We recently received the following email, we will follow up on this with an additional post shortly:

“Following your post of December 26, 2023, this is an update that the BFI are continuing to select their own BFI-backed films for the BFI-backed London Film Festival (see related links below). In my opinion, this is a clear conflict of interest and astounding arrogance considering that filmmakers unrelated to the BFI (or for that matter other state-funded collaborators such as Film4, BBC, etc.) are encouraged to pay submission fees for consideration.

I’m not sure how many short and feature-length films have been selected for screening this year, but some are also in competition! Examples include ‘Tuesday’ (2023) from last year’s festival, and Rose of Nevada (2025) for this year’s event in October.

Related links:

https://www.screendaily.com/news/mark-jenkins-rose-of-nevada-acquired-for-uk-ireland-cinema-release/5209329.article

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/british-film-institute_bfibacked-nationallottery-activity-7377001510565752832-fRg1
https://filmindustrywatch.org/bfi-london-film-festival-potential-conflicts-of-interest/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14682800

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt35674521

https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp

The post London Film Festival – conflicts of interest first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

By Alexa Morden

In 2024, Film Industry Watch published a piece titled “The Disappearance of TSG Casting and Talent Status: A Tale of Uncertainty and Loss”, which raised important questions about the sudden vanishing of an agency that left some actors and parents of child actors unpaid, confused, and misled. At the time, there was no clear answer as to where TSG Casting had gone or what had happened to the people behind it.

Now, after weeks of investigation, victim outreach, and independent reporting, I have that answer: TSG Casting didn’t disappear, it rebranded. But the allegations and reports of withheld pay and unpaid fees followed. What started as a solo investigation into a agency sparked a BBC primetime news feature across the UK, exposing the scale of exploitation behind the fraudulent ‘Lucy Harrison Casting.’ This piece digs deeper, uncovering how the same behaviour was able to persist and resurface under new names for years – despite having already been exposed.

TSG Casting and Talent Status Group became Lucy Harrison Casting (LHC) — an agency that, as of 2025, is at the centre of multiple allegations of financial misconduct, fraud, misrepresentation, and legal intimidation. It seems the same woman who ran TSG is operating LHC under the alias “Lucy Harrison” — a name not connected to any Companies House filings or legal ownership of any business. In fact, “Lucy Harrison Casting” and its CEO “Lucy Harrison” don’t appear anywhere online outside of their own website, Facebook, and Instagram page.

It appears that this fabricated persona was used to continue a pattern of financial abuse with a layer of plausible deniability. I discovered all of this because I recognised the red flags in comments on social media, having already been at the heart of unearthing other industry malpractice over the past 18 months. This included the “Bodhi Talent Scandal,” where a con-artist agent used actors’ work and fake cancer charity workshops to steal money before being exposed, filing for bankruptcy, and disappearing.

I’ve learned to pick up on patterns of bad practice and the emotional manipulation that usually comes with them. It’s not hard for a rogue agent to take advantage of the hierarchy that exists in this industry — a hierarchy that often leaves actors feeling that if they speak out or ask questions, even when warranted, they are “rocking the boat” or risking their careers.

Through my experiences helping creatives facing wrongdoing in the entertainment and performing arts industries, I’ve found that malpractice and exploitation are not only rife but also enabled by an unregulated system that leaves those affected isolated, unsupported, and often silenced. Reports, if made, aren’t taken seriously, or if they are, organisations claim there’s only so much they can do.

So, it seems to come down to those of us outside the traditional structures being forced to do what no one else is doing — collecting evidence, connecting the dots, offering support, and making noise in the hope that the silence finally breaks.

This isn’t a job I ever expected, or wanted, to be doing, but when the industry refuses to protect its most vulnerable, we have no choice but to protect each other. That’s why I’m writing this article: so you can be equipped not only with this information but also with a roadmap of red flags to look out for — so you don’t become unwittingly caught up in something like this.

Even now, with regulatory bodies investigating LHC, reports being made to the police and Action Fraud, and an eye-watering running total of money owed, industry organisations still feel they can’t let LHC clients left in the lurch know why their agent is under investigation — or warn them about the steps they likely need to be taking if they’ve booked work via this agency.

LHC is even claiming to some clients that they intend to continue working as an agency, and to rejoin casting directories, under a new name. With no public notice, no safeguarding guidance, and no duty of care being shown to those still potentially at risk, what’s to stop them?

