properly requested a retraction which has not been provided. "
not the case at all here

"Actual malice generally refers to statements made with knowledge of their falsity or in reckless disregard for whether they were false or not."
again, I stand behind my motives and facts 100%

Listen, Narc.

I know you want to stand up for yourself, and make your case... but what are you trying to prove, and to who?
Sure. You got screwed. Maybe you brought it on yourself, maybe you didn't. I don't know, and I have no time to care.
But what you KEEP doing, is pushing this in our faces. THAT, in itself, is not very professional, and is going to hurt your reputation! The best way to deal with something like this is to sweep it under the rug and keep it quiet. It's not good for you, it's not good for the actors. If you REALLY want to make things better, talk to your actors REASONABLY, and offer them something in consolidation for thier trouble. Make things seem like if they come out and finish the film, they'll actually BE REWARDED. Because if I were acting for you, and went through all those problems, only to find I have to come back AGAIN to shoot MORE.... well, I'd do it, because I made an obligation, but I wouldn't be happy... unless you offered me something as an apology. Sometimes, you have to think of other people... sure... the actors you mention don't sound very professional... but if you NEED them, and you want to make things HAPPEN, then you have to forget your own hubris and bite the bullet.
It seems you're still stuck on "Who's right?" and "Who's wrong?". That doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is keeping your dignity, and acting like a professional.
Try and POLITELY get them back, ad if that doesn't work, DISCREETLY take legal actions.

If Lucas bitched and bitched on the internet about how Anthony Daniels kept gumming up the suit with sweat and saliva and complained alot, people would be like: "Geez, I would never want to work with Lucas, he's a nazi!!!"
But he doesn't. I'm sure he's had some issues like you have, and he makes it seem like they ARN'T problems. That's a big thing a director/producer must do- make things SEEM like they are flowing smoothly, even if they are not.

So to recap:
-Bite the bullet.
-Get the actors back
-Stop bitching
-Pick yourself up and try again... but be considerate. Always be considerate.



-Logan-

All very interesting, but, being right and being smart aren't the same thing.

And the truth is that being a producer is about being smart.

You asked what advice we might have to solve the problem without litegation. Well, you're not going to like it, but here it is.

1) Completely give up on your public vendetta and delete any postings where you've named names. (At the moment one google search will completely destroy your chances of ever completing this film)

2) Call up the agents of the actors involved and ask to set up an informal meeting between you, the agent and the actors. Tell the agent you just want to get any problems that the actors may have out in the open and that you are there to listen. Tell the agent that your really just want to work this out like civilised people. Make sure thatyou suggest that the meeting happens at the agent's office, make sure that you're prepared to do all the travelling and do the meeting at a time that works for them.

3) Go to that meeting, dress casually (Do NOT power dress), shake everyone's hand and make eye contact when you do it, smile in an open and friendly way. DO NOT glower at them, DO NOT give off any hostile signals. If you don't think you can do that get someone else to do the meeting for you. (Hell, pay my airfare and $1000 a day and I'll do it for you) Plus take someone from the production team with you, the least threatening person you have and make sure that they know their job is to listen and nothing else.

4) When the meeting starts, say the following "Guys, I know that this film hasn't been an easy process for anyone and after all the work and effor that you've put in, I just really want to see it completed now. But, I can't do that if you're not happy, so I'm here to listen. I've got nothing but respect for you guys, tell me what the problems are and I'm just going to listen. I want you to be compeletly straight with me, don't worry about my feelings. I'm just here to listen to you to find out if there is anything we can do to salvage this project. And even if we can't I'd like to feel that you got a chance to tell me how you feel" (It would be good if you actually meant what you are saying, sincerity rocks in these situations)

5) Then SHUT UP AND STAY SHUT UP NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY, NO MATTER HOW ANGRY THEY GET. Listen to them and when they say their piece repeat what they've said back to them so they know that you've heard and understood.

6) Whatever they say take full responsibilty and apologise and do it sincerely.

7) In the course of their talking to you they will tell you what they need to hear from you. The trick is to say it..l. The killer phrase is "So, what you're saying is that if can get the whole thing wrapped in two days guaranteed and I pay you a bonus you'd be happy. That's incredibly generous of you (No sarcasm here). Look, how about if I wrap in two days, give you the bonus and also fly you out first class. I'd really like to do that for you, because nothing matters more to me than you guys being happy in your work, that's why I cast you in the first place."

(In other words always give them more than they asked for, nobody expects that and at that point they're endebted to you, they can't refuse)

8) Make sure that you keep every promise and treat them like royality when they come on set, get the film finished and make sure they are your best friends by the end of the shoot.

9) If for whatever reason they aboslutely refuse to work with you to finish the picture, do not threaten them, do not mention their contracts, just thank them for their time and then ask to get a minute alone with their agent. Say this "Thanks Marla, I really appreciate the time you've taken today to pull this meeting together. Look, I need to go home now and look at what my options are, can you pull together a letter for me outlining your clients position and post it out to me." Shake her/his hand and leave it at that. When you get back home go talk to your lawyer and let them take it from there.

10) Oh, if they say that they'd only complete the film if you promise not to be on set and that they'll be working with another director, fire yourself and hire someone in. (Airfare and $1,500 a day, thanks)

Personally, I'd give less than 20% odds that you'll do this, because the bottom line is that at this point you'd rather be right than complete your film. The question is what's most important, your pride or the film?

what you KEEP doing, is pushing this in our faces.


