To PAY or not to PAY actors?

[Madlabent]

Lets say that you are making a low budget independent film that will only cover necessary materials, and film festival expenses. Should you pay the actors who have worked on the film even if you plan to self-distribute it or four-wall theaters yourself once it is completed?

There seems to be three different options that we can approach:

1-Pay actors upfront
2-Give Credit Only or Credit and a Copy of the Film
3-No Upfront pay, but Deferred pay on the backend per certain conditions.

Which scenario is the best for an independent film that is self-distributed?

 

[Will Vincent]

Depends on your budget, but I think keeping the festival/distribution budget separate from the production budget would be advisable. If you can afford to pay your actors and it takes longer to generate the money to do festival submissions that might be preferable.

While it's generally possible to get actors for free, I would hope that paid actors earn their pay. When working for free sometimes it's easier to loose focus and not take things seriously.

 

[indietalk]

#2

I don't think deferred pay ever works. Besides, if the film makes it big, that is why they took a chance in the first place, they are not expecting cash later, they want exposure. You can repay them by hiring them again on another picture, and paying them then, or recommending them, etc.

 

[Madlabent]

In the case of a scenario where actors are being paid, the question then becomes what to pay them exactly. There does not seem to be a standard for non-union productions, so one if left to go with either using one of the SAG or AFTRA rates as a reference OR Just paying what Extras would make on Hollywood sets OR Coming up with a random number. I had a conversation with someone about the idea of paying minimum wage per hour if the budget is really low. However, I never used this particular strategy so I cannot say how well that would work?

How do you come up with the numbers and rates for the talent in your films?

 

[Will Vincent]

If you're going to pay them, I think I would probably offer a flat rate -- based on the significance of their role and number of days they are required for shooting.

The easiest method would be to go with option #2, and offer a per diem (to cover gas and such).. and feed them.

 

[indietalk]

Oh, by the way, for your #2, you should definitely give a copy of the film. That is what they are there for. And as Will says, definitely food.

 

[directorik]

You don't say where you live or where you're shooting. I know
expectations are different in different parts of the country.

Here in Los Angeles only the very new of the new even like to hear
about deferred pay. It's all talk. I'm not saying the filmmakers
who offer deferred pay are lying - but the chances of an
independent film with no name actors being distributed by the
filmmaker making a profit is beyond slim.

Don't offer it.

Think of this: if the movie makes money and you send the cast and
crew a check, imagine their reaction. But I know that in some
areas, deferred pay is acceptable.

If you can afford to pay them up front - do it. I usually pay
$100/day. On a 12 hour day that's only $7.14/hr. I've never paid
based on the significance of the role unless the name on the DVD
will help sell it. I pay by the day - even if the actor is on set
for less than the 12. When I can't afford to pay, I offer as
flexible schedule as possible, gas money and great food.

In my opinion the best scenario of the three you offer is number 1.

 

[clive]

Just wanted to reaffirm what's been said.

Except in exceptional circumstances you want to avoid deferred payments or points deals with cast and crew.

Figure out what you can ACTUALLY do for you cast and crew... such as a free copy of the film, an IMDB credit, a good premiere and your commitment to promote the film in places where your cast and crew will gain exposure for what they've done.

Deferments can be counter-productive to gaining exposure.

Imagine your film is carrying $200,000 in deferments (really easy to do if you defer at scale)... you're then in a position where you'd have to turn down distribution deals that only offer smaller amounts of money.

Trust me... your cast and crew will hate you for turning down opportunities to get the film out into the market... and there is nothing worse than a movie which sits on a shelf gathering dust, because it's carrying too much debt to get out there.

Plus, when you defer payments, people take two contradictory positions... one, they assume they won't ever get paid, two, they'll assume they SHOULD get paid at some point.

As someone who currently is owed $120,000 in unpaid deferments, I feel less charitable to those producers who assured me I'd earn eventually, than the ones who asked me to work for them for free.

I agree with Rik, if you can afford to pay something upfront do it... and I'd add, don't feel you have to work with just ANYONE, just because they are free... lots of good, professional people will work for free if the project is good, the production team is professional and their is a chance for them to do what they love in a creative environment.

 

[barnaclelapse]

I dunno.

I'd say it seriously depends on the people you're working with, and I would imagine it'd have to be one of those things you'd nail every detail for before you go to work.

But that's just me.

 

[YoungLions]

If you go with option 1 you may be able to pay them at a discount, since the money is up front. if you feel confident with making money on this film, I'd go with option 1 and pay them less than they would normally make.

 

[williamchristopher]

If you offer payment in the form of a 'COPY,' make sure that you actually give them a copy. I'm still chasing down people from projects i worked on several years ago.

Also, payment in the form of 'production/promotion stills' is also helpful to a lot of actors in the early part of their careers.