I’m just an actor — an actor who, seven years ago, started a podcast and online platform that speaks honestly about the realities of working in this business, and the parts that no one else tends to spotlight. I never set out to become an investigator, whistleblower, or advocate. But when people come to you with nowhere else to turn, or no one else who will listen — you listen. And you act.

Because silence, in this industry, protects abusers and enables cycles of exploitation. Speaking out protects others. It creates ripples, it gets people talking, and it helps to break harmful patterns.

When I began my sleuthing into “Lucy Harrison Casting” and the “well-known scammer” behind the agency (as described in an article I found on this very website), I was prepared to find dodgy dealings, questionable pasts, and mishandled money. What I didn’t expect was to hear mothers of child actors as young as two telling me stories about financial fraud.

What began as a few familiar warning signs soon grew into an archive of testimonies, documents, emails, and inconsistencies that could not be ignored.

There is so much to share in regards to this case, and you can hear the most important findings in “Lucy Harrison Casting: A Cautionary Tale” on The 98% podcast. But in a nutshell: Lucy Harrison Casting is not who, or what, it claimed to be. It is the latest in a string of agencies used to exploit actors, conceal financial misconduct, and avoid accountability.

What started as a few comments in a Facebook group regarding late payments and invoicing confusion around this agency led me to discover that LHC was using a company called “Happy House Productions” to handle their finances. Actors were told to invoice HHP in order to be paid for jobs. This is not standard practice and seemed to blur the lines of accountability over who was actually responsible for paying actors — a tactic that benefitted the agency, not the talent, who were waiting months, and in some cases years, for money owed.

Payments ranged from small recall fees to huge commercial buyouts. Typically, an agent invoices the production company directly. The payment is then deposited into a client account — a protected fund that the agent has no legal right to dip into. Once the agreed commission is taken, the remaining fee is sent to the actor, along with a remittance — a document showing the original payment amount, what was deducted, and what the actor has received.

When actors started chasing Lucy Harrison Casting for payment from jobs they had worked on, LHC claimed they had nothing to do with the finances and directed them to Happy House Productions instead, insisting the two companies were totally separate and unrelated. This has since been proven false, considering the director of HHP appears to be married to Marianna — the woman who seems to be operating Lucy Harrison Casting, and the same person previously behind TSG Casting.

Now that Happy House Productions has entered liquidation and is under investigation by regulatory bodies, LHC has shifted the narrative — stating they’ve been suspended from casting platform Spotlight due to HHP’s financial situation. LHC even tried to blame me (through unfounded legal threats) for “them” going into liquidation, with no mention of HHP at all. So, were they connected to Happy House or not? It seemed they couldn’t keep their own story straight.

They were also clearly unaware that I had already discovered a charge filed in January 2025 showing that Happy House Productions had entered into a financing agreement with Apollo Business Finance — a company that provides invoice financing, where a business receives most of the value of an invoice upfront from a third party, who later collects the full amount from the client and keeps a percentage as their fee.

We can learn a lot from this situation, which is why in my podcast episode I break down my armchair investigation from start to finish — so you can learn how to do your own due diligence when working with an agent. I walk through the red flags I spotted on the LHC website, what I uncovered through Companies House, and how to access public records that anyone can find. I also explain some of the laws and legalities around payments — things every actor should know, but that no one ever really teaches us.

For example, in the UK it is unlawful for an agent to hold onto an actor’s money for more than ten days. If a production company sends your fee to your agent, and that agent fails to transfer it to you within ten days, that is illegal. There is no reason for you not to have that money right away.

It is also illegal for an agent to access or use any money held in the client account. That money belongs to you, the client — not the agent. So, if an agent ever says they’re having “cash flow problems,” or are unable to pay invoices themselves, that is not to be taken lightly. An agent should never have cash flow issues, because the money coming in should be going directly back out to the actors who did the work, minus the agent’s agreed commission.

When Lucy Harrison Casting launched, some actors were told they needed to pay for headshots through the agency in order to be represented or put forward for work. It is unlawful in the UK for an agent to require any sort of fee or paid-for service to join the agency. No agent should ever make you pay upfront for classes, workshops, headshots, coaching, or admin fees as a condition of signing with them.

