Re: Film Arts Foundation debacle

From: Brook Hinton (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Aug 20 2008 - 13:11:45 PDT

And I want to add - I am confident no one at FAF wanted things to go the way
they did. Why would anyone be involved in such an organization unless they
truly wanted to help filmmakers? Frankly I'm amazed and happy they were able
to get some of the services continued elsewhere. It must have taken an
enormous amount of work - at this point, undoubtedly mostly unpaid work.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Brook Hinton <email suppressed> wrote:

> Jim, this isn't a case of a "crafts-focused" organization being taken over
> by a different type of organization.
> This is a case of an organization that provided services to filmmakers -
> equipment rental, fiscal sponsorship, and unbelievably cheap workshops -
> falling under the weight of enormous debt to the degree that they could no
> longer operate. Whether that's just a sign of the times, mismanagement,
> whatever is something those of us who were not part of the operation can
> debate forever, and ultimately we'll never know.
> They had to sell whatever they could to pay off some of the debt. They
> didn't just sell the filmmaking equipment. There are literally still
> instructors waiting on payment for classes they taught there long ago. They
> had an obligation as a non-profit organization before closing to try to find
> another non-profit to take over services committed for the future - fiscal
> sponsorship, for example - and the fact that the workshops may continue to
> be supported by the other organization at least shows they tried to get
> existing members something for their remaining membership time. I'm not
> trying to defend them wholesale - I have my own issues with how things
> transpired, and I don't want to air that laundry here - but this idea that
> one thing has been traded for something else if baloney. Nobody wanted that
> optical printer to go away. I'm sure nobody wanted the facility to close.
> The equipment component obviously wasn't salvageable. What should they have
> done? Find someone else to do it at a loss? That wasn't going to happen.
> The equipment/facilities were the main draw for me as a filmmaker. There is
> nothing comparable to replace that now. It's sad but it's the way things
> are.
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Jim Carlile <email suppressed> wrote:
>> In a message dated 8/20/2008 7:12:03 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
>> email suppressed writes:
>> Questions to ask yourself regarding FAF (applies to any arts
>> organization):
>> When was the last time you used one of their services or took a
>> workshop?
>> Attended an event?
>> Renewed your membership, even if you're not in the local community?
>> Made a tax deductible contribution?
>> Attended a fundraiser?
>> I don't live in the area.
>> Jeez, I'm just amazed that no one's bothered by this, and that they
>> approve of organizations for organizations' sake. It's all just so
>> secretarial and counterproductive-- if not parasitic. The delight of
>> mediocrities.
>> ------------------------------
>> It's only a deal if it's where *you* want to go. Find your travel deal *
>> here* <>
>> .
>> __________________________________________________________________ For
>> info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> --
> _______________________________________________________
> Brook Hinton
> film/video/audio art
> studio vlog/blog:

Brook Hinton
film/video/audio art
studio vlog/blog:
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.