Nudity

No its ok folks take your hands off the panic button i'm not getting my kit off just yet, although to be fair i have in the past and in the right role would again but whenever i have its been in paid professional and 'protected' circumstances.

I was just mulling over the amount of lo/no paid and student breakdowns out there that require nudity. i've seen a lot of 'topless zombie' and 'brief shower scene' and an awful lot of 'victims' these seemed to be advertisment mainly for women 18-25

I'm just wondering what people thoughts on this are - who's going for these roles, what peoples experiences of working nude with amature/student companies are.


  • 11 years ago
  • 8,572
  • 31
John Eastman
Actor

I have not read all the posts, but am in total agreement with the ones I have glossed through..

Has anyone else seen the so called 'job' wanting to hold auditions and then recruit for a HALF DAYS FILMING IN UNDERWEAR for an ONLINE job...with the pay at...yep a glorious £40.

CCP..is there a facility to name and shame so called job adverts? Or at least register our displeasure at being made to look fools for even considering this nonsense????????

JE


  • 11 years ago
  • 21
Lee Ravitz
Actor

It's been an intriguing thread this one, and has at least had the merit of getting some differently inflected discussion going! I have no wish to derail it into yet another of the done to death 'why don't film schools pay?' discussions...but there needs to be a reminder of where the nuances lie in the problems that Guy addresses.

Where there is no disagreement is over these two points: 1) If you value your own work as a professional performer, you should always look to work for contracted payment and 2) One of the factors that should decide you to work with someone in the first instance should be that they are offering decent rates for your time and commitment.

However, a blanket statement to the effect that 'all reputable schools' will pay is pretty meaningless, unless you take it to mean that a school that pays is by definition 'reputable'. The key problem with the student film 'market' is that the vast majority of schools that are held to be 'reputable' (in all other respects - e.g. rating of teaching, membership of regulating bodies and so on) do *not* ensure the payment of actors on student films is obligatory, and tend to leave it to student discretion (unsurprisingly, with limited budgets, the majority then do not offer pay for projects). A key constituent of this problem is that film schools do not even overstep legality in failing to pay NMW (let alone Equity rate) if the law is willing to accept the argument that actors are employed as 'volunteers' on film school projects. This is generally the term under which actors are contracted.

Just because an actor has been defined as a 'volunteer' does not mean that they aren't, in actual fact, a 'worker' in legal terms, but no firm ruling on this has ever been decreed by HMRC and won't be, unless a test case were to prove successful in court. Equity would argue that all actors are contracted workers (and does, in its example student film contract), but if the film school is choosing to define actors as volunteers, then it is really the union's word against their's.

None of this is to say that you shouldn't place a value on your own expertise and decide intelligently which jobs are worth the doing: increasingly large numbers of student filmmakers *do* seem to be offering some form of remuneration to actors and negotiating better deals for those who work with them. These are the film-makers to work with, and let's hope we continue to make progress in this field. But such film makers pay at their own discretion: it's rare for the establishment to be actively encouraging set payment rates. It's even rarer for any school to adhere to the Equity contract. I know that Guy trained with the NFTS, which was certainly the only school in the country working in accordance with Equity student rates on all projects for many years, although I am sure there was a posting on this forum not so long ago suggesting even an NFTS project had been done recently for payment 'in kind' (i.e. a copy of the DVD) only!

None of this makes our engagement with the film schools any easier, but it's important to know that often what is being done is, in the eyes of the film schools, perfectly 'reputable' and above board, so it is even more attendent upon you, as a canny professional, to make sensible decisions about which projects you are prepared to work on.

Now, with that said, back to the more intriguing question: how do we stand with regards to nudity within the profession?


  • 11 years ago
  • 22
Forbes KB
Actor

£40 for 1/2 a days work is above NMW so there's nothing to "name and shame" I'm afraid! There's no legislation in place to enforce Equity/BECTU agreements and despite Clives best efforts that's not likely in the foreseeable future!

If the current governments tactic is to declare tax avoidance using perfectly legal loopholes "ethically and morally wrong" and shame celebrities into paying what we mere mortals have to pay as oppose to closing the loopholes I fear they'll have little to no sympathy for us actors who want a bit more than NMW to parade about in out pants or even less!

CCP Tower's line is consistently "if you don't like the money on offer don't apply" hence I apply for very little on here!

The choice is your's guys and always will be!


