September 1 at 8:00am

The Hard Truth: Filmmaking Is Not A Job

Unfortunately if I sought to get compensated for the work I do, my movies would not get made. If I sought to get paid like normal people are, I never would have been able to produce any of my films.

I have been fortunate enough to have made about sixty films in about twenty years. I am not foolish enough to think I was the deciding factor in bringing good ideas into cinematic being, but I do know that certain practices of mine, have helped significantly.  Yes, it is also true that good work begets other good work, and a track record certainly helps — particularly a track record of profitability — but generally all of my films depend on two things to get made: 1) superior quality of the material, and 2) the willingness of the collaborators to make great sacrifices.

There’s more though on why these films have happened; there have been commonalities amongst all the films that have helped significantly in their getting made.  I have to repeatedly go out on the limb, believing in the film and the filmmaker for years on end, with no remuneration, pushing to make the project better, figuring out how in the hell to bring more “value” to it, shopping it, strategizing and the like.

I am highly selective in my choices to get involved with a project and as a result some of my movies get made and it usually only takes 3 years of my unpaid labor to do so. And then generally after we get the films financed, and the budget locked, I far too often have to make further sacrifices with my fees and “perqs”.  I am not complaining; these are my choices.  My eyes are open.  But when I talk to other producers, particularly new ones, often they don’t believe it.  Being a film producer requires abandoning the concept that you work for a living.

My first five or six years in the business I had jobs.  I exchanged my labor, ideas, and relationships for the ability to survive.  I came from very modest means, put myself through film school, and sacrificed most things so I could get the movies I wanted to see done (cue violins please). And yes, occasionally along the way, I did some things generally to pay the bills or support my company.  If I had pursued a job or security initially though, none of it would not have gotten done.  If I had pursued money over responsibility and knowledge, my life would have taken a much different path.

We live to work, we should not have to work to live — but we do & maybe it is because most don’t realize part one.  Reading in The New York Times how 37% of Americans between the ages of 18 -29 are not in the work force, makes me wonder if they are all becoming producers.  I have not had the guarantee of a salary since generous overhead deals for producers went by the wayside.  This is also not a complaint.  This is my choice to use my labor to build the culture that I want.

I state all of this now because filmmakers of different sorts have also stated to me that they don’t want to do certain things when they are not getting paid for it.  Unfortunately I think that means, at least in terms of today, that their movies will not be getting made.  Well, maybe not so for those few true geniuses out there, but what are the rest of us to do?  Stop making movies?  I have watched movies not happen because of small budget discrepancies.  I have made errors seeking too much money for my films, and witnessed their death as a result.

I am not endorsing the practice of exploiting people for their labor.  Yet, I support people making the choice of using their labor, albeit not at it’s proper value, to deliver the culture they want.

Yes it would be great if there were some support structures in America beyond academic institutions that helped those that did not dabble in the most commercial of creative choices to support themselves.  Although, when I get to travel to the different countries, some of which have had film cultures benefit greatly, from the subsidies to the arts, I often find cultures with more rigid rules than ours as to what is “finance-able” film.  I have seen how subsidies may provide for employment across all categories, but also how they diminish the will for many to invest their labor for the sake of  growth or supporting an artist they believe in.

Still though it would be nice to get a little help or acknowledgement beyond the marketplace that your work matters.  Maybe first though, all of us need to demonstrate that we value and want a diverse and dynamic culture.  Maybe we need to work a little harder letting those values be known.  We need to show that there are communities throughout this land that love ambitious film and will vote with their time, labor, and dollars to bring it to their friends and neighbors.  Paying artists directly for their work will go a long way to making filmmaking a legitimate option when it comes to choosing how to earn a living in this country.

And in the meantime, we all have to continue to make real sacrifices to get our work done.  Either that or take a real job.

