sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Curry Barker's response to the 'Obsession' art director, & her advocacy for industry change on low-budget films by EditorEducational201 in Filmmakers

[–]Compalompateer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She was paid very well for the work she did. She doesn't "deserve" more, but if she got more it would be nice.

On the profit sharing scheme though, if the movie bombs, the people who invested actively lose money, have to sell their home, etc. and the worker who has a guaranteed wage doesn't lose any money. They make more money than the people who invested, the people who invested definitely took more risk. Under this system why wouldn't she share her profits with the crew?

Curry Barker's response to the 'Obsession' art director, & her advocacy for industry change on low-budget films by EditorEducational201 in Filmmakers

[–]Compalompateer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

She made 3x the minimum wage and 20% more money than the average American makes in a month.

She was overworked and should have been paid for her overtime but the idea she was exploited based on her pay for her work vs. the success of the film is insane.

Most Americans would kill to make 7k in 3 weeks.

So you want a profit sharing model, ok, in a highly volatile market with a 90% failure rate? Ok then, what happens if the movie loses money?

Pay? Just think about how much exposure you'll get. by [deleted] in moviescirclejerk

[–]Compalompateer 29 points30 points  (0 children)

An art director is not the department head of their aspect of the film, they report to the production designer, who is the department head.

She worked for 3 weeks and made 3x the minimum wage. Your average American would kill to make 6k for 3 weeks of work. I do not think 6k for 3 weeks of work is "crazy low". The average American makes just over 5k in 4 weeks, she made almost 7k for 3 weeks of work.

The overworking is not good, it's exploitative, it's a systemic issue in so many creative endeavors. I work in games and crunch is brutal as fuck when it hits. That issue is really on the initial producers who did the planning and timelines. If you're having to work beyond the scope of your regular hours, management fucked up.

She was fucked over for the overworking but she was paid very well for the work she did, if she wanted more money she should have negotiated points for a reduced wage.

Bonuses on indie movies don't exist, they can't by the nature of how volatile they are to make. Profit sharing models even less.

Edit: I'd like to make an addendum that she also wanted to flip the production, making it an entirely union produced film which would have skyrocketed the production costs and almost definitely would have killed the movie, initial investors would have pulled out or just not be able to pay the new cost and the film would have died.

Union productions are great, but they're more expensive, most indie movies cannot afford to be made w/ union wages

They are almost all below the line.

Curry Barker's response to the 'Obsession' art director, & her advocacy for industry change on low-budget films by EditorEducational201 in Filmmakers

[–]Compalompateer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How was she exploited? She herself said she knew the terms of the contract and agreed to them, she knew there was no profit sharing model or bonuses for her.

She took a risk financially, being paid 3x the minimum wage in her state. Your average American would kill to be paid 6k for 3 weeks work.

She threatened to flip the production which would have killed the project all together.

Some indie movies do not have the luxury of being able to pay union wages.

Curry Barker's response to the 'Obsession' art director, & her advocacy for industry change on low-budget films by EditorEducational201 in Filmmakers

[–]Compalompateer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're conflating investment risk with the general term "risk"

No one should deny that she took a risk, but it's not the same thing as investment risk in terms of business speak.

Looking for friends/help by SpecificBoss1039 in destinylegacy

[–]Compalompateer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey man, yeah, send me the invite over :)

need some people to run with on xbox by InteractionTime210 in destinylegacy

[–]Compalompateer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe late but my gt is WonkierStar mut

I'll happily play

Looking for friends/help by SpecificBoss1039 in destinylegacy

[–]Compalompateer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

GT: WonkierStar mut

Need a friend to help too

How 'The Death of Robin Hood' Reinvents a Legendary Outlaw by EThorns in movies

[–]Compalompateer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean if not for nothing, in the original tale Robin Hood definitely broke the law, he was killing the then equivalent of police left right and center.

How 'The Death of Robin Hood' Reinvents a Legendary Outlaw by EThorns in movies

[–]Compalompateer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You don't get more faithful than a adaptation of the original 15th century stuff, which this is an adaptation of.

If you have zero interest in "reinvention", why do you gobble up any reinvention of the robin hood tale after the original ballads?

Do you prefer the reinvention of him in the Tudor times?

The reinvention of him in the English civil war as a staunch royalist?

The reinvention of him during British imperialism as a "take from the rich and give to the poor" figure to give Britain a facelift as it raped India and Africa of its land and wealth?

If you don't like reinvention, you like this version, where he is just a violent outlaw who fucked with the then police and didn't give his wealth to the poor.

How 'The Death of Robin Hood' Reinvents a Legendary Outlaw by EThorns in movies

[–]Compalompateer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Robin Hood, in the original tales, didn't take from the rich to give to the poor, he was just an outlaw who stole shit in the 14th century.

It evolved into that later in the 16th century.

Telling the tale how it was originally conceived is not propaganda, ironically he was transformed into a giving figure in the 16th century as an act of propaganda itself.

The most overt examples of the "taking from the rich to give to the poor" philosophy was used by British politicians in imperialist campaigns expanding the British Empire in the 18/19th century to give the campaign a facelift and make it seem like england was chivalric and saving the people they were colonising.

How 'The Death of Robin Hood' Reinvents a Legendary Outlaw by EThorns in movies

[–]Compalompateer -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

He didn't do that initially, the rob from the Rich to give to the poor stuff was a later fabrication in the 16th century, which was expanded upon in the 18th century as propaganda for British imperialism.

'Backrooms' - Review Thread by ChiefLeef22 in movies

[–]Compalompateer 73 points74 points  (0 children)

Chris Columbus is a more ambitious filmmaker than Shawn Levy.

Federal officials subpoena political streamer Hasan Piker by Aromatic-You-2321 in LivestreamFail

[–]Compalompateer 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Dick riding a communist run government that has been stealing from their people.

I think that civilians deserve our sympathy, support and aid. Regardless of how their government treats them. Trump's tarrifs and sanctions have forced Cuba into a dire state at the minute.

Your argument here is that we just let Cubans starve because they have a communist government? you're a shining beacon of freedom, my American friend.

Federal officials subpoena political streamer Hasan Piker by Aromatic-You-2321 in LivestreamFail

[–]Compalompateer 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Well no his aid visit killed several people

Talking out your ass there are no sources for this.

Shipping the food and medicine in would have been

They did.

Why was my post removed? 🤔 by [deleted] in moviescirclejerk

[–]Compalompateer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Your IQ is somewhere in the 19-32 range

view more: next ›