Okay-- I appreciate that, but I am just defending my position. I have been accused of defamation and other things which I don't believe are true or fair.

Also, I don't believe that asking them to appear for 1 day of neccessary reshoots in over 20 months is unreasonable.

1) Completely give up on your public vendetta and delete any postings where you've named names.

There have been no real names listed in this thread-- no names appear on any websites in any way related to this issue that I know of.

Also I have already done much of what you have suggested-- I have talked to the agent directly without hostility, and I offered to pay them and pay for the airfare, and they declined the offer with no reason given. (except it was not in person).

I appreciate your post-- I will reread it, and will try what I haven't tried yet. I apologize if I am looking like a hardhead about this-- I've been put on the defensive here and have basically been forced to defend and validate my arguement. I don't consider it a vendetta-- just a notice to others.

EDIT; (punctuation)

Dude! You're doing it again! :weird:
Listen to Clive... his post outlined EXACTLY what you need to do! Him is a smart man!

I understand your frustration, Narc! But you are letting your anger get the best of you! It's time to cool down, take a long walk, think a bit, and figure out WHAT YOU WANT!

Clive has basically outlined what you need to do, to finish your project.

From your point of view, you're saying "Oh, it's only ONE more day"... but what about the actors? They probably think "OH GOD! ONE MORE DAY? We put in 20 months of work, and he needs me AGAIN?!?! I need to move on to other projects!!!"

The thing is... no matter the contract... you have to respect and appreciate the actorsin order to get them to DO YOU A FAVOR by coming back.

You can save warning other people when someone else calls you for a reference on the actors, if they ever get hired again! Right now, you have to focus on kissing some ass, biting the bullet, and getting your film DONE!!!

Good luck, and please, take heed of the advice given to you!!

Spatula,

I absolutely agree with and am appreciative of his suggestions and yours. I will do whatever I can to follow these suggestions.

EDIT; I do not believe "anger" is a part of any of my posts here. This situation has been frustrating at times, and I'm thankful that I've received some positive suggestions.


From your point of view, you're saying "Oh, it's only ONE more day"... but what about the actors? They probably think "OH GOD! ONE MORE DAY? We put in 20 months of work, and he needs me AGAIN?!?! I need to move on to other projects!!!"

One quick correction though-- it has been a 20 month wait for 1 day of reshooting (was originally scheduled in Sept 2003). I apologize if I worded that wrong.

Good luck. Its nice to see so many people take time out and offer help so many times over. Its good to see that we all want to help each other, and so passionately too. Its times like these I'm glad this site exists :)

...Narcissus...

Here are some fundamental truths: First, contract or no, you can't make anyone do anything they don't want to do. Second, the only thing you really control is your own behavior.

...you seem to be waaaaayyyy less indie than many of us, I think many of us are at a point where the actors we deal with are just this side of little theater. Since this appears not to be the case with you, I think you might want to take the advice you are being given

...If you want to be on the board and rant, fine. As you see, there are many people who will listen...(uh, you should listen a little, too). You can find encouragement and people who will give you a good talking to as well.

...but first and foremost: don't put anymore details big or small on this site. You are taking a huge risk when you do. I know that and I am not nearly as connected as you seem to be. Don't jeopardize your case.

...secondly, right or wrong, vendetta or not, what you are pissed and you might want to cool off a little before you do anything else. Nobody thinks well when they are mad. You have to take the reins and do what is the smartest thing to do so that you can get your film done and keep your career intact.

No one is really accusing you of defamation. We are trying to stop you from the possibility of defamation.

It is normal to want to defend yourself and have people understand your side. Understand that even as emphatic as this thread is, the advice is to protect you. So, take a break, I don't know, sleep late, something that will allow you to look at the situation clearly, and don't lie to yourself about what happened whatever it is. Try to do something to calm yourself down because if you go in there crazy, people will think you are crazy. Show them that you are trying to rectify the situation and that you are a calm cool thinking person that they can reason with. Then your lawyers can deal with the legalities.

...You need to be more careful and at the core of all this, that is what we are trying to tell you....

--spinner :cool:

I appreciate that and am not posting anymore (unless there are corrections to be made).

Thanks for putting up with my postings (which are appearantly being interpretted by some as rants...),,, for those who did :cool:

...there are good people here who will listen, they know what they are talking about. At least I am convinced of that. They are here if you need to blow off some steam. Just not the details of what your legal stuff will be entailing. Its the safest thing to do. Look around and try to enjoy the site. (Don't feel like everyone on your case). Try to keep us posted (as safely as you can) as to how things are progressing and good luck. You are going to need it... :)

--spinner :cool:

good luck. You are going to need it...


Okay, thanks for the vote of confidence. :cool:

Okay, thanks for the vote of confidence. :cool:

...Oh, don't be like that :rolleyes: I only meant that you seem to have your work cut out for you...and that wasn't a slam. I assume you kind of know what you are doing, you just are to mad to be objective....And any legal situation gives me the willies (so thats me, not you).

...I think you seem to have all the confidence you will need and that is a good thing considering what you have posted. What should I have said? Good Luck, loser? I think that if you are in the right, (and understand that when you only have one side of the story, you only have one side.) then those who are contracted need to live up to their side of the bargain. But they will be more likely to do that when you are calm, cool, collected and in control.

...I am assuming that you haven't made any enemies here, just people telling you to put on the brakes a little so that you don't shoot yourself in the foot....what good would that do you?