  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print


  • Think about the
    side of a tote Replica
    Handbags
    as a blank painter’s canvas on which
    to print your business logo. That canvas is spacious, <a<br>href="http://www.copyluxury.net/herm...">Hermes
    Handbags
    meaning there is lots of room to
    display Lancel
    Handbags
    whatever marketing message you need to
    get across to your audience. You can use the ample space to its fullest
    potential by <a<br>href="http://www.replicahandbags-2u....">Marc
    Jacobs Handbags


    choosing huge, bold
    <a<br>href="http://www.handbagsprada.us/">Goyard
    Handbags
     print, bright colors as well as a
    captivating message.<a<br>href="http://www.replicawatches2uk.c...">Replica
    Aigner watches
    Laptop computer messenger bags Givenchy
    handbags
    come in lots of different styles. There is laptop
    computer backpacks, <a<br>href="http://www.handbagshermes.us/m...">Marni
    handbags laptop computer briefcases, & lots of more. You
    can get any of them that match you style & fashion for better travel
    conveniences. Men love to wear the <a<br>href="http://www.replica--watches.co...">Replica
    Watches
     and <a<br>href="http://www.replica--watches.co...">Patek
    Philippe watches
      is one of the most replicated watch brands
    worldwide, behind only <a<br>href="http://www.breitling-watches.c...">Breitling
    watches uk



     and Panerai. Omega watches tag
    heuer watches
    are popular, and hence there is
    a large range of Patek Philippe Omega replica watches available. These watches
    range from poor Chinese copies to the latest high-end Swiss ETA replicas with
    all the bells and whistles. <a<br>href="http://www.rolex-replicawatche...">Rolex
    Replica Watches



    </a<br></a<br></a<br></a<br></a<br></a<br></a<br></a<br></a<br>
  • One month left to enter your film into the AMC Bigbreak contest. Your indie film in theaters! from IAMROGUE.com Bigbreak Fb page http://bit.ly/blSfO3
  • Jon Jost
    A little perspective from now moving on 50 years of "independent" filmmaking. When I started, the thought of money/pay never really entered my mind, and it would seem for a little part of my generation it was the same - we were the "underground," "hippies" whatever. I still don't know how I stayed alive though I know how I made films: borrowed cameras and editing stuff, film stock that was meant to print on and was garbage to the labs; friends in labs who processed film off the books. That kind of thing. Eating, well, I don't know - I lived a few years on candybars and looking in the garbage. I still look in the garbage for useful things. I've had a retrospective at MoMA (they paid $1000 for a month of screenings), honors here and there, and most of my life I lived well below govt certified "poverty." A few times I made some money, or sold a film to Euro or US public TV. Finally, at age 64, with a lifetime savings of about $20,000 (I am real frugal), no pension, no insurance of any kind, I got my first job, teaching (in Korea, I put out some feelers in USA but to no response), only to make money and save it for the very imminent rainy days of old age to come (67 now).
    You can Google me and get 100s of pages; I am told by some I am "well known." Some say I am the Father or Grandfather of American indie film (bullshit); etc.
    If you make genuinely "independent" work, this is going to be your fate. If, like most currently known "indies" (or whatever changeable term is used) you make more or less conventional narrative films, maybe you will make a living making commercial films. That's the only way you can make "a living" outside teaching. There's a long list of real independent filmmakers - James Benning, or Ernie Gehr, and others who made there living teaching and made films when they could. There are NONE who made a living making "independent" films in the USA. In Europe and Asia it is another story.
    Jon Jost
    www.cinemaelectronica.wordpres...
    www.jonjost.wordpress.com
    www.jon-jost.com
  • taniamartins
    I have always thought of filmmaking, not as a job (exactly as you say), but as a lifestyle. A lot of sacrifice and hard work which you can only cross you fingers and hope that you'll get paid and enjoy a better life later on. I am young filmmaker who's been at it for 3 years and, although, I haven't made any money from any of the projects I was involved in, I loved them and did my best, cause I believe life is too short to be shit. I am looking for "a real job", but it will always take a back seat to my filmmaking endeavours.
  • I'm not a producer nor am I'm aspiring to be one at this moment but still working in this industry i know what you mean. It is a hard truth to face and early on(where I am) you don't always get to pick projects if someone want you to shoot a project it is because they can't find a friend to do it, so they are "hiring" a new friend to do it. You can only hope that your efforts are rewarding. Keeping in mind that reward is not just money, it has to be more than that, it has to be personal.
  • LFieldsCruz
    I think I understand what Ted is saying in this post, but I feel the need to place this into a a feminist perspective to further demystify the notion of "Filmmaking is not a job".

