"Rudy" To Be Filmed In Canada
Riley G
Filmmakers giving $$$ to stop this from happening. It will take an email
campaign to the local NYC press and news agencies...
Try emails to
NY Times
NY Post
News: Chris Shaw: cs...@nypost.com
Letters: let...@nypost.com
Entertainment: Faye Penn: fp...@nypost.com
NY Daily News
The Village Voice
http://www.villagevoice.com/aboutus/contact.php
--
You can contact the Deputy Mayors, Chief of Staff, Senior Advisor,
Communications and Press Officers, and other Senior staff at:
City Hall
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 788-9600
FAX: (212) 788-2460
-------
Not to mention that we in NYC are having the Fall Membership Meeting,
Monday, November 4, 2002,
5:30 to 8:30PM at the Directors Guild of America, 110 West 57th Street,
(Between 6th & 7th Avenues). Time to show up and rattle the cages.
Signed,
Riley G Matthews Jr
Actor - Stuntman (SAG)
---------------
"Rudy" To Be Filmed In Canada
Oct 28, 9:20 PM (ET)
By AMY WESTFELDT
NEW YORK (AP) - Filmmakers are going to Canada to make a movie about former
New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, angering industry officials who say
the film belongs in Giuliani's hometown.
"Rudy!" - based on an unauthorized biography of the man known as America's
mayor - is set to begin filming Nov. 7 in Montreal. James Woods stars as the
Brooklyn-born former mayor and Penelope Ann Miller plays ex-wife Donna
Hanover in the film, which intersperses flashbacks from Giuliani's childhood
and political career with his performance on Sept. 11, 2001.
Carlton America is producing the film for the USA Networks cable channel,
which has scheduled a release for next year. Like the book "Rudy!" it was
made without Giuliani's cooperation.
Giuliani spokeswoman Sunny Mindel declined comment on the film Monday.
Spokesmen for Carlton America and USA Networks declined comment on the
decision to shoot the movie in Canada. Carlton America spokesman Les Eisner
said a few scenes may be shot in New York.
The decision means less work for union members and comes at a time when New
York's film industry is struggling, said Pamm Fair, national deputy director
of the Screen Actors Guild.
"They have very little right now," she said. "Runaway production is a huge
problem in this country."
The Mayor's Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting said business was
"average" in New York for the fall season. Films in production now include
"Angels in America," an HBO project starring Al Pacino and Meryl Streep, and
"Mona Lisa's Smile," starring Julia Roberts.
hodah
it's important to ALL of us Americans.
Especially the New York film community.
thanks Riley G.
hodah
Michael Leahy
Paris" filmed in Paris? Was "Das Boot" filmed on a submarine? Was "The Good,
the Bad and the Ugly" filmed in the Far West?
Michael
(not Canadian, BTW)
hodah <ho...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:oW1x9.5920$t1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Philo D
with mid-size budgets, this may be the best use of their dollars.
Action Unlimited
film about NY???????? How about "Detroit Rock City"??? Think it was set in
Canada?
First Fallen
Techinically it's about Rudy, but I understand. Even as a Canadian film
maker, I was surprised that this was going to shoot in Montreal, and not
NYC.
Jim
> It will take more than the FTAC and actors/stunt performers and US
> Filmmakers giving $$$ to stop this from happening. It will take an email
> campaign to the local NYC press and news agencies...
Production costs for NYC are too high! Blame the overpaid union
workers there. If you want the flim done there, start a charity and
riase the $$$$
hodah
Where do you get "overpaid union workers" from?
I'd love for you to show me how WE are the reason for high production costs.
I'm making less now than I was seven years ago, I bet the "stars" of the
movies can't claim that.
Labor costs are rarely the highest cost on a film project.
Please back up your statement with some facts.
I am a proud member of Local 52. I am a grip and have been for 15 years. The
last seven as a union member.
--
Check out my web site: www.hodah.net
Steven J. Weller
"hodah" <ho...@verizon.net> writes:
> I'm on my way out the door, so I can't respond in the depth I'd like.
> Where do you get "overpaid union workers" from?
> I'd love for you to show me how WE are the reason for high production costs.
> I'm making less now than I was seven years ago, I bet the "stars" of the
> movies can't claim that.
No, they can't.
But Jim Carey still makes $20,000,000 (US) per movie, whether it
shooting in NYC, LA, Sidney, or Toronto.
> Labor costs are rarely the highest cost on a film project.
But they are what gets so hugely discounted when producers shoot in
Canada. Between the exchange rate, the tax credits for hiring only
Canadian crews (various points systems notwithstanding), the lower real
wages, the more lax union rules, and so on, productions can still save
double-digit percentages by going North - and they're not saving it on
film stock, the script, the stars, the director's fee, the producers'
percentage, etc.
