Commentary 21 Jul 2012 06:37 am
Passing Week
Two people who I respected enormously died this past week. They’d both touched my life, however briefly, and I had to comment on them.
I worked with Celeste Holm when she did a VO narration for me for a five picture set I did for the United Nations.
Ms. Holm was a star, one of the big ones from the era just before mine. My mother was very impressed that I was meeting her (so was I.) Take a look at her NYTimes Obituary for information about her great Oscar-winning career.
Things started off a little rocky when she arrived late with the UN representative who went to meet her and accompany her to the studio. There was some difficulty
with traffic. I had no problem with the late start, but my recording engineer – who had never heard of Celeste Holm – asked, “Is this the talent?” as she entered the room.
There was a long introductory narration for her to read, and I suggested we try going through it once so she would get familiar with it. Ms. Holm read it with many halts and huffs and stops and starts. But her expressions were basically right on the mark. I asked her for another take. With that she said she’d worked with William Wyler on her first film, and she’d done her first scene, she felt, perfectly. However, he continued asking for take after take finally ending with take 100. He used the first take. I listened and understood she wanted to read it only the one time. I responded by saying that William Wyler deserved 100 takes, but would it be possible for me to just get two? She did it perfectly on the second take. (It WAS a hard read, written by someone at the UN, not a script writer.)
By the way, I’ve never been able to find any film she did with Wyler, yet I’m sure he’s the director she’d named.
Richard Zanuck is a producer whose work I followed for ages. From Jaws to Driving Miss Daisy; Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid to Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland he was my idea of the consummate producer. Someone who put good films together and nurtured great talent.
At one screening, I recognized him sitting in the row behind me at the Academy theater and cautiously approached to say hello. After that brief meeting we always said casual greetings whenever we saw each other. I’ll miss seeing him in the world and so will Hollywood.
Emily Hubley’s Film
Artist and muse
I was completely under the spell of Emily Hubley’s latest film and/or, a 5½ min short poetic meditation on creativity. The film plays in a semi-abstract mode as it animates from scene to scene always moving in beautifully colorful transitions. The music, while always melodic, doesn’t hit on a theme until the old piano kicks in behind the finalized work of art. A coda of sweet animation playing out on the blank slate we’d seen at the film’s start. This is a wonderful movie with constantly repeating images and symbols. The voices change from male to female – before the idea gels and after, while a muse (female) whispers to the artist. I sat through the film three times, and it continued to grow with each viewing, and I’m sure it’ll get bigger the next time I see it.
Look for this movie on the festival circuit. It’s one of Emily’s finest, a fully developed, visually exciting movie.
music – Yo La Tengo
voices – Kevin Corrigan, Emily Hubley and Tiprin Manday
compositing – Jeremiah Dickey
sound design – Eliza Paley
Films I’ve Seen
This past week was a good one for movies, from my point of view. I saw what I thought were three of the best so far. Two docs and one French.
The French film, on Tuesday, was Farewell My Queen by Benoît Jacquot. It was the story of Marie Antoinette in the last days before the storming of the Bastille, as told by a young woman servant who acted as a “reader.” She read to her Queen and, therefore, had limited access to Royalty with a bit of knowledge about the politics surrounding both the King and Queen. The film was quite entertaining, seriously thoughtful about the period and certainly more illuminating than a couple of other recent films about the subject. Well acted, directed and scripted (an adaptation of the book by Chantal Thomas.
Thursday night the Academy offered a documentary double feature. I didn’t really feel up to going but pushed myself and was glad I did.
The Queen of Versailles by Lauren Greenfield told the story of a billionaire couple as they attempt to build the largest private home in the world. Construction of the private home is just a symbol for the problems this couple face as they build their house on sticks assembled on easy money with loose mortgages which collapsed with the recession in 2008. All their money collapses as well and while the husband tries to regroup the wife, acting as if she understands, continues to spend wildly and unnecessarily. The husband who works, as he says, 24/7 to rebuild his company – which is also his private funds. It’s a struggle, and the film – which starts out like a reality TV show – turns into serious questions about affluence and waste. It’s a wonderful film.