    If you compare producing to being a mother you'll find quite a few similarities. For most, not all, but for most, we usually need another job in addition to our job's as a mother. If we're lucky these jobs pay us enough so that we can put as much effort and time as we can into job's as mothers. In the best case we have a partner who also holds down a second job, but is as committed to "creating" the work as we are. At times we work in a vacuum, toiling day and night trying to find the best solution to an imminent or foreseeable problem. Whatever money we are able to raise and bring to the project goes directly to support the artist(s) and all who work or play with them (friends, teachers, nannies, tutors, coaches = DP, gaffers, grips, caterers, actors). Like the Producer a Mom has to manage the many stages of development: infancy, childhood, preteen, teen, young adulthood. A Mom provides guidance and structure, reviews and critiques different rough cuts--particularly during those teen years. A Mom courts feedback from the experts or those she trusts and tolerates the opinions of the uninvited. Its takes roughly 18 years to develop a "project", and when it's cut loose you never know just how it will be received by it's audience. Most of the time a Mother is happy if the project just breaks even. It's the rare project that actually makes enough of a profit to pay for the true amount a Mother has invested. And the same is true for an indie film project.
  • MTeplitsky
    So Ted, how did you manage to make a living while making 60 films in 20 years? I'm a fan of your work and blog, but this post left me confused. We all know filmmaking is a risky, tough way to make a living.
  • This is an important post (good one Ted) because this is the sad nature of this creative endeavor - not a business, not an industry. If Ted is noting the inconsistent nature of his income (someone I view as an exemplar of successful indie producer in providing a consistent living) then we must accept the movie business does not provide anything like a steady job to it's participants. I think Ted is actually painting a rosy picture. There are very few veterans who are not bitter - or at least extremely wry. I think people who are passionate (like many on this list) understand that pursuing the accomplishment of putting a good film on the screen requires 24/7/365 creative effort often with no recompense.

    My question is whether this 24/7 unpaid commitment to movies that built the NY indie community has now abated and there is now a cultural shift towards other forms of storytelling. I find many people are too occupied with social media and the glut of information to work (with delayed financial gratification) on movies in any capacity - even if that is their life's desire. The desire is there but the hours are not. And many of the most creative talented people are happy to design games or applications for very good money.

    On the other hand - for those of us who have always understood that, "filmmaking is not a job" - the professional tools and overhead of expressing ourselves just gets cheaper and cheaper but the talented creative labor, the real cost of a picture, seems harder to find (without nice paycheck.)
  • BRAVO to you. I often counsel most of my students at www.wordsmythe.ca to NOT WAIT for a producer to find them and their script. Write so you can shoot it yourself (or at least a trailer!).

    Cheers - Jana / www.wordsmythe.ca
  • Peter Hobbs
    Be glad you're not a poet. John Ashberry says the only poet in the world making any money is Billy Collins.

    Bitterness about not making enough money from art reduces the pleasure of making art. Some of that bitterness may come from the sense that one's hard work isn't fairly valued. In capitalism, value of work, and our sense of self-worth, gets tied to money. That makes sense, viewed from within the system, but there's no logical reason that art should have a monetary value, is there? I don't produce art to feed people or shelter them or save the environment. I produce it because it gives me pleasure and makes my life seem meaningful.

    Instead of feeling devalued by lack of income, I try to redefine "success." To me success is being able to do what you love. I'm very successful, because I love to teach and make movies, and I get to do both. Most people haven't even found something to do that they love. Many people try to make tons of money so that they can retire and do what they love.

    I could be dead tomorrow, so I do what I love, as much as possible. Maybe money will come, maybe it won't, but I'm having a good time either way.
  • "I am not endorsing the practice of exploiting people for their labor. Yet, I support people making the choice of using their labor, albeit not at it’s proper value, to deliver the culture they want."