Are you making less now than when you joined the union because you're
making less per hour, or because you're working fewer hours?
--
Life Continues, Despite
Evidence to the Contrary
Steven
Hern the Hunter
> But Jim Carey still makes $20,000,000 (US) per movie, whether it
> shooting in NYC, LA, Sidney, or Toronto.
He was making $30,000,000 (US)/movie right near "The Mask" and "Pet
Detective". Did his rate go down?
Joe
de Valois
>
>It will take more than the FTAC and actors/stunt performers and US
>Filmmakers giving $$$ to stop this from happening. It will take an email
>campaign to the local NYC press and news agencies...
>
It's kind of pointless to restate the obvious, but the excuse that production
costs are higher in New York than Canada doesn't explain why so many shows and
movies are still shot here?
In this case, it's a hedge against the film being a flop that it is filmed in
Canada. Ergo, let them have it.
Tao te Carl
nappy
little or nothing for the first pet detective
"Hern the Hunter" <He...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:NUox9.13401$oa.26...@twister.columbus.rr.com...
hodah
rate per day, meal penalties, etc.
I realize there is hardly any argument for keeping work in the states,
(although I can only speak as a New Yorker). but It does get a bit tiresome
to always be the brunt of the argument about budget costs. It's just too
easy of a statement to make.
It's not our fault that there isn't a national health plan, or that the cost
of living here in Manhattan is so high. We pay more for quite a few things,
but we get knocked down if we try to get compensated for it.
We no longer get a night differential, yet if you take a taxi after 8pm,
they do, for example. The costs around us keep rising, and our pay is
getting smaller and smaller.
If I were a producer I'd possibly go out of the country as well.
But let me lay something else on you. How about the idea of keeping American
jobs, getting us work, so we can they buy products, keeping the economy
healthy?
Don't we all have a responsibility to our own nations fiscal well being?
I love what I do, and I do what I love, and I also happen to like to feed
my family and have an apartment in the city.
If this is asking too much, I don't really know what to do.
Kaos
is contrary to, and illegal under NAFTA.
The subsidies are contingent on the productions not using US crews. Many
of my brothers here in LA and elsewhere cannot make a living because the
jobs are being stolen by illegal Canadian subsidies.
Support the FTAC www.ftac.org
The FTC is compelled to level countervailing tariffs against any film
produced in Canada which are paid these subsidies. It's the law that Canada
agreed to, they were given benefits under NAFTA and it's not right that they
ignore their agreement, to the detriment of US workers.
Filmmakers have the right to make their films wherever they want, but not
because they're being paid off to do it. It's wrong for a soverign
government to steal jobs away from a US state.
--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
"Philo D" <891ofb...@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:031120020727150515%891ofb...@sneakemail.com...
Kaos
Blame the overpaid union workers. What BS. With actors making millions,
and producers making millions, how can you say crew members making a decent
wage are the problem. The wages paid to the people hurt by illegal tariffs
are such a small percentage of a film's budget, that it renders blaming the
workers laughable.
Do the math, somebody, and tell me how what percentage of a film budget is
represented by crew wages.
I'm a camera operator. I, like everybody else deserve to make a comfortable
living. I'll never be rich, I just want to be able to raise my family and
build up some retirement like everybody else. I want the right to work on
US productions, a right which is currently being taking away by the national
government of Canada, who is illegally violating a legal signed agreement.
Join this organization. Participate in this organization. Support this
organization financially.
--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
"Jim" <james...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:bb16886f.02110...@posting.google.com...
Riley G
Being that I don't think you are a SAG member, and only an AFTRA member, I
can see why you are not concerned about movies being filmed in the USA...
Signed,
Riley G Matthews Jr
Actor - Stunt Performer (SAG & AFTRA)
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aq5vm...@drn.newsguy.com...
> "Riley left this mess on Sat, 2 Nov 2002 20:52:08 -0500 for The Way to
clean up:
>
hodah
I get so upset when I hear people blame "crew costs" I can't even think .. I
wouldn't mind so much if they would actually present the facts that would
"prove" their point.
hodah
a local 52 grip
--
Dwacon®
Canada...
--
Creepy Clown Motion Picture
http://www.dwacon.com
"hodah" <ho...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:6VHx9.21389$7W2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Jon Carroll
wrote:
>Puerto Rico is an alternative few people consider... many benefits over
>Canada...
hot, muggy, no rental places nearby... ew
--
-Jon Carroll
dra...@infi.net
"You're making me hungry. You won't like me when I'm hungry!"- Dexter
Hern the Hunter
> no.. it was only 20 milion and it didn't start until after the Mask. He
got
> little or nothing for the first pet detective
I could SWEAR it was 30,000,000. Must be one of those 'false' memories,
but I recall an interview with him on a trolley where it was mentioned that
he is now making 30 million per movie.