...so, take this in the spirit it was given...and Good luck... :) ...its hard not to be alittle touchy when you feel you are right. We really are trying to help...

--spinner :cool:

...Oh, don't be like that :rolleyes: I only meant that you seem to have your work cut out for you...and that wasn't a slam.


Okay thank you very much for clarifying that. :)

I guess I've been assuming I am making some enemies here. For that, I truly apologize. I literally never intended anyone any harm. Yes, I have tried to defuse a potential bomb with gunpowder-- but I hope that all of my actions are understood for their true intent-- that is to stop the games, finish the film, pay the actors well for their efforts, and praise them publically (and privately) instead of being stuck in gripe-gear.

Also, I would also like to give *thank you* credits to everyone who has contributed to this discussion (if they so chose to be credited) if the film is successfully completed.

I guess I've been assuming I am making some enemies here.

Not at all. Indietalk isn't that kind of forum. I think your gunpowder/fire analogy is right on the mark. Don't give yourself a hard time about it though, it's almost impossible to keep your cool when there is so much at stake.

One thing I think you might want to consider is whether there is a way of completing the film without the scenes that you need with these actors.

It's always good to have a contingency plan and in my experience there is always an alternate and often better way of telling the story.

If you can complete in one day's shooting, you can't have more than three or four scenes that you want, why not go back to the script and see if there is another way of doing it. There will be, I guarantee it.

The great thing about doing this is that it's a creative solution rather than a legal one (always good) and it takes the pressure off your negotiations because at that point you don't NEED the actors, you just want them. That strenghtens your negotiating position considerably.

The bottom line is that at the moment you feel they have the power to prevent you from finishing your movie and you can take that power back by doing what you do best which is being creative. (This has to be true or you wouldn't have got to this point)

If you absolutely can't find a way to do it, e-mail the script to me and I'll throw a day at it for you (for free)

Or shemp them!!!!


(for those unaware of the power of shemping, it was a term derived from the three stooges, when "Joe" and "Shemp" came in to sub for another stooge. Can't remember the details on that, but Sam Raimi coined the term when he would have actors stand in for other ones. He listed them as "Shemps" in the credits. There's so possibly accurate history for you!)

The Stooges (Moe, Larry, and Shemp... oh, and often Curly... then there's also Curly Joe... etc.) would often use whatever standing sets were available from the A pictures being made at Columbia to make their B, short pictures. They'd do this in such a fashion where they'd shoot all the principal photography, and do the pick-up shots much later on. Allowing them to work on mutlitple projects at one time. The shorts were in black and white, and the Stooges never changed much, so they were easy to intercut. Well, poor Shemp Howard died before they had actually finished off a few of these shorts. Eventually, Moe and Larry had to go back and complete these things without Shemp. In order to do this they used a stand-in, a fake Shemp, and then would proceed to work him out of the scene in some cheesy manner. Rami found this to be hilarious, and adopted the term "Fake Shemp" into his own super 8's, and eventually their feature films, to mean anyone whose face you didn't see. Someone in heavy make-up, a hand, a foot, someone who doesn't have lines -- the stand-in's and extras.

There ya go! Don't believe my lies! The truth is out there now!

I think your gunpowder/fire analogy is right on the mark. Don't give yourself a hard time about it though, it's almost impossible to keep your cool when there is so much at stake.

I have an update-- after starting this thread, I received emails from a representative of the actress who says she is willing to resume filmming. The emails were out of the blue-- hopefully this communication will go well and hopefully she will fulfill her contract. Both of the actors are talented, and I would like to be given the opportunity to reward their participation. That is my primary motivation here-- again I apologize if my method has been inappropriate.



One thing I think you might want to consider is whether there is a way of completing the film without the scenes that you need with these actors.... The great thing about doing this is that it's a creative solution rather than a legal one (always good) and it takes the pressure off your negotiations because at that point you don't NEED the actors, you just want them. That strenghtens your negotiating position considerably.

I'm glad you brought that up-- I've been writing some plot variations-- still trying to find variations without either of them in a worst worst case scenario. Will continue over the weekend. These are all excellent points that you've brought up-- thank you again very much.


If you absolutely can't find a way to do it, e-mail the script to me and I'll throw a day at it for you (for free)

Thank you very very much for your offer, Clive :) That is very cool and generous of you. I'll see what I come up with and let you know.


And to Spatula and Directorik-- Fake Shemps are an excellent idea as well :)

Also, I should say that it's not exactly like I've been waiting without being able to do anything else-- I've edited the film thus far (including 7 minutes of material to cross-cut with the scenes to add), done over 100 visual effects shots, edited and mixed the dialogue, sound effects, and soundtrack over this time-- there are simply scheduling dilemmas I cannot control which are making it imperative to move on this soon, for everyone's benefit.

Thanks again !

The key point is that your actors were complaining about (1) the pay and (2) the working conditions, and you simply refused to listen to them. So they bailed. Sounds fair enough!

Sounds fair enough!

not really...

they agreed to the pay, and only started complaining about that months after they stopped showing up. I don't know how it is in Nigeria, but simply complaining/whining does not mean you are legally entitled to back out of a contract in the USA.

they NEVER made any formal arrangements or any clear requests to renegotiate the pay. they just whined on set, showed up late, and stopped showing up.

also, there was no actual request made about the working conditions. it's not my fault if an actor all of the sudden develops a problem with sitting in a car to deliver their lines of dialogue. no real problem was made clear-- only 4th grader-esque whining. I hired adults for a reason... not for them to back out of a professional shoot just because they act like 4 year olds.

