If you believe it. Sounds like a hoax, especially when he starts to complain that the special effects community doesn’t get a share of profits of the film. Almost like someone someone doesn’t know the difference between an Above the Line and Below the Line position.
Stephen Schleicher
Stephen Schleicher began his career writing for the Digital Media Online community of sites, including Digital Producer and Creative Mac covering all aspects of the digital content creation industry. He then moved on to consumer technology, and began the Coolness Roundup podcast. A writing fool, Stephen has freelanced for Sci-Fi Channel's Technology Blog, and Gizmodo. Still longing for the good ol' days, Stephen launched Major Spoilers in July 2006, because he is a glutton for punishment. You can follow him on Twitter @MajorSpoilers and tell him your darkest secrets...
7 Comments
wow. socialism at its finest.
Fake. Probably.
That’s not fair wah wah wah Hugh Jackman is making more money than me. Gimme gimme me me me me me that’s not fair that’s not fair
Poozer.
you know with his mannerisms and his voice one could easily pick him out.
but nonetheless!
he stuck it to the man…i was hoping he was going to say he did it because the movie is crappy…which i believe.
the wolverine origins movie is a step above fantastic snore.
Another youtube celebrity rises upon the acts of others.
I agree.
Poozer.
I smell hoax.
But if it’s real, i have a few points:
1. It’s not like they were fooled to believe that they were going to get a share of the profits then sudden told otherwise. You knew the stipulations when you took the job. You knew that no matter how much work you did on a film’s effects, you were going to get paid your normal pay rate regardless.
2. If the CG effects industry is really this pissed that they aren’t getting a slice of the profit pie, or they are being unfairly treated, you could always organize into a union and strike. I for one would love to see it. Because then filmmakers would have 2 options: A) give into the demands and give the effects companies a percentage of the profits of the film because, let’s face it, the majority of the blockbuster movies from the last 15 years have relied heavily on CG to get the job done. Or there’s option B) Filmmakers and production companies actually make an effort to make engrossing cinema without relying on CG to accomplish what they can’t/don’t have the energy to figure out how to do practically.
Option A would give the CG companies what they believe is their fair share of the profit of a successful movie (or the reprocussions of a flop), while option B would result in a return to relying on well-written scripts, talented acting and visionary direction that was needed for a hugely successful flick way back when before the advent of CG effects.
I can understand where he’s coming from, but it seems to me that post-production wizards would command a much higher salary than the low figures he mentioned. $35-40k a year seems very low for their expertise.
If this is legit at all, I’ll be surprised.
for the average sfx people 35k-40k per year is about average.