Dozens of actors have now reported tens of thousands of pounds in unpaid earnings. Some have discovered discrepancies between what LHC invoiced production companies and what they were told they were paid. Children have had wages withheld or stolen entirely. Some clients had no idea they were owed buyouts or re-air fees that were paid to the agent months ago — until they contacted production directly.

When challenged, LHC and Marianna seemed to resort to gaslighting, manipulation, and, in some cases, intimidation. As well as not being transparent with clients and misleading industry professionals (including casting directors), LHC even sent emails to Equity and Spotlight about a former client, in what appeared to be an attempt to keep her quiet about her experience. I’ve seen these shocking emails myself, described by the actor as “slanderous.” Instead, this actor thankfully used her voice to warn others in a whistleblowing interview on The 98%.

I also received threats personally — emails that seemed to be AI-generated legal jargon. They were sent, I believe, to scare me into not releasing the information I had gathered after I offered them a right to reply for the podcast episode, which I had aimed to release in good faith and in the interest of the public. I was somewhat expecting this kind of threatening language and intimidation, having seen it used as a tactic to silence people I had helped in the past. (I have since learned that just because someone threatens you with legal action doesn’t mean they have a case.)

I’ve even heard from other actors, and parents of child actors, about agents elsewhere threatening legal action for things such as speaking directly to production, or sharing their opinion on social media. (Things you are well within your rights to do. And FYI — there can be no “defamation case” if what you are sharing is true, especially when you have evidence.)

From small suggestions and prompts to clients, we now have investigations by government bodies and yet another liquidated company to add to the list of this rogue agent’s operations. But this story is not yet over, and many involved feel not enough is being done. More victims are coming forward each week, and legal proceedings may follow. But the main worry is that the people behind this years-long scam will simply continue, as they have before, while those they have exploited are left to deal with financial instability, shame, regret, a loss of confidence, and a sense of distrust that may never fully leave them — without much assurance that something like this won’t happen again.

Hopefully we, as an industry, can learn from this. Not just in regard to specific individuals from rogue agencies, but by looking more critically at how the system itself is allowed to operate. There must be change: actual regulation around who can become an agent, stricter codes of conduct, more safeguarding in place when things go wrong, and more scrutiny regarding people with sole management of other people’s money.

In the meantime, we as actors can start to take our power back. As Karis, the former LHC client, said on The 98%:

“I understand my worth. I understand my value. I have enough self-respect and integrity, confidence and dignity, to know when I can stand up and shout loudly. I won’t be taken advantage of.”

Speaking out makes a difference. Don’t let fear keep you small. Anyone who makes you feel like speaking out against wrongdoing will “ruin your career” is someone who benefits from the fear that myth creates. A good agent wouldn’t want you to feel intimidated — they would want you to feel empowered.

This all started unravelling because a few actors began speaking online, and then joined together to figure things out and seek help. Those who take advantage of others in this industry have benefitted from a system built on silence and fear for too long. The best way to dismantle that system is to use your voice — for yourself, and for others. Because the more we shine a light on what certain people would rather keep in the dark, the fewer places they have left to hide.

If you have been affected by Lucy Harrison Casting or an agency acting similarly, you are not alone. In the episode description of The 98% podcast exposing LHC, you’ll find a link with clear, practical next steps to take if an agent is withholding payment you are entitled to.

Listen to The 98% podcast wherever you get podcasts.
Follow @the98percentpod.

The 98% is now a newly registered Community Interest Company, created to continue advocacy, education, and awareness for actors navigating an unregulated industry. If you, or someone you know, is interested in financially supporting a grassroots organisation with the aim of protecting performers, promoting transparency, and providing support — please get in touch: the98percentpod@gmail.com.

Timeline

OCT 2022 — TSG Casting applied to voluntarily dissolve the agency on Companies House (believed to be due to complaints surfacing regarding late payments).

DEC 2022 — Some TSG clients receive an email from “Lucy Harrison” (reportedly Marianna — the woman who ran TSG — posing under an alias) saying she was “leaving” TSG and “starting her own agency,” Lucy Harrison Casting. No formal announcement is made to clarify TSG’s closure.

EARLY 2023 — LHC becomes active. Actors are pressured into purchasing headshots directly from the agency to be considered for work — an unlawful and unethical practice. Marianna attends certain photography sessions but introduces herself as “Lucy.”

MARCH 2023 — People are told Lucy is off on bereavement leave after the “sudden death of her mother.”

