Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Dear Zoe, I was all prepared to write back a lengthy reply to Luis's queeries about providing music for a film without financial compensation and then read your wonderful and spot on analysis of the situation. This is so succinctly and articulately laid out that I"m going to save it and show it to students of mine when the same subject comes up for them (with your permission, of course). I only wanted to add one thing about this whole subject. Luis When someone makes a professional film or puts on a artistic dance concert or tour, there hope is that they will , ultimately, be successful, i.e., that they will make money from it eventually and hopefully, that it will be such a success that they'll make a lot of money for it. Anyone who is ethical about asking another artist to use their work in the capacity of helping their own artistic project should always include a clause in a contract (even if, initially, no money changes hands at all) that says, if the project is successful......................what compensation will be made to the artist (you) whose work they have used , precisely because they want their project to be better recieved. If the filmaker, in such a case, is reluctant to name a financial figure, then standard practise is that you should agree to some kind of percentage point system as compensation if something becomes successful. Because filmakers will then need to negotiate their own new deals with distritutors and , possibly, new publishers or film studios, they have to deal with what kind of compensation they need to negotiate later on down the road if the big boys and girls step in to take the project to the masses in a big way. Consequently, it's on them to figure out what kinds of points to assign. Basically, someone in this situation is asking you to forgo payment for your hard earned piece of music because there own resources are limited. What is de riguer in such a situation, then, is that since they are asking you to sacrifice your artistry in the present time for no compensation that they will reward you more highly later for taking that risk if the project is successful. This is standard practise in most businesses and is very fair. So the fact of the matter is, you should ask yourself, what kind of compensation would you need in order not to feel taken advantage of if: 1) the film disappears without a trace after release 2) the film has a huge buzz about it (insuring that the filmaker will make more films in the future and have more chances to be successful financially, themselves) but makes very little actual money (this happens a lot more than actual financial success or 3) the film is a runaway success (Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, et. al.) and makes shitloads of money Communicate this clearly to the film producers and figure out what's fair. Remember, they'll make whatever money they make if it's some kind of success (either with buzz and no moolah, or with buzz and loads of moolah) and, all of this being said and done: it sometimes is good just to be able to say to ANY filmaker, "Yes, I placed a song in such and such a film , no matter how successful or unsuccessful the film was." just because it speaks to your knowledge, experience and credibility in getting more work. Right now, Zoe is in the position to be fending off lots of these offers (most of which have no potential to earn income) but you may not be where her career is right now yourself. In other words, it doesn't matter if you get no compensation as long as you are happy with the result and it helps you in some way (even sometimes, just helping your own ego that someone wants your music). I contributed a track to the documentary film/DVD of the life of Robert Anton Wilson and did it completely gratis with no future stipulations but I was fine with it and, actually , having seen the career of two or three artists whose careers I always admired become mired in the very intense and all consuming world of major motion picture scoring to the detriment of their own individual artistry, I was pretty clear that I didn't want to go there in my career. but, that being said, it has actually helped me get more work (and, maybe just as importantly, more cred with people I may work with in the future) and just for a bit of buzz it was worth it to me.................it was also premade music so I didn't have to take extra time to write , record and produce something new. To me, what the music business, the film business and the book publishing business tend to lack these days is a strong morally ethical basis for doing business. It's endemic in all three of these artistically oriented businesses. It's assumed, cynically, that there are so many artists jumping through hoops for their 15 minutes of time in the spotlight that people can be taken advantage of without anyone protesting. To me, personally, anyone who is not willing to share their wealth and fame for a collaborative project just isn't worth doing business and yet, in a heartbeat, I"d probably score the next Paul Thomas Anderson film for free, myself (especially after that odd and inappropriate score that graces his last film......................... of course, Paul hasn't approached me about that yet...........<rue smile> He hasn't called yet, of course. good luck,Rick