H
Steven J. Weller
"Kaos" <w...@warrenyeager.com> writes:
> Christ.
>
> Blame the overpaid union workers. What BS. With actors making millions,
> and producers making millions, how can you say crew members making a decent
> wage are the problem. The wages paid to the people hurt by illegal tariffs
> are such a small percentage of a film's budget, that it renders blaming the
> workers laughable.
Actors' and producers' wages don't go up or down dependent on where the
film is shot. Crew wages do.
> Do the math, somebody, and tell me how what percentage of a film budget is
> represented by crew wages.
A substantial chunk of the below-the-line costs, which will vary from
production to production.
THAT'S WHY PRODUCTIONS ARE MOVING TO CHEAPER LABOR POOLS.
> I'm a camera operator. I, like everybody else deserve to make a comfortable
> living.
No, you don't.
Not in a Capitalist society, which is what we live and work in. You
deserve to make as much money as you can, doing legal work for people
who will pay you for it. But whether they pay you to do it, or not, is
_their_ choice - they don't owe you anything. If they can find someone
to do the work cheaper, they have every right to hire that person
instead of you.
It's not their responsibility to give you a living - it's your
responsibility to earn one. And a big part of that is positioning
yourself in a global marketplace. Like every other service in the
world, it's not worth what you say it's worth - it's worth what
someone's willing to pay you for it.
> I'll never be rich, I just want to be able to raise my family and
> build up some retirement like everybody else.
A lot of people want just that. Many of them will never be able to,
regardless of the business they're in.
> I want the right to work on
> US productions,
You have no such right. No one does. You have the opportunity to
compete for a job, like everyone else in the global workforce. If your
union won't let you, that's a matter between you and the union.
> the national
> government of Canada, who is illegally violating a legal signed agreement.
Then the loigcal course of action is to fight that battle in that
arena. So long as the laws have no teeth (like, say fining the
producers and prodcos that accept the Canadian bribes directly), the
producers and prodcos are going to go where it makes the most economic
sense - and right now, that ain't New York.
Steven J. Weller
"hodah" <ho...@verizon.net> writes:
> I don't count the days I work per year, but I'm talking about the actual
> rate per day, meal penalties, etc.
>
> I realize there is hardly any argument for keeping work in the states,
> (although I can only speak as a New Yorker). but It does get a bit tiresome
> to always be the brunt of the argument about budget costs. It's just too
> easy of a statement to make.
But sadly, it's true.
The realiy is, it's a global marketplace and there's an incredibly
cheap labor pol, able to offer reasonably good work, just a short hop
away.
> It's not our fault that there isn't a national health plan, or that the cost
> of living here in Manhattan is so high. We pay more for quite a few things,
> but we get knocked down if we try to get compensated for it.
Yup.
> We no longer get a night differential, yet if you take a taxi after 8pm,
> they do, for example. The costs around us keep rising, and our pay is
> getting smaller and smaller.
I appreciate that.
> If I were a producer I'd possibly go out of the country as well.
> But let me lay something else on you. How about the idea of keeping American
> jobs, getting us work, so we can they buy products, keeping the economy
> healthy?
The assembled grips of America could double their wages or go on the
dole, for all the impact it would ave on the national economy. In a
country of nearly 300,000,000 people, it's just too small a group to
make so much as a blip.
The deal is, the producer doesn't have the luxury of worrying about
whether you can make your rent payment this month; he or she has to
deliver the finished film in the best shape possible, for the lowest
price possible. If spending the extra money to shoot in NYC means a
substantially better film, it's a good deal. If a 2nd Unit crew can
grab some establishing shots on the island and the rest can be shot in
Toronto for 25% less, with a comparable result, then that's the way
it's gonna happen.
Just like H'wood has doubled for every major city in the world for the
past century, and NYC has doubled for other places on occasion.
> Don't we all have a responsibility to our own nations fiscal well being?
Sure, but most people are more concerned about their personal fiscal
well-being, closely followed by the fiscal well-being of the people who
hire them. Protecting the income of NYC grips, so all couple thousand
of you (is it that many, even?) can make your mortgage payments and pay
for occassional trips to the multiplex, pales in comparison to saving
20% on below-the-line costs.
Especially when their paycheque is tied, in part, to the profits.
Paying your rate means literally taking money out of their own pockets.
> I love what I do, and I do what I love, and I also happen to like to feed
> my family and have an apartment in the city.
> If this is asking too much, I don't really know what to do.