    Ted I think this defines most of the crews who work on indie films. I just want to acknowledge the crews who actually make the films... not taking away from the above the line people who have more invested (not just financially). Above the line shares in the glory. The crew doesn't. Or at least I don't often hear the boom operator credited with doing a great job in getting the film made. Yet, without his/her unpaid or under paid labor the film doesn't get made at the quality level everyone desires.

    The support is out there on every indie film being made by a crew who uses their underpaid labor to deliver this culture. If I'm reading your post correctly you are reacting to some producers who don't want to accept the personal financial challenges of indie film. I have no data to support this but I feel they are the minority.

    It's wonderful now that anyone can make a film. Anyone. However, that attracts some who have a sense of entitlement that perhaps is not deserved. Those that have worked in the trenches like you have (it's been a long journey since Frankenhooker-I have a lot of friends who worked with you on that one!) understand the sacrifices to be made and do so for many different reasons.

    Forgive me if I'm a little off topic. The post just struck a cord and I wanted to give voice for the crews who might not be represented yet devote their energies to making indie film possible.
  • Sujewa Ekanayake
    This might be a way off course comment, but I think it's related - here it goes; what exactly does money measure, or what is it a symbol for (the value of money being symbolic, as the paper w/ images & numbers on it has very little direct physical value outside of the economic system that it is used in)? And the second idea is, in "less developed" economies/countries/time periods the donation of labor in order to accomplish projects that are worthwhile to the group/nation/tribe was the norm - pyramids in Egypt (no, I do not think they were built by slaves, rather through teams of mostly volunteers), temples in India, Sri Lanka, etc., ancient & medieval armies in Europe & elsewhere (and donation of labor still is the norm in many parts of the world, specially when it comes to building temples, etc.). Anyway, back to the first idea - I think money (since we are no longer on the gold standard) is primarily a symbol for activity or labor or the ability to produce something or get something done. So, if money is not readily available but people are willing to do the work & there is a solid plan to either turn the product of labor into money & or compensate the workers in some other means, then, I think going ahead with a project that the creators/workers think is worthwhile is a good way to go even in our "highly developed" economy. I think much of real indie film (at least the first or second features, & other passion projects) have been made this way anyway. So what's the point? :) - I guess making movies even if you are not getting paid for it may be totally cool, & ultimately useful to many people - just as volunteer service for building religious structures, other community projects, going to war back in the day was done w/ out any monetary compensation or w/ out adequate monetary compensation.

    - S
  • If you want to make money by making films you first have to be a talented artist who makes stuff people want to pay for. Art first. Business second. Thanks for the clarification, Ted.
  • Justin Eugene Evans
    In my opinion, many people are missing Ted's point. He never said he worked for free. He said he made donations of his labor. That may seem like a fine point to debate, but for me it's the Shibboleth of independent film.

    I was paid to make A Lonely Place For Dying. And, I've donated a tremendous amount of time and labor.

    Also, if you look at history Michelangelo donated a tremendous amount of his time to complete the Sistine Chapel. He was forced to accept the project, it was outside his skill set, it had a set budget and because the craftsmanship didn't meet his standards he chose to start over and do the job right.

    That's the very definition of what Ted is talking about. My guess is he hasn't worked for free in a long time. But, I'm also willing to bet that the capital didn't fully cover what was required of him to do the job well. So, he went above and beyond his contract. He pushed forward even when the project's budget was spent. He didn't say "I'm sorry guys. I know you want to do a festival push. But, my week rate is X and you don't have the money. I can't push this movie at festivals."

    That's the nature of independent film. There is not revolving line of credit, there is no ever-flowing pool of capital...the well runs dry and if you want to get the project done you must be willing to sacrifice to see that happen.
  • It's a good distinction Justin, yet, producing requires working for free. I maintain a pretty large development slate. I only have faith that those projects will get made -- I have no guarantee. Until they get made, I won't get paid. Development projects usually take a MINIMUM of three years to get made and all involve a lot of work. It is rare that I will get a development fee. Additionally now that budgets have dropped, it is rare that I take a fee on the films that I am not "hands on" on. Each of the past two years, I have Exec Prod'd films that could not support an up front fee for me and I will only get paid if the investors fully recoup.