 

[M1chae1]

As it was said, it depends on your budget, and location. If your budget is--let's say--under 10K, then try and find talent (cast and crew) willing to work pro bono. Talented actors will work for free on a micro-budget (non-paying) gig if they believe in your work--although sometimes this is not as often the case in the LA region I hear.

If your budget is upwards 50K...then definitely pay your main talent (cast and crew). You don't have to pay someone coming in for a day to do background work, or a PA cutting their teeth on a set. You still have to hire creatively at that budget level.

If you want your movie to be awesome...with great acting, you may have to pay your actors from the get. This could be $50 a day (outside of California--usually in the LA area, $100 a day is the starting day rate for experienced talent) or $500 for the entire project. You decide...but it's worth getting solid actors if you want people to take your movie seriously, or be moved by your story.

Deferred pay to an experienced actors means 'working for free.' You're not disguising anything.

If you can't afford to pay your actors...the least you can do is keep them well-fed and watered (and a copy of the film, that goes without saying).

A solid team of actors is worth their weight in gold...remember that.

 

[Lochleinn]

Pay!

Always pay actors. If you can't (because it's a no-budget project) give them an equal ownership over it. "Exposure" is often not worth anything. Anyways, the exposure shouldn't be IN LIEU OF paying someone for their work. There are minimum wage laws. You probably won't get in trouble, but is that really a law you think is unjust? Giving them ownership means they can be fully invested in the production, and you don't have to worry about not having cash for recompense.

 

[sfoster]

Always pay actors. If you can't (because it's a no-budget project) give them an equal ownership over it.

You're insane dude, equal ownership to a no name actor

Do you have any idea how much work pre-production and post-production take? Why would I give "equal ownership" to someone that put in 1/20th or 1/50th of the effort that I had to

 

[Nikola Damov]

You're insane dude, equal ownership to a no name actor

Do you have any idea how much work pre-production and post-production take? Why would I give "equal ownership" to someone that put in 1/20th or 1/50th of the effort that I had to

Because he as an actor who wants equal ownership and now he is going to send the thread to his friend director who doesn't want to pay him and say " Hey look what people say, you should definitely give me equal ownership " .

And then he will commit suicide and the world will explode.

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

If you offer payment in the form of a 'COPY,' make sure that you actually give them a copy. I'm still chasing down people from projects i worked on several years ago.

This is big - I put out an audition call a couple years back, and said that while headshots/résumés were fine links to previous work or acting reels were preferable. Out of about 40 responses I got 3 who had links or reels. A lot of them sent résumés with multiple independent shorts and even features, but when I followed up with them they all said the same thing - they didn't have a copy, and the film either wasn't finished, or wasn't available online because they were doing festivals, or waiting for distribution, or they just never heard from the filmmaker again. I ended up filming most of their auditions and sending them private youtube links so they'd at least have something they could show. You see credit+copy offered all the time, but it's clear that a lot of filmmakers never really bother with the 'copy' part of that.

 

[IndiePaul]

Good post ItDonnedOnMe. Noted.
.

 

[baoliun]

This is big - I put out an audition call a couple years back, and said that while headshots/résumés were fine links to previous work or acting reels were preferable. Out of about 40 responses I got 3 who had links or reels. A lot of them sent résumés with multiple independent shorts and even features, but when I followed up with them they all said the same thing - they didn't have a copy, and the film either wasn't finished, or wasn't available online because they were doing festivals, or waiting for distribution, or they just never heard from the filmmaker again. I ended up filming most of their auditions and sending them private youtube links so they'd at least have something they could show. You see credit+copy offered all the time, but it's clear that a lot of filmmakers never really bother with the 'copy' part of that.

same goes for crew members and sometimes even DOP lol.
I have supported a friend on her crowdfund campaign which raised 5K £. They shot the film and it has been a year since it is supposedly in post. I haven't seen a single screenshot

 

[itschrisreed]

You can't just not pay people. Its illegal. The only way to either differ, or give them points.

A deferment that will never pay out is something you should just be honest about. "I need you to sign this thing that says 'deferred pay', it will probably never make any money but its only fair that you get a shot at it if it does, and I can get in trouble if I don't have a signed contract from you come tax time".

Same thing with points that will never see a profit. The problem with giving points is if you don't structure the deal properly they all own a part of the underling ip and not just profit on production.

 

[NickClapper]

You can't just not pay people. Its illegal.

Well, no.

If people are volunteering on your production then there's no legal imperative to pay them. There is, of course, an ethical one. But, like all work anywhere - whether that's doing part time filing, working at a soup kitchen, or playing football for a local team - no one can be forced to pay you if you agree to do it for free.

But as itschrisreed says, it's important to be honest, especially when offering points. Offering points on an indie film is not the same as offering payment, and people who are naive about the industry can be manipulated into misunderstanding that.