Think about moving, or about switching careers, or about lowering your
expectations. Just like the auto workers, the steel workers, the
aerospace workers, the single-family farmers, and a host of others have
done before you.
Jon Carroll
>In article <D7Gx9.15018$t1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
>"Kaos" <w...@warrenyeager.com> writes:
>
>> Christ.
>>
>> Blame the overpaid union workers. What BS. With actors making millions,
>> and producers making millions, how can you say crew members making a decent
>> wage are the problem. The wages paid to the people hurt by illegal tariffs
>> are such a small percentage of a film's budget, that it renders blaming the
>> workers laughable.
>
>Actors' and producers' wages don't go up or down dependent on where the
>film is shot. Crew wages do.
>
actually, they can. alot of 'known' actors will charge more if they
have to leave their multi-million-dollar houses to go somewhere they
dont know.
--
-Jon Carroll
dra...@infi.net
"You're making me hungry. You won't like me when I'm hungry!"- Dexter
M$
Canada. It's smart corporate marketing. I've been watching some television
shows lately that have been produced in Canada, and boy, aren't I pleased
with the talent that comes out of there.
You seen that show Higher Ground, Kaos? What do you think of the camera work
that is done in that show? I must say, I haven't seen a show aimed at a
teen-side demographic where the camera has brilliantly constructed each and
shot.
I am not American or Canadian, but would it really be a problem if it didn't
put the American dominated film industry in such a disadvantage. Would the
American film industry care if it was a reverse situation, would they run to
the aid of others?
"Riley G" <Ril...@BloodBrothersMC.org.Anti-remove-me> wrote in message
news:aq7f3u$ha2$1...@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
hodah
I just have to keep reminding myself
"MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY"
"what's the difference between a producer and a catfish?"
One's a scum sucking bottom feeder.
The other's a fish.
h.
de Valois
>
>
>I'm a camera operator. I, like everybody else deserve to make a comfortable
>living. I'll never be rich, I just want to be able to raise my family and
>build up some retirement like everybody else. I want the right to work on
>US productions, a right which is currently being taking away by the national
>government of Canada, who is illegally violating a legal signed agreement.
>
Hear hear!
It astounds me that, in this day and age of Enron and Worldcom and thiscom and
thatcom that the protections afforded by unions to their members suddenly make
them a target of calumny! Would these people rather the money go to working men
and women or to studio executives?
Tao te Carl
de Valois
B) Where did you get the idea I support Canadian filming? That I can understand
and even argue points of my opponents' point of view doesn't mean I agree with
him or her. It means I spent some time thinking about it.
"Riley left this mess on Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:48:59 -0500 for The Way to clean up:
Tao te Carl
Bill
"DwaconŽ" wrote:
>
> Puerto Rico is an alternative few people consider... many benefits over
> Canada...
>
> --
> Creepy Clown Motion Picture
> http://www.dwacon.com
Puerto Rico does occasionally attract filmmakers who want to shoot there
for its unique locations. But it would be rather silly, wouldn't it, to
shoot a film like "RUDY" which needs New York look alike locations?
Puerto Rico also lacks the crews and production facilities which are
readily available in Toronto, Vancouver and other Canadian cities.
Break a leg,
Bill
--
THE ACTING STUDIO
http://gvtg.com/theactingstudio
Riley G
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aq8jc...@drn.newsguy.com...
stavros
Ireland, and elsewhere, THey all want the big bucks. Most countries
offer subsidies to keep local filmmakers in-country, and usually as a
cultural protective measure. Look at the animation business - korea
producing Simpsons, for example, for labor-intensive animation at
cheaper labor.
But sophisticated laywers and lobbyists work around these systems the
'disguise' such productions as local content, which is good for the
local economies, but defeats the purpose of subsidies to begin with.
First, despite the money made by local crew and services, is takes
away from truly indigenous filmmakers who need the break on crew and
facilities. As a Canadian producer, try hiring a driver whose ben
spoiled by doing Disney films for the last three years. Really,
these 'service producer' nations become not much more than resources
to be plucked, and have no ownership, or at least a disguuised local
ownership that reverts back to the majors. Its often a clever abuse of
the system, really. But try to convince a local politico that the
billions prodced for local economy is not worth it. It's a big money
grab.
God forbid that when the Canadian 'peso' rebounds back to the US
equivalent, as it was in the past, we'll have a fire sale up here. I
hear some states, such as one of the Carolina's, is trying to offer
tax credits to attract production. Hell, its already being done with
the autonotive business all over the US and Canada. Graft is graft.
It's a hard one to fight. The good news is, in places like New York,
Indies are truly indies who have to be resourceful on what they got.
The result is some ass kicking films with less compromise because
handouts carry a price.
