PDA

View Full Version : Holy crap!


alex whitmer
10-15-2009, 11:18 AM
Forget it. Wanted to point out some hazards to be wary of, and it's getting ugly.

Anagram
10-15-2009, 11:33 AM
someone's going to get sued.

carcar
10-15-2009, 11:45 AM
These greedy bastards keep messing with tax credits, gonna screw it up for everyone.

FADE IN
10-15-2009, 12:00 PM
someone's going to get sued.
And hopefully a few people will go to prison, where they belong.

Scammers abound, unfortunately. :confused:

Always watch your back!

EOTWAWKIN
10-15-2009, 12:48 PM
Stay the hell out of Utah. Ran across several fraud producers/directors and writers from there that would sell their soul to make a buck.

The Gunshark
10-15-2009, 01:01 PM
Wow, that Pia guy is a bastard.

Always good to have the heads up. :)

dwest
10-15-2009, 01:30 PM
Wow that sounds like a mess. Inmates running the asylum.

Still you have to wonder how the 1 producer (Jocelyn) and other production company (Supernova) let all this happen. I'm curious how the corporation was set up. It seems odd that all these different people thought they had control of the distribution rights. It sounds to me like the Supernova may have made some poor decisions when setting up the corporation for the film. Unfortunately, being the main investor doesn't necessarily give you any input on how a film is distributed or sold.

grant
10-15-2009, 01:56 PM
Does anyone believe that this is really just an interested horse lover with no connection to the film? That a lowly anonymous PA on the film knows all about the legal goings on after it wrapped? Seems like astroturfing to me.

Even if it's not, it's highly biased. Not sure how seriously to take the charges without some corroborating statements from a more neutral site. Of course there are no links on the site itself to confirm that any of this is actually happening, and it's not just a wacko on the internet.

grant
10-15-2009, 02:09 PM
Thanks. I'll read up. Blog still seems a little suspicious.

(There was also some funky editing on wikipedia listing the court case in weird places.)

grant
10-15-2009, 02:26 PM
Well I'm not trying to be a jerk about this. Apologies if it sounds that way. I am curious about what's really going on.

But that first link is just an anonymous person called 'guest' claiming that one guy is a scumbag.

And I can't read any details on the second link, only that there's a lawsuit in existence.

And google, google news, and google blog searches on "shannon's rainbow" aren't turning up any information on the lawsuit.

grant
10-15-2009, 02:26 PM
DOH! That was a cross-post. Reading the next doc.

Ulysses
10-15-2009, 03:12 PM
The website is poorly written and never gets down to facts.

I have no time to decipher this.

OGWAVES
10-15-2009, 10:05 PM
How gives a crap! Just focus on YOUR script and YOUR career! Who gives two shits about this kinda stuff? Not me...

nuvuefilms
10-15-2009, 10:33 PM
One thing that stands out in the link is "they" claim that selling foreign before a theatrical release is common knowledge suicide. That's not accurate. The cast they have is NOT going to guarantee a theatrical release, let alone a P&A commitment. No studio is going to buy this movie for a theatrical release unless it blows up at Sundance or Toronto and I doubt it would even get in. It's not Little Miss Sunshine with Steve Carrell.

It is very common to sell foreign before domestic. A ton of independent films get made this way, and this is an independent film.

Of course, if you have a 35M film with A-list stars, you would get a domestic theatrical deal in place, then use this as leverage to increase your foreign sales.

This film is only a 5M drama with an ensemble cast. No star power. There is no way this movie is going to command a theatrical release. Miramax is not buying this movie, neither are the majors or the mini-majors.

Mac H.
10-16-2009, 05:53 AM
It sounds like the writer of the blog has plenty of opinions but seems to have no idea of what the hell should be happening.

Her claim to fame is that she's a 19 year old kid who loves horses.

Yet somehow she is convinced that she's correct in her comments on the producer's obligations to investors despite the fact that she hasn't seen a single contract explaining these obligations. And she can't spell. So she isn't exactly giving the impression of competence.

She seems like an idiot. She talks about how people are 'evil' and are trying to 'steal it away from its rightful owners' ... but then claims that we should consider them innocent until proven guilty. She then rants on about how a guy (whose name she gave) fired the film's accountant in PA because she knew too much and refused to lie or cheat on the books.

Is it true? Who knows. But sadly I'd never want to work with any of the people she mentioned just because of the whole mess that she tells people about.

She is destroying the reputation of everyone she mentions - in a way that a simple lawsuit wouldn't. It is especially disturbing because the only plausible outcome of the blog is to destroy their reputations. It isn't going to help resolve the court case. It is simply destructive.

A simple google shows the production has been plagued by people from both sides suing each other. One person who was the producer/dialect coach/acting coach/casting director and who cast her daughter in the main role is listed as being sued in 2008 for 'failing to deliver an "A-list" cast'. Oh - and she also shares the same home address as the person listed as the primary investor!

The full lawsuit is on line if anyone is interested.

Mac

Mac H.
02-26-2010, 09:52 PM
The latest bit in this messy saga - the company is now suing itself.

Or another company with the same name and address as itself.

It isn't really clear: http://reporter.blogs.com/files/dipalmarainbow.pdf

Mac