those who take financial risks are rewarded the most

That's the problem, the people who actually make the thing get nothing but the rich fuckers who restrained the project every step of the way and hindered the actual creative process in favour of profit are the only ones who benefit.

those who take financial risks

Fuck off

And yet not having enough finances can be a financial risk

The artists and crew took their own risk of doing this film and not doing something else that made even minimum wage. Putting in money you get in your sleep is not a risk.

the "risk" they take is that if it fails they might have to become a worker

Go ahead, just say you wanted to be the millionaire. Thats what you wanted.

That’s a boycott from me towards his future movies

When you put time and reputation on a film are you not also taking financial risk? If the film flops then odds are you will get less work, and less paying work. This art director was treated like an unpaid intern.

Oh look, turns out it"s a class thing and there are no good/bad generations

Is he the dingus who said The Simpsons invented the monkey's paw tale?

as always, piracy stays winning.

it's hilarious to me when the studio reputation management campaigns come out and act like the people on the high seas are stealing money from the key grip and the hair & makeup people. like those people ever get points, even on these "startup" type indie projects.

nope, it's all just shoestring corner-cutting on labor allowing the "investor" to brag about how they 10-100x'd due to their shrewd strategy of "having a bunch of money already".

Hexbear dont fall for misinformation ragebait challenge (IMPOSSIBLE):

Kind of a shitty reduction of his entire statement, so one can do ragebait. His actual statement isn't some out of touch thing, but an explanation of how the money gets shared and why. Hes not talking about himself.
He also wasn't a millionaire or someone who financed the movie with daddys money, as far as Im aware, so I dont know where users get that idea.

Not to mention the vast majority of the money doesnt go to him, but to the supplier, who paid millions to have it in cinemas and stuff. The supplier takes almost all the profits.
I dont know how much he has personally made, but I reckon if it was enough to pay out bonuses, those bonuses would first go to people who were either volunteering or people who were on set for the entire period of production.

On top of that the art director took a job in an indie film where she got paid 300$ a day. She was fine with the rate until the movie saw success. She didnt get ripped off, she got paid a fair wage for her work, yet now pretends she didnt.

Edit: here is her statement

Difficult to have any enthusiasm for any "indie boom"

Wow hexbear comments section goes so hard.

The financers/producers openly dissuaded union work because of the "tight budgets." As a result, the workers got fucked over while the financiers made out. I wonder how a film with such a tight budget, was able to afford the kind of marketing that allowed it to catapult to this kind of breakaway success story? I guess its just that good of a movie, word of mouth right? Marketplace of ideas, surely not a concerted effort by various sectors of the movie industry to promote a union-busting film, to lend legitimacy to a new business model that ensures even more technical trades get forced to take lower wages in order to return profits to those who took "financial risks."

Indie films dont have the same level of engagement as larger blockbusters by unions, particularly the crew union IATSE. The unions just dont really keep track of indie movies. They also have a lot of pull with american production and distribution companies. So the movie was made for 750k, and sold for 15m (what a roi!) to a Canadian distributor, bypassing american union reach, and the distributor took on marketing. They used "guerrilla marketing" tactics to lend some bona fide to the low budget.

There have been a lot of films in recent years made for exceedingly low budgets, using this indie movie loophole and trying out various other tactics like filming in Las Vegas where union penetration is lower, though this often still leads to the crews seeking out and organizing union contracts. None so far has been this big of a success, so Obsession is being pushed in every which way. Its the realization of a long project by movie production companies to skirt union oversight. This always leads to more dangerous conditions and lower wages across the board.

I dont know about you all, but I'm never watching this shit ass movie, and I will never watch anything by this director/production company, if I can help it.

Read the actual statement instead of falling for ragebait.

New tagline material?

Obsession bad now Kane ParSONS the first 21 year old man would never smh