Lovingly,
A '51st state' denizen up North
"Riley G" <Ril...@BloodBrothersMC.org.Anti-remove-me> wrote in message news:<aq1vpn$umk$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net>...
> It will take more than the FTAC and actors/stunt performers and US
> Filmmakers giving $$$ to stop this from happening. It will take an email
> campaign to the local NYC press and news agencies...
>
>
>
> Try emails to
>
> NY Times
>
> executiv...@nytimes.com
>
> managin...@nytimes.com
>
> let...@nytimes.com
>
>
>
> NY Post
>
> News: Chris Shaw: cs...@nypost.com
>
> Letters: let...@nypost.com
>
> Entertainment: Faye Penn: fp...@nypost.com
>
>
>
> NY Daily News
>
> voi...@edit.nydailynews.com
>
>
>
> The Village Voice
>
> http://www.villagevoice.com/aboutus/contact.php
>
> --
>
>
>
> You can contact the Deputy Mayors, Chief of Staff, Senior Advisor,
> Communications and Press Officers, and other Senior staff at:
> City Hall
>
> New York, NY 10007
>
> Telephone: (212) 788-9600
> FAX: (212) 788-2460
>
> -------
>
>
>
> Not to mention that we in NYC are having the Fall Membership Meeting,
> Monday, November 4, 2002,
>
> 5:30 to 8:30PM at the Directors Guild of America, 110 West 57th Street,
> (Between 6th & 7th Avenues). Time to show up and rattle the cages.
>
>
>
>
>
> Signed,
>
> Riley G Matthews Jr
>
> Actor - Stuntman (SAG)
>
> www.PoliceActors.com
>
>
>
> ---------------
>
>
>
> "Rudy" To Be Filmed In Canada
>
> Oct 28, 9:20 PM (ET)
>
>
>
> By AMY WESTFELDT
>
>
>
> NEW YORK (AP) - Filmmakers are going to Canada to make a movie about former
> New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, angering industry officials who say
> the film belongs in Giuliani's hometown.
>
>
>
> "Rudy!" - based on an unauthorized biography of the man known as America's
> mayor - is set to begin filming Nov. 7 in Montreal. James Woods stars as the
> Brooklyn-born former mayor and Penelope Ann Miller plays ex-wife Donna
> Hanover in the film, which intersperses flashbacks from Giuliani's childhood
> and political career with his performance on Sept. 11, 2001.
>
>
>
> Carlton America is producing the film for the USA Networks cable channel,
> which has scheduled a release for next year. Like the book "Rudy!" it was
> made without Giuliani's cooperation.
>
>
>
> Giuliani spokeswoman Sunny Mindel declined comment on the film Monday.
>
>
>
> Spokesmen for Carlton America and USA Networks declined comment on the
> decision to shoot the movie in Canada. Carlton America spokesman Les Eisner
> said a few scenes may be shot in New York.
>
>
>
> The decision means less work for union members and comes at a time when New
> York's film industry is struggling, said Pamm Fair, national deputy director
> of the Screen Actors Guild.
>
>
>
> "They have very little right now," she said. "Runaway production is a huge
> problem in this country."
>
>
>
> The Mayor's Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting said business was
> "average" in New York for the fall season. Films in production now include
> "Angels in America," an HBO project starring Al Pacino and Meryl Streep, and
> "Mona Lisa's Smile," starring Julia Roberts.
Dwacon®
news:3DC7FBC8...@ix.netcom.com...
> Puerto Rico does occasionally attract filmmakers who want to shoot there
> for its unique locations. But it would be rather silly, wouldn't it, to
> shoot a film like "RUDY" which needs New York look alike locations?
> Puerto Rico also lacks the crews and production facilities which are
> readily available in Toronto, Vancouver and other Canadian cities.
It may not have the number of crews but has quite competent crews and
state-of-the-art production facilities. The climate is great and there are
great tax breaks. Maybe you can't do NYC externals but what is the
percentage of exterior shots?
Anyway... just my 2-centavos...
--
There are two thieves: Pain & Pleasure
Neither one is true...
http://www.dwacon.com
de Valois
I've seen of your interactions here.
"Riley left this mess on Tue, 5 Nov 2002 16:00:45 -0500 for The Way to clean up:
Tao te Carl
Riley G
Signed,
6468
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aqb74...@drn.newsguy.com...
de Valois
"Riley left this mess on Wed, 6 Nov 2002 17:58:38 -0500 for The Way to clean up:
Tao te Carl
Riley G
By KAREN MATTHEWS, Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - With a movie about former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani set to
start shooting in Montreal on Thursday, a Brooklyn congressman called for
tax credits to offset the Canadian film industry's competitive advantage.