I wasn't asking anything of them that is remotely difficult (to deliver lines of dialogue in a car). actors are/were paid to act. it is not okay for them to just decide they don't want to do that towards the end of filmming a movie. is that difficult to understand ?

Hmmm. Depends on the contract, I guess.
But the problem has been cleared up, right?
(as you mentioned in a different thread?)
I'd love to see what the final product looked like.

the actress had no problem showing up (it was 2 years to the week after the last shoot they showed-up for).

the actor, due to so many delays/problems, was written out of the scenes. I heard from the actress that he wanted to be involved at the shoot (after all that !!!) , but he was already written out.


I took a year off for health reasons, and am back on finishing the effects. I completed a viewing copy which was entered into Sundance this week (for the 2008 fesitval).

needless to say, I'd never hire these actors again, and am actually looking into making films in CG now (animated).

Glad to hear you finally got the film wrapped, and sorry to hear you've had some health issues.

Had to laugh when you said you're moving over to CGI animation... I don't know how many directors wish they could replace actors with animation, glove puppets... any damn thing other than an actual person.

It could be that you just got incredibly unlucky with your cast, in which case you'll never have these problems again. Not all actors are "problematic"

Hi! :hi:

I always wondered what happened to you! I am glad to hear that everything worked itself out. Sorry about your health, we should all hope to never get sick in this administration. I hope you will let us all know how your next project goes.....actually, I would love to know how the 'troubled production' went as well....

-- spinner :cool:

Wow... old thread, but since Spinner revived it today, I thought I'd chime in a little..

First off, congrats on wrapping, and good luck with getting into Sundance.

As for the problems, the only thought that is in my head worth mentioning is that their whining and lazy behavior is most likely related to something other than whatever pay rate they had agreed to. Example, I was recently (a few months ago) a resident DJ at a night club. I went in three nights a week, and did my thing.. no problem. It was after a few months of feeling like I was being taken advantage of -- going in on days I wasn't working to work on lighting, etc -- that I started to complain about things. What was it I complained about? Money. Even though I had agreed to work for that amount, suddenly it wasn't "enough".. but it really didn't have anything to do with money, it just felt like my time was more valuable than what I was making.

So, to clarify that some, I'd say one of your jobs on set, as a producer, is to make sure all your people know that they are valued. Make everyone feel important and they will take ownership of the project. Once they feel like they are just as important as you are, they'll do whatever it takes to get the film done, and done well.

Now, that's not to say that there aren't some people who just suck to work with. It is possible you got smacked with the unlucky stick and had to work with some real trolls, but I think it would behoove you to take a look at yourself and see if there isn't anything you might need to change for the betterment of a smooth production.

Changing oneself is one of the most difficult things to do, often because we're afraid to admit that we are flawed. However, you are the only person that you can change... and even a slight change of your own behavior can drastically affect those around you.

Just words of wisdom, take them as you will. I'm not saying you are wrong, but I'm not saying you are right either.

At any rate, congrats again, and good luck.

one of your jobs on set, as a producer, is to make sure all your people know that they are valued. .

I definately did that as best I could. Still tried to for over a year after they showed up several hours late on the last day they showed up in 2003.


they'll do whatever it takes to get the film done, and done well.


That's what I've heard, and seen from some involved on the film-- but not what I've seen from them, or two other people formerly on the production. Fortunately, I would never hire any of them again, or work with them again. That is basically the only positive thing I can say about them at this point...



At any rate, congrats again, and good luck.


Cool. Thank you for one of the few sensible replies in this thread.

"claims of defamation are limited to living persons only and the living person must be identifiable in the writing or publication"
there are no names included in this thread





I know this is an older thread and a dead horse, but just to clarify something about defamation -

When it says "the person must be identifiable", that doesn't necessarily mean that they have to be identified by name. If I write something defamatory about Britney Spears, and you know it's about her because of the language I use, but I never use her name, it's still defamation if you can recognize who it is from the context of the story.

In this case, if I knew who narcissus was, as a director, and I knew which project he was working on, I could deduce who the actor and actress are he's accusing of being difficult to work with, and that could possibly constitute defamation. It would be easier for the actors to prove if it was an easily identifiable project and they were household names, but they still might have the basis of a case that could cost thousands in court fees.

Make sense?

Make sense?

Not really. I actually have the right to say anything I want as long as I believe it to be truthful without fear of being sued (thanks for trying to chill-effect the thread again...).

Liability comes only into play if I was intentionally trying to damage someone's credibility. I have repeated my intentions for this post; to help other to avoid the same unneccessary predicament. It doesn't matter if I post their names or not-- my intent is simple.

All I have posted are provable facts and my own opinions about the actors. I still have no idea why so many people here have posted bogus legal info and pseudo-threatening falsehoods in this thread... :no:


Anyway, here is some legit legal info;

"Most states recognize a valid defamation lawsuit when false written or spoken words are communicated to a third party and disparage a person of his trade, office, or profession, and when the employer or ex-employer negligently failed to check the accuracy of such information.

Exceptions

If the employer makes a mistake in providing a reference by looking at the wrong file, and later corrects the mistake, then the employee does not have the right to press charges of defamation.