Ai WeiWei: Never Sorry is a film by Alison Klayman which focuses on the Chinese artist/activist and dissident. The film offers a sympathetic but rounded picture of this admirable artist. The artist is all about communication, and his primary theme is about the political situation within his own country. His work is well known internationally (probably more so outside of China), and we get a very intimate portrait of the man, his work and his views. While being thoroughly informative, the film reveals a lot about the society in Beijing and we get to see how changes have developed quietly over the years. Ai WeiWei, himself, says that his not being imprisoned is enough of a proof that things are changing. (He does disappear for months and is obviously affected by the arrest once he’s been released – it takes him a number of months before going back to his constant twittering.) The film could have gone much deeper than it does, but the filmmaker is obviously trying to tell the story to an audience who doesn’t know who Ai WeiWei is. It’s a primer, and a bigger film is deserving, but we do get into the human side of the artist, which is well appreciated.
I’d heartily recommend all three films to anyone looking for something intelligent and adult. They’re all three very different from each other and offer what ever mood you’re looking for at the theater. Unless, of course, you yearn for Batman rising again.
How Cheap Can You Go?
Something has hapened to animation in the past few years. The budgets keep getting lower and lower and lower. Clients have no qualms about asking you to produce a project for free. Another, producing a series of short films, asks you to do a five minute film for $2000. That’s $400 for a minute of film. And the worst part is that you not only think hard about taking it (if you don’t), but you try to calculate how much more work you’ll get from the same producer when you do a brilliant film for them.
Naturally enough, after you’ve done the job you don’t get more from them, and you have to wonder why they don’t love you any more – even though you’ve done a great job.
It’s a horrible situation we’re in. The small studios are being squeezed to death by these low budget backers and times are getting tougher.
Richard O’Connor, at his site Ace & Son, starts a dialogue about this state of affairs. Worth the read, worth adding to the commentary.
on 21 Jul 2012 at 9:47 am 1.Mark Mayerson said …
I really think that globalization has put an end to the possibility of service work as a main source of income in animation.
As difficult as it is to create and market intellectual property that is profitable, I think that it’s the only way forward. Studios are going to start very small (and maybe never get big) in order to become profitable as soon as possible. Studios are going to be small enough to live off merchandising revenue from their work.
Then, if service work comes knocking, a studio will have the cash flow to turn down work if it doesn’t make sense economically without worrying about alienating the client or ruining the chances of future work.
Animation artists are not people who need to be on site, like carpenters. They can be anywhere, including low wage countries. Globalization has driven down the price of everything except natural resources and work that must be done on site.
That being the case, I think the only kind of service work that is going to remain viable is on the high price end of things, where a client knows they need a certain quality level for whatever reason. Those jobs are going to go to shops that specialize in high end work or to shops that manage to create a distinctive enough voice/look in order to attract those jobs.
on 21 Jul 2012 at 7:22 pm 2.James T. Nethery said …
“Clients have no qualms about asking you to produce a project for free. Another, producing a series of short films, asks you to do a five minute film for $2000. That’s $400 for a minute of film.”
I see this all the time browsing websites like Elance and ODesk. “$100 for a twenty minute cartoon done in the Disney style… oh yeah, and I want it done in a week” and ridiculous crap like that… I’m not exaggerating. I actually saw that in an “animator wanted” ad on Elance once.
Most of these people who want these crazy low prices are simply uneducated in my experience. They have no idea how time consuming animation is… even for “simple” Flash animation and such.
I just love how people think Flash is some magic program that can churn out an entire cartoon in five minutes by pushing a couple of buttons. “Oh, you can just do it in Flash right?” EERGGH.
on 21 Jul 2012 at 10:34 pm 3.Michael said …
The series I mentioned – $2000 for 5 minutes – is a real project well in the works and it has professionals organizing it. There’s no hope.
on 21 Jul 2012 at 11:22 pm 4.The Gee said …
Is the series being done here in the states?
If not, I can one-up you:
25×3
25 different locations (god knows how many total backgrounds and supporting characters)
9 months
DVD release
$2500 budget
A crew of five was willing to do this in India.
on 23 Jul 2012 at 8:13 pm 5.Mark said …
I agree Michael, I’ve known studios in Australia that have gone under as a result. Many artists, at least that I know personally are starting to revolt. The penny pinching has gotten out of hand. I know of a high end project where the directors were getting less than the line producers and one producer getting something like $10 000 per week. For doing what? I ask. A director has a lot of responsibilty and should get paid the most then down from there. With, writers, designers, board artists and key animators on the second rung. Of course that should change again if the writer is the creator etc.