    Still though, you get the point. Even when we get paid in indie film, all of us, ATL and BTL alike, are making a large donation of our labor to the art.
  • Jamie Hargrove
    Outside this small community, it's a matter of dispute whether these films do in fact represent superior material. For audiences, here and abroad, the answer would seem to be "no". Those audiences may be wrong, but they've spoken.

    Whatever the dangers of government funding, filmmakers living in countries which subsidize films enjoy one enormous advantage: directors employ producers, and producers court directors, rather than the other way around. No producer has to be pleased. The project doesn't have to be comprehensible to the producer. The limits of the possible don't reside with the taste and judgment of the producer. The films don't reflect the producer.

    If the producer feels he can do more than be an employee, there is a route for him or her. Be a writer or director. What doesn't work is producers serving a surrogate writer-directors. Meaning they don't actually write or direct the stuff, but projects are subject to their tastes and judgments. In the more socialistic states, other filters are still in play, but they're often more rational filters.
  • J. Miller
    I'm sorry but this is just foolish, it stems from a completely ridiculous premise that at some point in history art wasn't a commodity or has ceased to be one. The whole BS concept of the starving artist is a barely 200 year old romantic construct with no grounding in any form of reality. If you think the Sistine Chapel would have its ceilings painted if Michelangelo hadn't been PAID by the Catholic Church and instead just did it on weekends in between his day job you are nuts. If you ask anyone who is successful if they made sacrifices beyond their pay rate to reach that success, they will say yes, that doesn't mean they didn't have a job. Is computer engineering not a job because Bill Gates didn't get paid a weekly salary when he was creating Microsoft in his garage? Filmmaking most certainly is a job, and so is independent filmmaking. Obviously independent filmmaking requires a different set of sacrifices often more directly financial, that a producer is unable to find a way to support themselves speaks to his/her failure as a producer not to any genius as an artist unfortunately. The moment you say that producers shouldn't expect to be paid you have made it a career exclusively for the independently wealthy (something which is already much to common).

    A better way to think of an indie film is as a start up company trying to produce one product. Most startup companies fail, most startup company founders lose whatever money they put into them. That doesn't make it not a job. If I am investing in a startup company I don't want to find out the CEO of the company is holding another job to support themselves instead of putting 100% of his attention to the company, I expect that part of my investment goes to pay for one of the companies key assets, the founder. In the same way if a producer can't pay themselves enough to survive giving 150% of their attention to the film they are producing, they have failed both the film and their investors, not made a noble sacrifice for their art.

    There is no glory in poverty and no drive that stems from actual hunger. If you can only produce out of desperation you are no artist. I'm sorry for the indie film world that the "internet bubble" of the miramax/sundance 90s burst, but the truth is that by celebrating lower budgets over quality filmmaking and never bothering to figure out a way to commodify the product the indie world just created more terrible film festivals than good movies and destroyed itself. Congratulations, if you want to see high quality innovative cinematic storytelling turn on cable and avoid film festivals, because the best work right now is being done by people with jobs.
  • Podertz
    Yes, I identify with what you are saying. This is the Romatic fallacy that so many kids in the fine arts world have fallen for, and made bad choices for themselves. But it led to huge profits for schools and material suppliers.

    I also disagree that the support for projects in other countries has diluted the quality. Some of the best "small" films have come out of Europe over the past decade. And because they actually have budgets, they don't all look like they were shot on HVX's and have well-developed stories, decent production value and excellent acting.

    This is a business, if you think it is anything else, stop complaining and go out and make some real art. But for god's sake, please, stop making thrown-together mediocre films with crappy production values and poorly conceived storylines and expecti other people to care/support you.
  • Rire00
    "Yes it would be great if there were some support structures in America beyond academic institutions that helped those that did not dabble in the most commercial of creative choices to support themselves."