If the employer shares their opinion about the employee’s wrongful conduct to another person; an opinion cannot amount to defamation.

If the employer disseminates defamatory but true information about the employee."


(source; http://www.mypersonnelfile.com/oer_defamation.php)

Not really. I actually have the right to say anything I want as long as I believe it to be truthful without fear of being sued (thanks for trying to chill-effect the thread again...).



I wasn't trying to "chill-effect the thread"; I'm explaining a point of law. You don't have to use the person's name in order for them to be identified.

And you are absolutely wrong from a legal standpoint when you make the statement you made above. Just because you believe your statements are truthful doesn't mean you can't be sued.

The post that followed this one said something about people posting bogus legal info. You have proven several times in this thread that you do not understand the difference between legal and what you consider to be right and wrong.

you are absolutely wrong from a legal standpoint when you make the statement you made above.

really ?

i guess internet legal sites must all be wrong then if you're right...


"Defamation is a general term for the false attack on your character"

source: http://www.faceintel.com/defamation.htm


"grant employers immunity from liability for truthfully disclosing information about job performance and reasons for termination."

http://jobsearchtech.about.com/cs/labor_laws_2/a/defamation_3.htm


"Truth is an absolute defense to defamation"

http://www.myemploymentlawyer.com/mel/answer.php3?answer_id=2326

You have proven several times in this thread that you do not understand the difference between legal and what you consider to be right and wrong.

Wow... obviously you are so right-on with your legal info so far...:rolleyes:

Why don't you point out where I've been wrong and prove it ? :D

I have to repeat something again obviously, though-- my REASON for posting this is to HELP other filmmakers AVOID a situation where actors fail to appear for filmming.

For this, I've been bombarded by "smart people" like Steve with retarded and inconsequential info claiming I'm wrong for posting provable facts and my opinions about something. I'm not wrong for doing this. I know my sources for legal info here, and I have no idea why this "smart person" is still trying to make me look bad for trying to help other filmmakers avoid a bad situation with actors being childish and causing unneccessary damage.

If this particular "smart person", (Steve) thinks he can disprove the facts of my experiences with these actors, or my opinions of them, he might as well claim himself to be Jesus and fly off to Atlantis on the wings of a magical unicorn.

Guess this is place is still absurd. Wonder why I don't post much here... :rolleyes:

Note; I just got an infraction for the above post. I edited a few words into "smart person". That is the closest I can get to my truthful opinion, due to forum censorship.

It's interesting that Steve posts "you're wrong" to me with a false assertion about the law-- falsely charging me, with unsurprisingly bogus info. Seems Steve is doing what he is falsely claming I am doing-- making public charges against someone, but he has no proof to back himself, as I do with the actors. He is posting his opinion (obviously not legal fact), so I have no grounds to sue him, as per my arguement and legal info he is actively denouncing.

Also, Steve's false assertion that I have "proven.. that I don't understand" is another false assertion. It's a generalized charge, again loaded with bogus legal bearing.

Believing this display from Steve to be abhorrantly ignorant, I called him 2 names. And I'd do it again, if it weren't for forum laws.

really ?

i guess internet legal sites must all be wrong then if you're right...


"Defamation is a general term for the false attack on your character"

source: http://www.faceintel.com/defamation.htm


"grant employers immunity from liability for truthfully disclosing information about job performance and reasons for termination."

http://jobsearchtech.about.com/cs/labor_laws_2/a/defamation_3.htm


"Truth is an absolute defense to defamation"

http://www.myemploymentlawyer.com/mel/answer.php3?answer_id=2326



You only quote the parts of the law that you feel agrees with you. That won't help you in a courtroom, as they tend to take all of the legalities involved into consideration, not just what you approve of.

Your previous statement was that you could say anything without fear of being sued as long as you *believe* it to be true. That statement is wrong. Simple as that.

Narcissus, I tried replying to your PM but your mailbox is full. If you would like a reply, please clear some of your PMs and let me know when you have done so.

Note; I just got an infraction for the above post. I edited a few words into "smart person". That is the closest I can get to my truthful opinion, due to forum censorship.

It's interesting that Steve posts "you're wrong" to me with a false assertion about the law-- falsely charging me, with unsurprisingly bogus info. Seems Steve is doing what he is falsely claming I am doing-- making public charges against someone, but he has no proof to back himself, as I do with the actors. He is posting his opinion (obviously not legal fact), so I have no grounds to sue him, as per my arguement and legal info he is actively denouncing.

Also, Steve's false assertion that I have "proven.. that I don't understand" is another false assertion. It's a generalized charge, again loaded with bogus legal bearing.

Believing this display from Steve to be abhorrantly ignorant, I called him 2 names. And I'd do it again, if it weren't for forum laws.


I've been polite to you up to now, and you clearly deserve no respect, as you offer none to others, but I'll try to approach you as a grown up, anyway.

I didn't make any charges against you. My original statement was that you can be sued for defamation, even if you don't use the person's name. They simply have to be identifiable in your writing.

You're wrong when you say "if I believe it is true, I can say it without being sued." There's no accusation there, it's a truth. You're wrong. Sorry you don't like being wrong, but that's the law.

You have no grounds to sue me, for many reasons, first of which is you are posting anonymously, so I can't be harming your reputation. That has nothing to do with the legal info you cut and pasted from websites; it's the law.

Unless you are an attorney, you, Narcissus, can't be "denounced" for your "legal info" as you are no expert - essentially, no harm, no foul. Again, a reason you can't sue.

