In Reply to: Re: film production posted by Kenner on February 25, 2003 at 16:37:36:
I'm not sure the source of your numbers, but if it's a buddy, I'd take what he says with a grain of salt. Asst Film editors do not make $200 an hour. None, ever. I include a link to the editors guild website, of which I am a member. You'll find the top rates for editors and sound mixers to be more in the $2000 a week range. In this day and age few people make overscale, and the ones who do can be counted on a single hand. The highest rates I have ever heard of in 27 years in this business are triple scale. That number falls far short of $200 an hour and never do assistants get triple scale only a few big name picture editors and re-recording mixers.and BTW at 10,000,000 the actor is walking off with the lions share, as far as the working stiffs who make movies go. To take a lead actors wage and lump every other cost against it and come to a conclusion that actors wages are not a problem is absurd.
Steve
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: film production - SR 13:50:58 02/26/03 (5)
- A little clarification - Kenner 16:11:31 02/26/03 (0)
- Re: film production--about Union Building Trades Scale - Tom Brennan 15:27:13 02/26/03 (3)
- Re: film production--about Union Building Trades Scale - SR 18:59:15 02/26/03 (1)
- Re: film production--about Union Building Trades Scale - Tom Brennan 19:29:24 02/26/03 (0)
- Re: film production--about Union Building Trades Scale - Kenner 16:36:03 02/26/03 (0)