"Today, somewhere in Canada, a network called USA Network is making a movie
about the mayor of the city of New York," Rep. Anthony Weiner said
Wednesday. "I guess they're going to show him watching baseball games at the
SkyDome or eating pommes frites rather than eating at Patsy's."
Members of the Screen Actors Guild and other film industry unions joined
Weiner, a Democrat, in front of City Hall to urge federal legislation that
would provide producers with a 25 percent tax credit for wages if they film
in the United States.
"What we have to do is level the playing field between ourselves and these
other countries," said former SAG president Richard Masur.
Canada offers wage-based incentives that can cover 35 percent of labor
expenses. Entertainment industry executives estimate that those credits have
cost the United States 25,000 jobs and $10 billion annually for each of the
past three years.
The two-hour Giuliani movie, "Rudy!," is the latest example of the trend.
It's based on Wayne Barrett's biography and stars James Woods in the title
role.
A spokeswoman for USA Network had no comment on the protest. Sunny Mindel, a
spokeswoman for Giuliani, also declined comment.
Weiner, who is co-sponsoring the U.S. Independent Film and Television
Production Incentive Act, said New York's film industry has been
particularly hard hit since Canada implemented tax credits in 1998. He said
total gross budgets for feature films in New York state dropped from $695
million in 1999 to $167 million in 2001.
California legislators also have discussed ways to offer filmmakers
wage-based tax credits for filming in that state.
Riley G
principals/stunts for a SAG feature film... Five plus myself that is...
RGM
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aqc9j...@drn.newsguy.com...
First Fallen
> principals/stunts for a SAG feature film... Five plus myself that is...
I just checked out your website...that's pretty cool. I had no idea there
was such an organization.
Riley G
blume this year...
Riley G Matthews Jr.
Actor - Stunt Performer (SAG & AFTRA)
"First Fallen" <no...@nope.com> wrote in message
news:kRmy9.704525$f05.28...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
de Valois
"Riley left this mess on Wed, 6 Nov 2002 19:19:46 -0500 for The Way to clean up:
Tao te Carl
Riley G
actors (www.PoliceActors.com) and we all seek principal acting gigs for
ourselves and all members. I don't wait for my Agent to find me gigs, I beat
the bushes myself... Not to mention I started a new SAG stunt group in NYC
called: www.NYC-Stunts.org
We as a group have a few feature film booked and the first film should be
starting soon. (Budget over 3 million)...
Signed,
Riley G Matthews Jr.
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aqds9...@drn.newsguy.com...
Kaos
point.
The studios and execs are making more money. The crew members here, who
have been
making their living making films for years are unemployed because the
Canadian government has
reneged on a part of a legal agreement. The US does that too, and I'm
against it, by the way.
I'm not comenting on the talent of people. That's not the issue. The
issue is broken contracts which allow
execs to make more money while destroying the families of US crew members.
The tax breaks are contingent on
a US production, which shoots in Canada, NOT using US crew members.
There is no other issue.
I'm pissed off that my livelyhood is being stolen by petty, small time,
crooked, dishonesty on behalf of the Canadian government. That's not smart
corporate management, that's theft. If that's taking the high ground, I'm
proud of it.
--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
<M$> wrote in message news:3dc7a875$0$11...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
M$
Nice intellectual link you made with my previous commit. I liked your use of
it.
I clearly didn't know the full context of what the issue at state was and
how it was brought about. Thank you for filling me in, on your side.
I'm fully for film production in Canada and aboard, given I liked there
work much more than what has comes out of America in the past, but then
again i do not hold that back from the producers either, as wouldn't you
make a film that is specifically made to make money from the selected
demographics there targeted to in society? I might be ashamed of it but I
would put the money to good use.
But for one now I am rather discussed at the tactics employed to lure
executives to make film productions in Canada with there tax breaks and
such.
The victims are the people who loose there work due to this. I don't hold
anything back on the Canadian people working on the films, as I do not blame
them. They are trying to secure a living much like you are. But the real
villains in this are the illegal operators that manage this scheme, who you
once worked for. The question is for me, would this still be such a big
concern if there was no legal bounded agreement with the Canadian government
in the first place?
"Kaos" <w...@warrenyeager.com> wrote in message
news:BTIy9.51406$7W2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
de Valois
Absent the Canadian government's bribes to film producers, would costs in Canada
be cheap enough to justify filming a movie like "Rudy" there? Likely not. If
they were, there's not a whole lot the US film industry could say about it. We'd
have to dig deep and become competitive.
It's the fact that there's this open endorsement by the Canadian government that
makes the whole thing blatantly unfair and lopsided.
<M$ left this mess on Fri, 8 Nov 2002 16:36:43 +0800 for The Way to clean up:
Tao te Carl
de Valois
>
>I'm not a CSA member,
But you offered to cast me, Riles, true or not?