I also made no claims about you with your actors - I simply stated a point of law. So, you're whining about an attack on you that didn't occur.

Any lawyer could look at this thread and would agree with me that you've proven you don't understand the law. Your last posts give ample evidence of this.

And since you do not understand the law, you chose to call me names...which demonstrates to me pretty clearly why your actors didn't want to go back and work with you, even under the threat of legal action. You come across as quite a jerk in print; can't imagine how charming you are in person.

So, go back to not posting, and I'm sure no one will miss you. Go make your movies on your own, wasting years of time because you can't manage people. Call me names from behind an anonymous screen name, like a little girl. I don't care.

But when it comes to the point of law I made about being able to identify someone before an action can be libelous or considered defamation, that is correct, and you are wrong. Simple as that.

You only quote the parts of the law that you feel agrees with you.

Read what they say. They don't say maybe, or sometimes, or occasionally. I won't quote the entire page, but real law (not your opinion) speaks for itself. That's only a few instances, reiterating the same legal info (google it yourself).


That won't help you in a courtroom

Yes they will-- laws are used in courts. Someone get this kid a Gatorade...:huh:


Your previous statement was that you could say anything without fear of being sued as long as you *believe* it to be true. That statement is wrong.

Nope. Defamation is a FALSE ATTACK on someone's character, which you have provably done in this thread and I have not. I have poised no false attack at any point against my actors. Period. Not even in my dreams. Again-- try to prove this to be false, and have Peter Pan give you a lift to see the Wizard of Oz while you're at it.

Again-- Defamation is a FALSE ATTACK on someone's character. Not sometimes, not maybe, not only on weekends. Not just "when I want", as you again charged me with above.

Google this for yourself. Stop making falsely charging me and making me repeat this.

Any lawyer could look at this thread and would agree with me that you've proven you don't understand the law. Your last posts give ample evidence of this.

Okay-- I've posted links describing the reality of defamation. What have you posted besides rhetoric and false charges ?


And since you do not understand the law, you chose to call me names...which demonstrates to me pretty clearly why your actors didn't want to go back and work with you, even under the threat of legal action.

Attack of character seems to be happening from you now, mister smart.



You come across as quite a jerk in print; can't imagine how charming you are in person.

Okay-- who is name calling now ? And from such an ignorant source... oh no :rolleyes:


Go make your movies on your own, wasting years of time because you can't manage people.

Yeah, I don't control people. So you think you're some kind of puppeteer or something ? You're a bit creepy besides the ignorant charges and bogus legal info.




But when it comes to the point of law I made about being able to identify someone before an action can be libelous or considered defamation, that is correct, and you are wrong.

I am wrong. Simple as that. No reference. I'm wrong because you're right. Hello genius...Say "hi" to Santa Claus for me.... :rolleyes:

Believe is the key word, Narcissus, not false. Believe.

You can *believe* the sky is green. Your belief does not make it a fact or law.

If you *believe* someone has cheated you, and you accuse them in writing or publicly of cheating you, you can be sued, as your *belief* is not a defense.

That's all I've been saying. That's the law. Why are you being so obtuse?

Steve,

okay, obviously you're a bit slow. Google is a search engine on the internet.

Go to www.google.com

type in "defamation" (with or without the quotes)

you will find the first entry;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slander_and_libel

The first sentance is;

"In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation."

again read the words, FALSE CLAIM. now meditate on that. What in the world do you think I've FALSELY ACCUSED actors of ???

You have no grounds to sue me, for many reasons, first of which is you are posting anonymously, so I can't be harming your reputation.

BUT LATER...

But when it comes to the point of law I made about being able to identify someone before an action can be libelous or considered defamation, that is correct, and you are wrong. Simple as that.


What you are saying is; that I can't sue you because I am posting anonymously, but someone else can identify you without using their name or something.... and I should worry about this ?

You have no basis to your arguements. I can't even take you seriously. :rolleyes:

Steve,

okay, obviously you're a bit slow. Google is a search engine on the internet.

Go to www.google.com

type in "defamation" (with or without the quotes)

you will find the first entry;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slander_and_libel

The first sentance is;

"In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation."

again read the words, FALSE CLAIM. now meditate on that. What in the world do you think I've FALSELY ACCUSED actors of ???



Narcissus - obviously, you are learning disabled.

Show me where I ever said you falsely accused your actors of anything.

You don't even understand the conversation you're having. You're stuck on one point, which isn't the point I brought up in the first place. I defined something about defamation. You keep bringing it back to something all together different.

Narcissus - obviously, you are learning disabled.

Wow... A compliment coming from you...



You're stuck on one point, which isn't the point I brought up in the first place. I defined something about defamation.

Which shows how much you really are contributing to the thread, besides your bogus info and personal attacks which I just have to say again are incredibly boring and ignorant.

Show me where I ever said you falsely accused your actors of anything.

Why are you posting and adding so much ignorance to this thread ? Obviously, you percieve that I am doing something wrong to you, or you would not have been attacking my character with false info before I called you the names. And since.

It's really amazing to see a big adult get so worked-up and insulting over being WARNED to AVOID a bad situation with actors. According to you, I'm supposed to control them or something... guess I'll use a magic wand or something... Thanks for that golden nugget of ignorance and paranoia...

Quotes like "You don't know anything abou the law" and "you're wrong" when I'm posting quotes from legal websites... shouldn't you get back to the hospital ?