  • 11 years ago
  • 23
Guy Press
Actor

Hi All,

'Reputable' doesn't just extend to the NFTS other schools will pay properly and the industry (On the other side of camera) is well aware which are decent - it's not a matter of opinion or subjective either. ;-)

A proviso note is that students will sometimes have external projects using the schools name without the schools funding or full backing - on these projects beware!!

Best to all!

Guy ;-)


  • 11 years ago
  • 24
John Eastman
Actor

Forbes you are factually correct, as always! I think I made my remark more in the spirit of trying to tap into the principle of saying no to work that degrades us as a profession. And yes, of course the choice is always yours and if you don't like it etc etc

Fact: An employer thinks they can get a room full of men and women in their underwear to be online in a non-speaking role (which requires 'physical comedy') for half a day's filming, and pay them ...wait for it...£40.

The fact that there are members out there who will apply for this is the sad truth.

In relation to the original thread, I hope more actors will value what they have sufficiently, to stand up to this sort of manipulation, the likes of which I have seen advertised many times on here.


  • 11 years ago
  • 25
Lee Ravitz
Actor

In response to Guy's last points, I'll be brief(ish) - for once- (as this is getting off topic again!)...

Student film makers using the name of the institution to cover for their own setups is not unusual, I suppose, and it may be right to conclude that, often, the institution's good name is being blackened by non-paying students putting together their own low budgets on the fly. But, then again, I think it more than possible that the case can operate in reverse also. A student who is attempting to make their own film for the sake of personal benefit, rather than craft a film for the sake of coursework, may actually be *more* inclined to pay decently, pulling out all the stops in order to get the best possible results for their own creation, and to cement their own reputation, whereas they leave the internally made films at the whims of the institution's budgeting. So, once again, whether an actor decides to work on such films must be judged on a case by case basis. It is, however, an unfortunate fact that many learn they can source actors 'for free' during their time in film school, and carry that mentality on into the financing (or lack of it) of their later work.

As regards 'reputability' it remains hard to define: I was thinking, perhaps, in terms of aspects like whether a defined school or college is considered a nationally approved Skillset Academy, for instance. Unfortunately, and this was demonstrated categorically at the Equity Lo/No Pay Working Party, evidence has been amassed to show that, on the basis of adverts culled via casting sites over a year alone, there are very, very few Skillset approved bodies that have not had some students advertising for actors for free. Indeed, many of the highest rated are clearly the most culpable in this regard. If this were one or two instances, they might be considered aberrant. In some cases, however, we are talking about the release of hundreds of separate casting calls. I am not passing judgement on those figures, but I think they point out that the vast majority of institutions are *not* encouraging payment to actors as a necessity. Therefore, when I say that, should the production pay, it is because the students choose to allocate their budget in this way, I mean it. This doesn't mean the schools don't teach good practice - but they clearly don't penalise if is not being enforced. And why should they, if there is no rigorous rule in place that actors *should* be paid? Good schools may ensure that pay is always offered (and the NFTS, thanks to its strong agreements with Equity, has always been at the forefront of this practice), and some may tacitly encourage payment on the basis of the perfectly reasonable assumption that actors are workers and shouldn't be working for nothing (!), but I still see nothing in force to convince me this is anything other than a 'gentleman's agreement' style arrangement, and honoured less often than not by the majority.

Where I think everyone is in agreement with regard to this thread is that: being *paid* to take all your clothes off may be an aesthetic decision that suits some and is deemed demeaning by others, but not getting paid for doing it suits only blatant exhibitionists, and is rarely a clever move for anyone else (whether for moral, aesthetic, or even insurance, purposes!).

Now, that's surely enough of that?


  • 11 years ago
  • 26
Forbes KB
Actor

There will ALWAYS be someone willing to sell there soul or even to give their soul away in a vain attempt to get to the next rung of the ladder! Since the dawn of time there's maybe a handful who've actually succeeded using this strategy!

Value yourself and the skills you have to offer and others will too! Give yourself away for free and there will always be someone willing to accept your offer!


  • 11 years ago
  • 27
Guy Press
Actor

Just to give all a quick heads the heads up Skillset academy status is a guarantee of nothing!! Academy status is a joke - it isn't industry standards applied in practice at all - the differences between so called academies is huge! As a crewing employer there are vast differences!

Best as always to one and all!

Lee your Prose is getting shorter!! ;-) Best to you as usual Sir!!


  • 11 years ago
  • 28
You must login as a candidate to participate in the forum.
Please note: Messages written in the forum do not represent the views of The Mandy Network, nor have they been vetted by The Mandy Network staff. If you read something which you believe to be offensive or defamatory, please contact us and we will take the appropriate action.