Let SAGIndie Casting hamstring your film!

Noticed this Screen Actors Guild ad in today's email version of indieWIRE:

SAGIndie is proud to announce the launch of SAGIndie Casting, a free web-based casting resource for actors and filmmakers. Available online at www.sagindie.org, SAG Indie Casting allows filmmakers direct access to professional actors looking to work on quality, low-budget films.

How does it work? Filmmakers working under one of five low-budget SAG agreements are eligible to submit their breakdowns online, where actors can check in daily for project descriptions and submission information. A complete list of your casting needs, including location, brief role descriptions and submission information, is made available to SAG members nationwide.

Sounds great, doesn't it? Except, here's what they don't tell you in the ad (or any of their other ads) but do tell you if you go to a SAGIndie workshop: If you make your film under, say, the Experimental Film Agreement, each cast member now controls the fate of the film. If you ever want to distribute the movie beyond a film festival, you have to obtain each individual performer's consent, effectively giving veto power (and huge negotiating leverage) to every single cast member, including the one with whom you had a torrid affair on the set and who now hates you for some reason.

Here it is in plain language from the contract summary:

Any distribution beyond film festivals requires that the producer contact the Guild, obtain each professional performer's consent and negotiate compensation for any further distribution.

When I attended a recent SAGIndie workshop to see how I might get SAG actors permission to be in Free Cinema films, I was floored when I heard about this rule. I interrupted and asked the guy giving the presentation, who was moving on as if he'd just mentioned some minor rule like how long a lunch break has to be, "Are you serious? Every member of the cast has veto power?"

"Well, we don't call it that, but yes."

"So if I have, say, twenty cast members, I have to consider when I'm doing auditions that, one or two years from now, any one of these people could hold up the distribution of the film for any reason?"

"If you want to be paranoid about it."

Paranoid? Let's see, I pour a year or more of my life into a feature film, then at the very moment all of that work is to pay off, an actor who worked one day on the film can make any demands whatsoever (money, credit, more close-ups, anything) and hold up the distribution of the film. Last I heard, this was called leverage, and it's extreme leverage. No producer in his or her right mind would walk into such a situation. Investors could probably sue you for gross incompetence if you signed such an agreement without warning them in their investment contracts. Unless your movie has only one actor, and that actor happens to be you, you're taking a risk. And the moment you hire someone who is a stranger to you or has little at stake in the project, it becomes an insane, irresponsible risk.

I confirmed with the SAG rep that these contract terms may not be negotiated prior to shooting. SAG apparently allows these negotiations to occur only after a distribution offer has been made--so the actors know exactly what kind of negotiating power they have over the producer.

On Nothing So Strange, we had a huge cast. By and large, we all got along really well. But one day one cast member--I cast him based on a ten-minute group audition, and this was his first day--threw a hissy fit because of some misunderstanding of some kind (he didn't understand he would have to improv, wasn't dressed appropriately, something like that). The dude was basically crazy. He perceived an insult where there was none. He was paid for the day and sent on his way. But he didn't let up there. He was so angered that he called the line producer and threatened to call Microsoft and have the production shut down. He found my home number and called me to harangue me about his various grievances (and ask, unsuccessfully, for his role back).

In the big scheme of things, it was no big deal. We just shook our heads and moved on. But I shudder to imagine if this guy had veto power over the distribution of the film. "Um, excuse me, Crazy Guy? Can I have your permission to distribute my film please?"

The Director's Guild doesn't ask for this kind of control. Neither does the Writer's Guild. They both have low-budget agreements of various kinds. Why SAG has chosen to insist on this insane level of control is beyond me, but it certainly is going to motivate me to continue to avoid SAG like the plague. Because, to my film, a SAG contract is the plague--it can kill the movie.