Look, I got no beef with you, and my suspicion is you took my comments
incorrectly, which means I wasn't clear on my position regarding Canadian
filming.
I'm veery much against (and you can ask Drama Queen, First Fallen, and Electric
Angel, all Canadian, to verify this) the Canadian government interfering in the
competition to make movies. It's the same argument I had against Japanese
incentives to car manufacturers, and chip makers in the 80s and 90s: it's bloody
unfair when we don't get the same protection from our government.
Let me go you one further, Riley: I'm a union man. I've been a union man since I
turned 18 and joined 32B for summer work. My dad was a union man, a carpenter.
Currently I hold no less than five union memberships, including my acting unionS
(emphasis intentional). Unions have provided me with health care, eyeglasses,
even come money for college. I believe that unions are the only bulwark I have
against being screwed by people with more money and more power than I have.
So don't presume to lecture me about my faith in the union system or my
positions on union issues. I don't always agree with SAG on some of the things
they do, and lately, yes, I've been extremely critical of how they've handled
internal business. I think it's a blatant betrayal of my trust. But by NO
stretch of the imagination should you extend that to mean I am anti-union. I'm
just against the scoundrels in there now.
Why don't I do something about it? What makes you think I haven't?
Tao te Carl
Kaos
I think there's be less of a concern if Canada weren't bound contractually
to not give subsidies in this manner to US film producers. It would still
be crappy for us down here, but Canada wouldn't be enjoying the benefits of
NAFTA either.
There's a proximity issue too. It's more of a hassle to shoot in
Australia, New Zealand, Europe, etc than it is to take a 2 hour flight to
Vancouver, which is essentially "America Lite" culturally anyway. (Just
kidding). I think your point regarding Canadian workers is worth
mentioning again. It's the politicians we should be pissed at. The
Canadian government for reneging on the agreement AND the US government for
not implimenting the clearly stated sanctions and remedies for such a
violation of the contract.
We should be urked at the producers who are shooting in Canada as well.
They're the film version of slum lords.
I salute producers who are shooting in the US, for whatever reason, and they
should be fighing to end the subsities as well, because is puts them at a
disadvantage to the producers who are reaping the benefits of the Canadian
ploy.
If Canada would issue their subsities to US producers and allow US crew
members to come in and work on the productions, the Canadian economy would
benefit greatly AND the US (especially Californian) workers would not be
nearly as miffed. I worked on a film in Luxembourg, where there are
insentives to draw film production which aren't aimed at the American
worker. I didn't even need a work permit to enter the country and work.
Look, I'd go up to Vancouver to work on a TV show. The point is that if I
get hired to do that, the production loses millions of dollars in tax
breaks. That's the biggest rub. If North Carolina developed into a huge
film production entity, I could move there and work. The issue is that US
workers are being screwed specifically by the Canadian actions.
www.ftac.org has the whole story.
--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
<M$> wrote in message news:3dcb7682$0$15...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
Kaos
understand that, and I'm glad this discussion is happening because if it.
This issue, however, reaches much farther than this one project.
The TV show (before it got cancelled) "Pasadena" was shot in Vancouver.
They shot the pilot here, and none of the crew could reap the benefit of
their good work because the show moved to Canada. That's one of many, many
examples of productions being stolen from Los Angeles.
There are good reasons to shoot in Canada. The Canadian "peso" (a very
funny reference), and the fact that the people there are more film friendly
then they are in LA are two fine reasons. If the Canadian government wants
to give insentives to shoot in Canada, then so be it. But to do so
contingent on the exclusion of American crew members is wrong.
"Without A Trace", which takes place in NYC, is being shot in LA. CSI Miami
is being shot in LA. ER is being shot in LA. Film makers (and TV producers)
have a right to shoot wherever they want. The difference is that if you, as
an American want to work on "Without A Trace or "CSI Miami" or "ER" you have
as much of an opportunity to do so as any of us. You can move out here (as
many crew people have done) and compete for the jobs. There's no
government preventing you from seeking work. The Canadian government is
preventing you from seeking work on American productions.
You have a good reason to be upset that "Rudy" isn't being shot at home,
it's a very personal story about NY, but this has been happening to us here
in LA for years, and nobody seems to give a crap.
--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aqgfl...@drn.newsguy.com...
de Valois
York. It's been happening for a long time.
"Kaos" left this mess on Fri, 08 Nov 2002 19:56:25 GMT for The Way to clean up:
Tao te Carl
Kaos
Warren, Superman IV was one of the first films that portrayed Vancouver as
New
York. It's been happening for a long time.
Yes.
There's plenty of precedent for not shooting in the place you're portraying.
