Well the latest feature is in the can. I was for the most part able to stay away from set and was glad of it. By the end of it, they were into double blue revisions and as previously posted I ended our relationship at the blue pages.
The trouble with this film was they needed a leader. Unfortunately on this set, we had a first time, wet behind the ears rich kid, wanna be director.
This will be the last film I work on with this dynamic. Unless of course the director just happens to come from money but is passionate about the work.
I wasn't getting a lot of passion from from this guy. For the most part, he was like a deer in the headlights. So many on set took liberties they never should have been allowed to take. And it cost us in time, which cost us in scenes. Good directors realize that he needs all of the script shot if not a little more. So that he has choices in the editing suite. Well in my case, so the editor has choices in the editing suite. Cause there's no way this guy's getting final cut.
But in the end, I'm told by my exec producer that we, "Have a film," and that the length is going to be okay (after more than one panicked phone call). We'll be able to sell it and it paves the way to other work.
Well for some of us, others need a bit more time in the farm league, if you know what I mean.
I'm having a look at the assembly cut on Monday, fingers crossed.
Hmm. Well you'll have to tell us how it looks. I'm kind of curious how that whole situation was set up. Was the director also throwing money into the project to help produce it? If so, why wouldn't he get some say in the final cut? If not, why was he directing it to begin with?
Is there anything you might have learned as an indicator for spotting these types of productions going forward? You know, so you can steer clear of them.
Glad you're out, glad you'll potentially be able to use it for future work. Maybe something good will come of it all.
As far as I know, the editing was set up as a being a done deal from the get go. So the feeling basically is that he lacks the skill to make the sort of decisions needed also unlike a writer / director, he doesn't have the story in his head (or the script in his hand for that matter).
He was only linked to the money, the family individual putting the cash up actually does want a sellable product so one more reason to keep the director away from the editing suite.
Realise I got sort of sucked into this project, as in the beginning, I was nothing but the story editor. It was the initial writer's inability to deliver a shootable script on time and within budget and my own personal relationship with the exec producer (also roped into this) that caused me to be involved in the first place. So as far as avoiding this sort of thing. You keep saying no and they keep offering more money because it's better to pay you more than the crash the whole thing.
But there was one other factor.
We're talking to another production company looking to bring us into their slate (they have deeper pockets than us) and having a few films completed this year (three as it stands) makes us a much more viable entity for next year's production slate and allows them to, "Buy in," to the two features we have planned for production.
This film also allowed us to see who will be continuing the journey with our company in the capacity of crew. Strengths were exposed as were weaknesses and as they say, only the strong survive.
And after talking to the Exec producer a couple of days ago, it looks like we do have something. I'll have a better idea of what that is after I look over the assembly cut.
So while I might steer clear of this situation again, I would give a passionate first timer a solid consideration and if the money is right, what the hell.
Steve Abbott
Sabot Productions
"Who Dares Wins"