Okay -- this thead has devolved into insults. You've both made your points. Unless either of you have something more useful to add to the discussion, please stop wasting our time.

I am the law.

I think the only answer is to get out of here and nuke this thread from orbit.

Also-- I thought I posted this, but the actress came back and finished shooting. Steve's attack made me realize this may not have been made clear enough. I know it was posted in another thread, at least. Though I'm not sure if anything can be made clearly enough for him to grasp, from what I've seen here...

Anyway, I'm focused on selling the film, and I have *less than NO reason* in this world or any other to harm the credibility or reputation of the actors in my film. Why would I ? I wouldn't. Hopefully someone here can eventually grasp that. The story's over. Go on with your lives understanding that.

And again, I'm extremely tired of being slammed with these ignorant accusations here of appearantly how terrible it is for me to help other people *avoid* the problems I had. I wish someone would have helped me avoid that. Or maybe everyone here is an all-knowing actor-puppeteer, like Steve graciously attacked me for not being... Either way, move along with your life.

For the next person who wants to chuck a stone at me for not puppeteering actors; just stop. Stop the ignorance.

Steve's attack made me realize this may not have been made clear enough.



I never attacked you. Still haven't.

My original statement was that you can be sued for defamation, even if you don't use the person's name.... You have no grounds to sue me, for many reasons, first of which is you are posting anonymously, so I can't be harming your reputation.... But when it comes to the point of law I made about being able to identify someone before an action can be libelous or considered defamation, that is correct, and you are wrong. Simple as that.

Okay... Has anyone told you you have a paranoid reality complex ?



That has nothing to do with the legal info you cut and pasted from websites; it's the law.

Yep. Obviously your grip on the law is quite captivating, as shown again above. Legal info is wrong. You're the boss. The printed law is wrong. I'm glad to have met you. Get back to your padded room please.



Go make your movies on your own, wasting years of time because you can't manage people.

I'm 'wasting' years because I hired actors to perform. Again-- how does that equate to my wrong ?
And yes, post after post of berating me for warning other people to avoid a similar situation (which I wish I would have avoided) is still boring.

Let me get your posts straight;
You think I can't manage people because you are the law, no matter what it says, and so actors shouldn't show-up to film because I'm such a jerk for being relentlessly bothered here for trying to help others avoid the same situation. Ouch, you're smart.



I never attacked you. Still haven't.

Well, not besides my "ability to manage people" as judged by your excellency. Or my being wrong about the law by posting it. No, of course you don't have any references or relevant facts. Just condemnation and ignorance. Thanks for sharing so much of it.

Go get a life and stop bothering me about your fishy opinions of the law and paranoid/judgemental nonsense.

Peace be with you.

For reference of the attackiness of this thread (not just Steve), read it again.

What do you see ? Me posting info to HELP others AVOID a similar problem, and then being forced to defend myself-- as written laws are denounced, contradictory/bogus info used to make me defend myself, and I have been called a jerk for it... what cool people.

And being told that all of this is all to do with "my inability to manage people", and not the actors themselves. No, people aren't responsible for anything they do. According to several of these fine folks in this thread-- I am, as a producer, appearantly responsible for the thoughts and actions of others. Wow. How important producers must be, to actually be responsible for the thoughts and actions of others. I wonder how they do it. Real producers I mean, who control your thoughts and actions-- not simple-minded nobodies who hire actors to act like I did.

What an amazing and useful bunch.

Why is this argument still going on? I'm sick of seeing this thread on the home page all the time..

*sigh*

As the only information to come out of this thread is... actors sometimes let you down, then I fail to see the value of the warning.

But as we're handing out the pearls of wisdom here are two more for us:

Crew sometimes let you down

and

Technology sometimes lets you down

if we dedicate about two years to each of them... we should get onto something new round about Christmas 2011

As the only information to come out of this thread is... actors sometimes let you down, then I fail to see the value of the warning.

The value of the info is preventative.

If you've never been in a car accident, info about wearing a seat belt may seem benign and unneccessary as well. That same info may save your life though, which makes it valuable if you value your life.

Same with info about this situation-- it will certainly be of value to me for the rest of my life. I absolutely wish I was warned about the possibility ahead of time to have avoided it.

If you don't value this info, hopefully someone else will.

Also, Clive thanks for trying to devalue the thread again, though. Obviously, that's very important-- you're the third or fourth person today to do that.



To everyone else; It's really cool to read back through a thread and to be denounced and forced to defend myself by nearly every poster. What a genuinely cool crowd. Would hate to lose such a valuable thing in my life. If I read this thread, and avoided a similar situation, I would be thanking and not berating or insulting the poster right now. After 5 f--king pages of very little other than insults and bogus info... I'm kindof missing why I'm supposedly in the wrong for "not managing people well" when obviously you are a classy and helpful bunch.

Thanks for being really important here, friends. If I recommend that you all wear seat belts, will you all insult me for 5 more pages ? Are you that important and cool ?

Preventative how?

Preventative how?


Knowing.

This was not a scenario I would have believed possible going into the film. Most actors I know or know of, especially early in their careers, are eager to work-- to gain recognition and experience. I would have never guessed that a situation such as this would or could have happened. I believe it's counter productive to shoot yourself in the foot as an actor.

