I hope this makes your day as much as it has made mine. There is a very thin line between volunteering and helping out versus being an "adult intern." I have already touched on this subject in the past, urging for the blatant abuse of labor law to stop. It may never happen, but let's face it: something has to change to stop runaway productions and slapped together second-rate product. The people demand more for their money nowadays. The industry still needs asses in seats, and a strong economy, one with jobs, will allow that to happen. New York Times reports,
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Manhattan, claims that Fox Searchlight Pictures, the producer of Black Swan, had the interns do menial work that should have been done by paid employees and did not provide them with the type of educational experience that labor rules require in order to exempt employers from paying interns.
The rest of the article is here. The Indietalk discussion about this article is here.
Filmmaking is expensive. VERY expensive. Even learning how to be a filmmaker can be expensive. In this post, I'm not addressing university film schools like USC, NYU, or UCLA. These schools not only provide real degrees, they have a proven track record. Even if you attend for the alumni database, they are worth the money. You also get financial aid at these places which--at least in theory--levels the playing field between students of different socio-economical backgrounds.
I'm talking about those unaccredited afternoon classes that cost more per unit than any class at the above schools. I've never attended any of these "classes" personally, but a Google search brings up many unfortunate, but reliable sources. These programs, which can cost as much as a used car, claim to give you the "real deal" on making it in the film industry. Obviously, this is a marketing ploy, given that many wannabe filmmakers believe university-based programs are largely theory-based. While film theory plays a large part in university-based models, film programs at "The Big Three" are known for their hands-on approach to filmmaking, as well as the academia. That's what makes USC, NYU, and UCLA the Harvard, Yale, and Princeton of the field.
So, the dodgy programs sucker you into believing that university-based programs are archaic, theory-laden, and super-exclusive. And that they offer the alternative. As long as you have a valid credit card, you're in. The Usual Suspects that raise eyebrows: LA Feature Film Academy, Vancouver Film School, Academy of Cinema and Television, Film Connection, and 2-day Film School (highly debated, seems like his videos and books are better received).
Warning signs: 1. For-profit status: Yeah, one can argue that all colleges and universities are for profit. But universities offer much more for the money. Like alumni functions, larger access to equipment, ball games, and meal plans.
2. No degrees given: If the program doesn't offer any degrees of any kind, your money might be better served taking film courses at LA City College.
3. Degrees given for little coursework: 10-month master degrees are rare. In fact, both NYU and USC's MFA programs are three years.
4. Strangely high acceptance rate: Just like the Industry, very few attend real film school. Ideally, anything above a 50% acceptance rate (that is not a community college) should be reconsidered.
5. School boasts that your favorite filmmaker "attended": Most likely not, or it's a moot point all together. For example, 2-day Film School claims Spike Lee started his career there. While he may have signed-up, Spike Lee also has an MFA from Tisch at NYU. NYU wins that debate.
6. Financial aid is unexplainable: Got a student loan package but never filled out the FAFSA? Run away.
7. Recruiters use hard-sell tactics: It is the job of the recruiter to make you want to attend. However, a "how-can-we-get-you-to-come-here" approach is a red flag.
8. School reminds you that it's "not a scam": Again, most university programs rarely care if you call their programs scams. If this is an FAQ question on the program's website, reconsider.
While it's true that not everyone can and will visit the Ivory Towers of Higher Learning, you might be better off visiting your local library than attending these high-priced programs.
Kudos forLA Times and the Hollywood Reporter for shedding some light on this subject. Very few industries can get away with the whole "privilege-of-working-with-us-is-enough-compensation" as much as Entertainment Industries. These industries thrive on enthusiastic wannabe players who will do next to anything for that one lucky shot. Unfortunately, these prospective players drive down the market for others, as well as shoot themselves in the foot.
I'm all for volunteering and collaborating. It's a great way to network. But there is a very thin line between volunteering to help out and being used as free labor. It's so commonplace, many now-professionals even stress going the extra mile on these "free" positions in order to keep your foot in the door. As the practice spreads in other industries due to the economy, unemployed workers and the government are starting to question the legality of the so-called "adult internship."
Just as both articles point out, working for free for the direct financial benefit of a company is illegal. The "non-college intern" PA position on professional shoots has to stop. If the film cannot budget some type of compensation for you, then it probably will not help you advance your career. Be friendly and open to assignments, but be mindful.
Local Albuquerque news broke quite an intriguing story: a former local filmmaker was "loaning" out his insurance policy to other filmmakers in exchange for producer credit. Talk about copy and credit!
The former filmmaker also made some scratch on the side, charging filmmakers for the use of his insurance policy. Herein lies the grey area: Mr. Porter is not an insurance agent and therefore cannot provide insurance to anyone, yet he asked for co-producer credit on all the films, cementing his "involvement" on the film or films. Dare I say, scam???
This is fraud, plain and simple. You can be sympathetic towards the filmmakers and to Mr. Porter, but Mr. Porter can't name himself co-producer on a project AND collect a fee. Most producers and filmmakers here in Los Angeles would've laughed him out of their offices and hire someone else with a license. Even if Mr. Porter did not know what he was doing was illegal, the insurance company--who knew--should have taken responsibility. The company merely informed him it was illegal (or, at least, that is what it told KRQE).
Listen, s**t happens. You're gonna need insurance on your shoots. If you drop your camera off a cliff, your main actor breaks his arm, or have your tripod or dolly stolen (my God, please steal ANYTHING!), you might want to have a little insurance to back you up. In fact, it's the law in many places. But please, buy insurance from reputable sources. Even State Farm sells insurance for filmmakers. In the unlikely event one of the above occurs, your policy will actually cover you, instead of covering some guy who knows close to diddly squat about your film.
Here is a short list provided by my alma mater (Fight on, ol' SC!) for film insurance providers:
While daydreaming about something witty to write, I decided to expand this blog a little by starting some mini-topic series. Thus, I christian the first mini-topic: "Do I smell a SCAM???"
There are way too many scam artists out there. Especially in the Industry who pray on hopefuls such as you and I. In fact, I volunteered at an undisclosed film festival office where my job was to promote the festival by spamming other people's blogs and message boards. I feel so dirty now. And ashamed.
Luckily, I grew a backbone and graciously left. This will be one of the many topics I will cover in this mini-topic series. Stay tuned.