That doesn’t mean a producer shouldn’t be paid well, especially if they are actually raising the money and putting it together, but most producers are employees like the rest of us.
on 23 Jul 2012 at 8:18 pm 6.Mark Sonntag said …
At some point quality product will come to the fore again. It takes creators with long term thinking to do that. There are many producers out there who are only interested in putting the package together, taking the best cut and delivering as cheaply as possible. Most of this crap will never be seen more than once, if at all.
on 24 Jul 2012 at 10:20 am 7.richard o'connor said …
Thanks for the link, Michael.
The small fries paying small potatoes doesn’t bother me SO much. These are clients who wouldn’t have considered animation when it was a film process due to the expense. Legitimate lower costs have essentially opened up the market to them.
The big players going cheap are the crux of the issue. Especially in an age of record corporate profits. They get these profits by squeezing suppliers and cutting production and distribution costs. Also marketing and public service/charity.
Of course, my first point factors into the second by dragging down the market rate of animation in general.
By and large, the Elance, Odesk and overseas competition are more of an insulting nuisance to the profession that a serious threat. Animators who create a quality product will quickly price themselves out of that market and clients who are content with the low level of work can make everyone happier by sticking with it.
on 24 Jul 2012 at 3:34 pm 8.The Gee said …
I disagree with you Richard on the bidding companies, like Elance. I gave up on those a decade ago because I can’t limbo that low and make working on something worth my time. I can’t imagine what it is like now. But, I know an illustrator who says he sometimes uses sites like that. So, maybe it is different for different people or firms.
I think sites like that convince clients a lot can be done for a little, so clients try to get the moon for a song. Some will do that anyhow; its their nature (sales people, for instance). But, it is the clients expectations for cheap. That sorta leads into the next thing:
“The big players going cheap are the crux of the issue.â€
Yeah. But, I do wonder if some of that has to do with whoever is overseeing a production, hiring for the project.
One thing I’ve encountered is someone who doesn’t have the qualifications you’d want a producer to have, or an art director to have for that matter. But, their job is to bring someone on to make Project X.
Even if the company has deep resources and parts of the company has experience outsourcing animation to a studio, the point person isn’t gonna fight for a larger budget if they think it can be done for cheap.
Conversely, sometimes the budget is there even if the producer’s experience isn’t.
Companies will pay for things they believe they need. I just wonder if it is less about the big companies and more about those who work for them who are trying to deliver something cool but not realizing the optimal resources might be required to make something cool. And, there’s no one outside of the creative to convince them the budget needs to be larger.
2 cents which I hope is clearly expressed and not confusing. This text box is good for short bursts of writing but not long stuff.
on 25 Jul 2012 at 10:40 am 9.richard o'connor said …
I don’t know that we necessary disagree.
My argument is that the bidding companies set standards below professional rates. That means professionals (like you, and to a lesser extent me) don’t use them. So what’s left is pool of amateurs and hard luck cases.
These artists will either establish themselves as professionals and adjust their rates accordingly or produce work that’s worth what was paid for it.
“Serious” clients -those who value professionalism and quality -will still try to get work for as little as possible, but avoid these types of deals.
I agree wholeheartedly that there is a serious degeneration of qualified people (we used to call them “producers”) on the client end. In many the cost cutting in this area is a bigger factor in the current state of the business than anything else.
on 25 Jul 2012 at 3:47 pm 10.The Gee said …
No, I shouldn’t have made it seem like there was a wide chasm of disagreement between what you wrote and the points I tried to make.
I’m glad you mentioned “Serious†clients. That is pretty much it. Though, sometimes I think the reason why they are “serious†is because I do not have to ask:
“Are you serious!!!?! You’ve got to be kidding?â€
Two out of Three.
Quality
(Quick or Slow) Turnaround Time
Cost.
Serious clients should already know this and be prepared enough to accept that there are trade offs but if they are prepared then it all works out for the best of the project/production and its purpose.