Speaking hypothetically to other actors who may think about doing this to another producer; doing this will make you look petty and ridiculous, makes other actors look unworthy of being filmmed thanks to CG, and causes damages you aren't worth having created just for acting for a few days/weeks. You are as replacable as toothpaste, so you need to follow-through and be a pro to look like one and be paid and respected like one. Don't ever punish a producer for having hired you. Producers may forgive, but won't ever forget. Sean Connery, has *never* been late to a shoot. I respect that even more than I like him onscreen (even as one of my favorite actors).

For myself, it has made me look beyond hiring actors to CG. In CG, if you need pick-ups or want to add shots to enrich your film, you don't have to chase actors around and fly them around the country/world just for them to say a few lines or walk down a hallway... Simply open a 3d application and move the actor whereever you need it, and export your shot. Minutes instead of weeks. In fact, in the 2 years of waiting, I learned enough 3d to make features in 3d-- I didn't "waste" the years, as Steve's boldly ignorant claim stated. And in 2 years, I could make 4-5 films well.

Yes, CG is now a legit production platform. The main detractor to the realism of CG films so far has been lip synch. That is no longer an issue thanks to something called Face Robot. I can make films faster, and better for myself. Directing films in 3d takes away; gravity, budget, location availability, problematic employees, etc.. I can have 100 cameras on a scene, render out IMAX resolution, etc. No constraints. And CG films are far more profitable than live action, on average.

The only time I might ever hire actors again is to shoot on greenscreen to shorten production, and have the contracts spell-out very specific info about a situation such as this. Including the fact I would never again pay actors until their role is finished-- they would only be paid for fulfilling the role.

Something about this entire discussion strikes me as ironic..

You've been complaining about actors not wanting to return to complete the film, but the attitude you've had in the majority of the posts makes me think that if I were an actor on your film I'd have a hard time coming to work for you as well. Maybe that's way off base, but the image you've formed of yourself in my mind is one of the kind of person I'd hate to work with.

I wish you luck in your 3d ventures, maybe it will be a better fit for you, and the only "actors" you will need are voice actors.

you've formed of yourself in my mind is one of the kind of person I'd hate to work with.

For being put on the defensive here... that's very generous of you. Thanks.

I'm wrong and have to be belittled again. Thanks for adding so much more to the thread, champ.

"You are as replacable as toothpaste"


Yeah, can't imagine why you'd run into any trouble with your actors when you have *this* kind of respect for the craft.

It's ironic that you accuse me of saying you weren't a good enough puppet-master (my actual words were about you not managing people well, but what I said shouldn't matter to what you want to repeat and distort, now, should it?), and then you go to CGI which is almost all about being a puppet master.

God, I just had a thought... Narcissus, you're not Troy Duffy are you?

Wow cool. Two more offensive posts. What else can you people do here besides heckle and offend me ?? Juggle ?? Sew ??

Of course actors are replacable-- am I supposed to say they aren't ? Harvey Keitel was the original star of "Apocalypse Now", but was replaced. I guess that also makes me the bad guy here, eh ?

Yes, my goal is to PRODUCE FILMS. When actors don't show up, I find another way.

Please someone, lock this thread.

God, I just had a thought... Narcissus, you're not Troy Duffy are you?

Hmm.. scary, that would be a good fit, wouldn't it? Hmmm...


Please someone, lock this thread.
It does seem rather overdue for that. ;)

For the record... I was sincerely wishing you good luck in your 3d venture. But, whatever.

Wow... it's not like incredibly obvious that it's everyone versus me or anything...

You've all added so much here. Thanks for... being insulted by such a fine bunch for 6 pages.

Wow, people really are important. Thanks for the lesson...

Wow... it's not like incredibly obvious that it's everyone versus me or anything...



Ever think that maybe you're in the wrong and everyone is pretty tired of politely trying to explain to you how to make your chosen career path work more easily when all you do is respond with arguments...?

Naw, of course not - you're always right and everyone has it in for you, because you're so special and great and you'll show us all, I bet...

Ever think that maybe you're in the wrong

For hiring actors ? Or for trying to help others avoid a situation I wish I would have avoided ?


when all you do is respond with arguments...?

Have you READ my posts ?



Naw, of course not - you're always right and everyone has it in for you, because you're so special and great and you'll show us all, I bet...

No--just pointing out the flow of the thread. You've all really added alot here... literally almost nothing but insults and bogus info.

Please STOP posting. Mods have been asked to lock this thread.

:lol:

I've owned dogs all my life... and I know for sure, there are no bad dogs just bad owners....

This has nothing to do with the thread... I just thought we could talk about dog training instead of this thankless "horse/water/drink routine."

Does everyone else here use the "ignore bad behaviour, praise good" model?

So, when your dog barks, you walk away from it... but when it's quiet you give it affection.

It's always worked for me :yes:

Does everyone else here use the "ignore bad behaviour, praise good" model?

What have you all added here ? According to the incredibly retarded information in this thread, I (the producer) is in the wrong for actors not showing up. That's my bad behavior ?

Since everyone here is so sure I'm in the wrong, and is incredibly general about my "wrong", why don't you be more specific ? While you're at it, make sure to include a reality check, realizing that I don't *control* actors.

How does someone else's actions become my bad behavior ? Please don't generalize or patronize me for a change while oyu're at it.

Locked at the request of the thread starter.

This is not the place for calling people names, this is the place to discuss. If you don't have anything constructive to add to a thread, please refrain from posting in it.

Besides, I think this thread ran its course long ago.