    I agree with this post. But I'm also a little bit offended. Below-the-line talent, actors (for the most part), and businesses providing services to indie productions all expect to get paid. Hell, they won't do any work if you don't pay them! However, somehow and for some reason it is legitimate and even...as you describe it...altruistic for producers to starve to death in order to go ahead with their films? I don't get it.

    I'm 26, have been passionate about films my entire life and I have a steady day job. Does this mean I want it less than you or any one else? Doubt it. Every one is completely different. I get what you mean about sacrifices but self-sacrificing is a different banana. It's not easy for creatives of any kind to do what they love and make a living out of it but implying that there's a certain hunger that is only prevalent when denying yourself a wage in favor of producing that one glorious film is a bit snobbish.
  • That's not how I read it. I took this to mean that the sort of person who WOULD sacrifice their salary has a hunger that the person who WOULDN'T make that sacrifice lacks. That is not the same as saying any paid producers lacks drive to do great work. When we interview potential crew for our productions, we seek high and low for the sort of person who would do the job for nothing because they're primarily driven by creative ambitions... and *that's* who we pay.
  • Dan Mcguire
    This is great, hard earned wisdom.
  • Well, there's sacrifice, and then there's writer's sacrifice...

    After years of study and practice and bullshit gypsy jobs for rent and cat food, the car, girl, credit rating, stuff, most friends long gone, you finally create something you feel is worthy of attention. You don't know if it really is, of course, but all ya got is you, so...

    More years spent just trying to get it 'read' by the 'right' people; the rejections and maybes and false promises peppered in between more bullshit gypsy jobs that barely keep the Eviction Sheriff at bay as limbo drags on and on.

    So you man-up, spend 9 months, maybe a year creating another piece you feel is worthy of attention. And the process starts all over again. Except, at this point, you really don't have much left to sacrifice.

    Then some producer says he loves your stuff - but could you rewrite it reflecting my notes for free? Because, you know, once it's re-written, then said producer will be able to 'run with it.'

    This could be my break! Finally! Sure - I'll give ya two MORE months of free 'work' even though, technically, I devoted a couple of years creating the piece for 'free' once already. Three months later, said producer's wife leaves him and he has a nervous breakdown and you're broke and back to square one. Again.

    Another year of struggling and begging and cajoling someone - anyone - just to read the damn thing later, you finally sell a piece - at a bargain price because no agent will touch you because you've never sold anything before - and after you cover the mountain of debt accumulated during the 'free' sacrifice years, and pay-back all of your family and friends who supported your relentless dream-pursuit as best they could during the lean decade, and replace a few of the 'sacrifices' - like, you know, socks, and bread - your net worth is back to a total of $0.

    Even experienced, savvy producers sometimes... forget the level of sacrifice most writers have already endured by the time said producer is considering the best 100 pages you feel you ever wrote...



  • I agree the writers are also a slave to the system we have. No one is on top. that DP who shoots the story you wrote for years, he as spent years working 14hr days without pay. sometimes as a DP other times a a Gaffer more times an electric moving hot heavy lights for the price of "imdb credit" if the movie gets that far.

    It seems everyone can play the victim but spare us all because that guy next to you was in the same boat.
  • This is a great post Ted, but I want to point out that some of us have "real jobs," and still continue to make sacrifices for the Indie Film community. It's kind of creepy working part time (which ends up being all of my spare time) to keep all of the plates spinning for my passion, while colleague lay-offs happen left and right and the Sword of Damocles perpetually hangs above my own head.

    The upside is pretty great though. Watching fellow filmmakers, like Gary King, Gregory Bayne, Phil Holbrook (with King and Keck) and Lucas McNelly doing just what you are describing above, and making their crowdfunding goals, promoting their work and actually producing movies. These guys are moving forward, working 'without a net,' and there other filmmakers behind them with fire in their bellies.

    Many of these stories are lost in the white noise of the "Manifestonistas," but I think that there is a wave of filmmakers breaking toward the shore of the diverse and dynamic culture you mention and I appreciate their strength and their drive.

    Thanks for keeping fires stoked.
blog comments powered by Disqus

This site could not have been built without the help and insight of Michael Morgenstern. My thanks go out to him.

Help save indie film and give this guy a job in web design or film!