Michael McQueen Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 i bet a north carolina sound mixer wouldn't have let that lav cable go like that… or a georgia, Louisiana or michigan, I'm kidding. but seriously, why not another 20 seconds to drop that cable down his shirt? i hate seeing crap like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 i bet a north carolina sound mixer wouldn't have let that lav cable go like that… or a georgia, Louisiana or michigan, I'm kidding. but seriously, why not another 20 seconds to drop that cable down his shirt? i hate seeing crap like that. You're assuming there was a sound guy there at all. I'm pretty sure us L.A. guys would have boomed that one ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McQueen Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 zing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Den Nic Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 I'm curious as to what you guys opinion are of the Canadian share of American Hollywood, mostly talking (This year in Toronto) about Total Recall and Resident Evil 5 (I don't know if the sound crew was local or not). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Lightstone, CAS Posted November 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Hollywood productions have been shooting in Canada for well over 40 years. Montreal and Toronto were the busiest places then followed by Vancouver in the 70's and 80's. Over the last 20 years it has been Vancouver and Toronto and then Montreal. All three cities have a good pool of talented Sound Mixers, with many who have been doing it well over 30 years or more. Total Recall and the Resident Evil sequels were crewed with Toronto sound people. Steve Gauthier mixed Total Recall, he's been around a long time. Resident Evil's Cinematographer was Glen MacPherson, an established D.P., originally from Montreal. I first worked with him in the mid 70's when he was a clapper-loader. There is also an excellent pool of talent in Great Britain. Producers and studios will shoot any where in the United States, Canada or in the world, for that matter, where ever they can save below the line costs. That's just the way it is. Established Mixers in Los Angeles and New York will always be considered for the bigger budgeted shows, no matter where they shoot. But, it is no longer a guarantee any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Den Nic Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Glen Gauthier mixed Total Recall but that's besides the point. Good to know that Canada based productions are using Canadian talent (or at least a mix) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Lightstone, CAS Posted November 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Den, What is your point? The sound crews on those shows were entirely local hires. So I'm not sure what you mean by "or at least a mix"? The overall point is that we in the U.S. do not have control when a producer and studio decide to go to another country and shoot a project with local crews. Of course we would like them to shoot it all in the U.S. I think the focus, at least in Los Angeles and San Francisco, is for the California legislature to put together tax incentives at least as competitive or better than those offered by other states. That would go a long way in slowing the many runaway productions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurence Posted November 26, 2011 Report Share Posted November 26, 2011 Governments should stay out of it and Producers should be free to seek out the crews and the locations that best suit their production needs without the need for taxpayer money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted November 26, 2011 Report Share Posted November 26, 2011 Governments should stay out of it and Producers should be free to seek out the crews and the locations that best suit their production needs without the need for taxpayer money. I agree. Problem is that states and countries have, and always will, lured business and manufacturing from other states by offering incentives. We in the film industry have long believed that our "manufacturing" should and would stay in Los Angeles, but we're fooling ourselves. As consumers become less concerned with quality, and the business owners become less concerned with quality, and more disposable "good enough" product can be manufactured elsewhere by less experienced and cheaper labor, the companies will move their manufacturing. The biggest problem with our product, is that it can be manufactured anywhere. No factories required. Just pick a spot, drive the equipment there, and off you go. California will never be able to match the cheaper states, so frankly I think we should offer nothing. Producers will leave if they can save $5 million or $5 thousand. So why give them anything for staying? A good friend of mine (line producer) tells me he has meetings all the time that go like this... "We can make your movie in Los Angeles for $10m" "But if we go to New Orleans we can spend $13m and get $3m back, so we now have a $13m movie for $10m!" "Yes, but for the same $10m, we can make the same movie in Los Angeles without traveling actors or crew or gear or other producers. We have all the crew we need. We have sets and props and costumes and skilled crew who can make you your movie for $10m. You don't need a tax credit. It'll be the same film as you would be getting by spending $13m in New Orleans, and you wouldn't need to get the $3m back." "Yeah, but, it's a $13m movie not a $10m movie." "Right. But it's the same movie. It costs you more there, and you get the difference back." "I don't understand. Let's shoot in New Orleans. That's what everyone is doing, so it must be better." Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Babb Posted November 26, 2011 Report Share Posted November 26, 2011 I agree that taxpayers money should not be used to provide incentives for industry. However, each state is made up people and those people decide, through their legislature, to spend their money on incentives. Many states believe that bringing a film to their community will create jobs. Unless there is a consistent stream of movies flowing through a community, those jobs are temporary at best. Incentives for manufacturing or agriculture makes more sense to me but movie making is sexy and that's why they get the incentives. That being said... I think its laughable that Californian's believe they are ENTITLED to the film industry. It doesn't matter if the production can save money and produce a "quality" product somewhere else. It doesn't mater that a competent crew base and filmmaking infrastructures exist in other places. A little competition is a good thing. California is running all sorts of businesses out - not just film/tv. Here in Wilmington you can make your show and live in a 4 bedroom house and have a car in your driveway and be 15 minutes away from everything for what it costs for a 1 bedroom flat in LA or NY. If I were a producer, I'd move my production to NC. I'd have everything I need to make a movie or a series and have a comfortable life with my family. Oh, and the ocean is warm on this coast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Lightstone, CAS Posted November 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2011 The only reason they are in Wilmington, or Atlanta, or New Orleans IS because they can save money. They hold no love for the local crews, nor the state they are in. They have embraced the competition a long time ago and while it provides relativly good wages for a growing crew base locally, it only helps to drive down the wages of film technicians nationally. That is the wish of the major studios; to have the Area Standards Agreement replace the Basic Contracts of Los Angeles and New York. The Area Standard wage rates are at least half or worse of the Basic rates. They will continue to shoot in the Film incentive states, until there is a cheaper locale or country to save a buck. It's all transitory and as history has shown they will be out of there as fast as they came in, once it gets too "expensive" for their budgets. California, actually Los Angeles, will always remain the Entertainment "Capitol", just as New York city is the Financial Capitol. The headquarters are here, the infrastructure and an enormously qualified crew base. Once the cycle runs it's course -- it always has -- they'll be back shooting again in California and then flee once more when it gets good somewhere else. So my advice to Jeff Babb, and the others who do not reside in L.A., is make your money now before they stop showing up. Because they will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted November 27, 2011 Report Share Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) " taxpayers money should not be used to provide incentives for industry. " First we must remember that the movie industry is not the only one being lured back, and forth, by financial considerations (which include incentives). Not only does this apply to other industries, but also, it is much more complex than just the specific movie production incentives we are discussing here, there are a lot of other factors, especially taxes, that go into the equation, and frankly, the movie business is not the only "industry" California is sending, make that chasing away... Edited December 1, 2011 by studiomprd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Babb Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 ...Incentives for manufacturing or agriculture makes more sense to me but movie making is sexy and that's why they get the incentives. ...California is running all sorts of businesses out - not just film/tv. ...the movie business is not the only "industry" California is sending away... California will always be known as the pioneer of the film industry. But it may not be the future of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old school Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 California will always be known as the pioneer of the film industry. But it may not be the future of it. J.B. Personally speaking,..... I wouldn't bet against California in whatever form content creation takes in the future. Viva the best coast, the west coast, it happens here, then everywhere else. CrewC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 West Coast, boyeeeeee!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirror Posted November 28, 2011 Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 " the movie business is not the only "industry" California is CHASING away... Fixed it for you..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.