Film makers have the right to choose where they want to make their films.
There are many reasons to shoot in locations other than the one you're
portraying.
That US film production is being drawn to Canada illegally, and contingent
on the exclusion of US crew members is the problem.
This isn't exactly a new problem, either. This has been going on for 7 or 8
years.
It reaches farther than shooting NY films in NY and LA films in LA, etc. A
national government is targeting US workers and taking their jobs by luring
producers by stuffing millions of dollars into their pockets.
Let's stay focused on the real issue: Canadian subsidies, which are
illegal under NAFTA, provided to US film and television producers, which
given if and only if, the US productions do not use US crew members,
supporting actors, etc.
--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
"de Valois" <deva...@nailedandused.com> wrote in message
news:aqhet...@drn.newsguy.com...
Joseph R. Ekins
<az...@lafn.org> wrote:
> In article <D7Gx9.15018$t1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
> "Kaos" <w...@warrenyeager.com> writes:
>
> > Christ.
> >
> > Blame the overpaid union workers. What BS. With actors making millions,
> > and producers making millions, how can you say crew members making a decent
> > wage are the problem. The wages paid to the people hurt by illegal tariffs
> > are such a small percentage of a film's budget, that it renders blaming the
> > workers laughable.
>
> Actors' and producers' wages don't go up or down dependent on where the
> film is shot. Crew wages do.
>
> > Do the math, somebody, and tell me how what percentage of a film budget is
> > represented by crew wages.
>
> A substantial chunk of the below-the-line costs, which will vary from
> production to production.
>
> THAT'S WHY PRODUCTIONS ARE MOVING TO CHEAPER LABOR POOLS.
>
> > I'm a camera operator. I, like everybody else deserve to make a comfortable
> > living.
>
> No, you don't.
>
> Not in a Capitalist society, which is what we live and work in. You
> deserve to make as much money as you can, doing legal work for people
> who will pay you for it. But whether they pay you to do it, or not, is
> _their_ choice - they don't owe you anything. If they can find someone
> to do the work cheaper, they have every right to hire that person
> instead of you.
>
> It's not their responsibility to give you a living - it's your
> responsibility to earn one. And a big part of that is positioning
> yourself in a global marketplace. Like every other service in the
> world, it's not worth what you say it's worth - it's worth what
> someone's willing to pay you for it.
>
> > I'll never be rich, I just want to be able to raise my family and
> > build up some retirement like everybody else.
>
> A lot of people want just that. Many of them will never be able to,
> regardless of the business they're in.
>
> > I want the right to work on
> > US productions,
>
> You have no such right. No one does. You have the opportunity to
> compete for a job, like everyone else in the global workforce. If your
> union won't let you, that's a matter between you and the union.
>
> > the national
> > government of Canada, who is illegally violating a legal signed agreement.
>
> Then the loigcal course of action is to fight that battle in that
> arena. So long as the laws have no teeth (like, say fining the
> producers and prodcos that accept the Canadian bribes directly), the
> producers and prodcos are going to go where it makes the most economic
> sense - and right now, that ain't New York.
>
> --
> Life Continues, Despite
> Evidence to the Contrary
>
> Steven
Sad but true Steven.Unfortunately it would probably be too much of a
sacrifice to practice capitalism with a conscience where the folks at
the top aren't consistently looking to fuck over everyone else to get
"theirs".there is a question of how much is enough? After 20 years in
the "business" I have seen and heard enough to know there are some
truly evil folks running the works here in Hollywood.It really is
amazing how some people will treat others and then pat themselves on
the back for their achievements. Joe
ca...@partneredfilmedentertainment.com
I've worked prof. in Canada and the UK film industry as a Line Producer and PM for almost 30 years now and the name of the game in film and television is profit. Producers will always go to the place hey can get the biggest buck for their dollar. The Canadian film and television tax credits have been around for 20 years under diff. names and titles so it's nothing new. Claiming they are a form of bribary is hilarious, the producer only gets back what they put in and again its not the US ones , its the Canadian end.
As for US crew coming in and working on shows that doesn't happen. US Actors have to have work visas and are paid in US dollars in the US. They are also subject to all IRC and Rev. Canada taxes. The film industry in Canada is highly unionized and part of the tax credit qualifications is that you hire 90% Canadian crew. This allows for your producers, directors and maybe DOP to be from the US but as for everyone from the PM to the AD to the LM to the Set PA they are all Directors Guild of Canada members and everyone from the Key Grip to Hair/Make up Prod. Coord. to Props & Set Deck are Canadian IATSE members. Transport is all Teamstirs so f yu think any of those unions would allow a Canadian member to be replaced by a US one then forget it. It doent happen.