I'm SO sick of the overuse of these 2 words (deferred pay). If you plan for a film, then you best plan for all the expenses. As a composer, I can't get any equipment for free, I can't expect musicians to come to my studio and record for free (I pay them all cash). The fact that someone (everyone) has no budget to film is suspicious to me. How on earth are you going to get anywhere without money? Money to edit, money to color-correct, money to post, money to shop it, etc. Do you think someone is going to magically appear and give you money? And if they did, how much of that deferred pay would the composer actually see? Probably none of it... so then, how important is the music to you now??!! Composers. Here's valuable info: "Backend or profit-sharing deals are so sticky because the persons/company doing the project can keep writing off expenses against the product to keep it from showing a profit. A savvy lawyer negotiating YOUR contract will be sure to indicate that you get a percentage of the gross income, not "percentage of profit." This is a popular thing in TV and film contracts too... When you start to see language about AGR (adjusted gross receipts) and MAGR (managed adjusted gross receipts) that's where you should get anxious. The best example of a great wording for what you want would be what some talent has written into their contracts: artist receives x% (or x points) of the TOTAL BOX OFFICE as reported by Variety" or something along those lines. Run, run, run if you see "profit." Same with "deferred payment" deals. Important to define "deferred until when?" And if the answer is "deferred until recoupment" or "until we show a profit" then it's time to negotiate those words out of the deal and negotiate in the word "gross." I know that we're not always in a position to make that demand, but at least know what you're getting into. I've seen a few folks get screwed over on points/backend/deferred deals. They didn't realize the impact of that "profit" language in their contract." (quote from Kerry Muzzey)
Composing : "Deferred Pay" my arse!!! by Andy Kotz
Other topics in Composing:
Check out Trending Discussions
Register / Log In
Hi Andy, I have to agree with all you said. As a seasoned composer and musician who has been in this industry for longer than I care to admit, I have witnessed the rapid degradation of music across the entire entertainment spectrum. There is very little respect shown to those who have spent many years perfecting their craft, only to be told that they should work for free, or as you mentioned for a piece of a non-existent back end. I have seen composer fees fall over 80% in the last 10 years alone. It is all but impossible to make a living in this field anymore, unless you are very very very well connected with one or more of the few people left in Hollywood or elsewhere, who still understand the true value of what a composer can bring to the table, and the extraordinary quality of their final product as a result. It would seem that most directors and producers coming up nowadays, give very little thought to ORIGINAL music for their Original film, and end up cutting and pasting library cues, or pre-recorded songs and make them fit, as their score. No way back I'm afraid, until the industry as a whole regains some respect for original music, and indeed for composers and musicians in general. As there are now more composers than ever, willing to work for free, or for below minimum wage, just to be noticed, the waters are so muddy that in the end almost no one gets any attention, and producers can go their merry way paying nothing, or next to it, for their music. Composing to picture is a very unique art form, that is going to go away forever, unless enough of us make a big enough noise, to gather public and industry support for our art and our craft, and we are treated with the same respect as other highly trained professionals in the industry.
Richard as a fellow composer I agree with you, but it is not a trend specific to film - I believe it is a trend we see in the whole music industry since before the Napster days. The public expects its 99 cent downloads, Apple is giving away millions of U2 albums for free (the public perceives it as free and that is all the counts imho), and filmmakers (except perhaps the LA and NYC high budget ones) do not understand much about sync licenses or anything else connected to working with composers. I just came back three weeks ago from the 168 film festival in LA and it seemed to me that more than 3/4 of the films either used public domain music and no music at all (many of them didn't even credit what they used). The future of the film industry comes from those just starting their journeys or still in the beginning of their careers. Most of them here in Texas IMHO are not full time. These are the ones who work on little to no budgets and either have no music, use public domain, or expect to pay little to nothing for the music. Now I can not speak for anywhere else, but its not just music that gets short changed - when the composer is not paid, neither does anyone else get paid. The good news is there are some people who make a living at composing though here in Houston I am aware of less than 5 and they are forced to also work corporate, commercials, and rent out their recording studios to others. Those filmmakers with decent budgets here such as Michelle Mowers two "Preacher" films which have both been on Lifetime, do generate money for the composer (though I can't tell you how much he makes - my guess its in the 5 figures). So there are two challenges 'established composers' have to deal with - (1) those filmmakers with either little to no budgets and/or ones that have no clue how to deal with composers and (2) newer composers that want to break in and are willing to work for imdb credit only. Here in Houston, many of the films made are competitions like 48h film project and splatterfest for which money is not permitted - however, for those that move to festivals, there is still often no money. I have worked on shorts that are not competitions where the filmmaker budgets are perhaps $1,500 total - not much money there for the composer to ask for. So my personal guess at least here in Texas, is that composers will generally expect to work for free for shorts and when they finally get onto a feature - could ask for something. Though even then, budget could dictate the composers fee - I was on a feature documentary last year. I could have asked for a contract up front and I probably would not been asked to join. So I joined at no cost with an agreement we would work out something formal before I actually started scoring a completed film. I did some work at no cost for effectively a trailer (used for raising money). The filmmaker could not raise money to complete the film and I have not heard from him since March. That is in my opinion very typical. So what is the answer to this quandary? Well you know what it is - when you start off, you work for free. As you get established you get to increase your fee on successive projects. If you get to pursue successive levels and the work keeps coming, you continue to get paid though perhaps not like the old days. But the competition is as fierce as ever - especially in California. So if you can't keep your momentum going, your paid business dries up and your back on the same playing field with the ones who score for free. Not much different from anything else in the music or in fact entertainment business for the 100 years. Very few composers have 30 or 40 year paid careers - less than a fraction of 1% probably. No different than trying to become a rock/pop star and then holding on to it for years and years (except perhaps Tony Bennett who had the number 1 hit the day I was born on 9/16/51 and still performs 63 years later at age 88! :) )
1 person likes this
Very interesting topic Andy! So far I'm getting paid for my work here in Sweden. Maybe it's just a matter of time before this "no pay" hits Sweden too. I hope not :)
Hey Jonas! Send me some of your paid work that you can't do !!! :)