EARLY FEB 2024 — The 98% helps expose the conman agent behind “Bodhi Talent” and raises awareness around the issue of rogue agencies and bad practice.

LATE FEB 2024 — The 98% receives the first email from a former LHC client detailing how actors were required to pay for headshots with “Lucy” in order to be represented and put forward for work. LHC is reported to UK actor union Equity, but the complaint is dismissed.

JAN 2025 — Happy House Productions (the company handling the finances of LHC and payments to actors) enters into a charge agreement with Apollo Finance, a third-party financing company. This indicates the agency had borrowed against future earnings while still owing money to actors.

EARLY MAY 2025 — Social media chatter opens a dialogue regarding late payments and questionable correspondence from LHC and Happy House Productions.

MID MAY 2025 — LHC clients receive a round-robin email saying Lucy is “off work with PTSD after a sudden bereavement.” People are told on the phone it is Lucy’s mother that has died (again). Maz and Allison (the “bookers” at LHC) claim they do not have access to the accounts to pay people, but that Lucy will return at the end of June.

LATE MAY 2025 — Alexa of The 98% begins her armchair investigation into LHC, TSG, and the woman behind the agencies, Marianna. Advice is posted on social media about how to recover money owed. LHC clients begin requesting remittances from production companies. Discrepancies are confirmed between what was invoiced and what actors received — if money was ever received at all.

JUNE 2025 — Legal threats and libellous emails are issued from LHC in an attempt to silence those speaking out. The 98% publishes the episode unveiling information gathered. Regulatory bodies confirm that LHC and Happy House are the same entity. Investigations begin, and LHC is suspended from UK casting directory Spotlight. Happy House goes into liquidation, but some LHC clients receive an email saying LHC intends to continue under a new name (the same pattern as with TSG) and that Lucy won’t be returning. LHC cites an “online smear campaign.”

JULY 2025 — As actors and parents of child actors chase payment and ask production companies for remittances, evidence emerges that all manner of money had been withheld or stolen.

AUGUST 2025 — EASI continues to investigate. Some actors prepare to take Marianna and Edward Lightfoot to small claims court. LHC attempts to continue operating under “Happy House Media.” The website and Facebook page for LHC remain live — until the BBC covers the story.

Alexa Morden is an award-winning actor and founder of The 98% CIC — a newly registered Community Interest Company dedicated to advocacy, education, and systemic change in the entertainment industry. Through her coaching and consultancy service Acting With Alexa, Alexa supports actors in their craft and careers with empowerment and confidence. Through her podcast, online platform, coaching, and investigative work, she champions transparency, accountability, and the changes needed for a safer, fairer industry.

@alexa_morden | @the98percentpod | @acting.with.alexa

Legal Disclaimer

This article is an investigative report written by the author and published by Film Industry Watch for the purposes of public interest, transparency, and education within the entertainment industry. The content of this article is based on information obtained from publicly available records, direct communications, and accounts provided by individuals. Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the material presented.

All statements contained herein are made in good faith and are based on evidence available at the time of publication. Any expressions of opinion are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of Film Industry Watch. Neither the author nor Film Industry Watch intends to harm the reputation of any individual or organisation. If subsequent evidence emerges that materially alters the facts as reported, corrections or clarifications may be issued.

Nothing in this article should be taken as legal advice. Readers are encouraged to seek independent legal or professional guidance where necessary. If you find any error in the article, please contact us immediately.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Film Industry Watch and the author disclaim all liability for any loss, damage, or inconvenience arising from reliance on the information contained in this publication.

The post Changing Names, Not Behaviour: Inside the LHC Scandal (The Disappearance of TSG Casting) first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Despite blockbuster productions like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Barbie, the UK’s film and TV sector faces mounting challenges. While the industry contributed over £17 billion in 2021 and employs around 300,000 people, independent studios and freelancers are struggling due to declining revenues, rising production costs, and shifting market dynamics.

Streaming services, falling ad revenues, and industry strikes have led to a 10% drop in commissioning and a £392 million revenue loss for UK production companies in 2023. Independent studios and freelancers are most at risk, with over 70% of small production companies facing closure by mid-2025.

Without urgent government support, the industry risks losing its status as a cultural powerhouse and key economic contributor.

The Film and TV Industry’s Economic Impact

The UK’s film and TV sector significantly boosts the economy, with domestic film production spending reaching £1.97 billion in 2022. Productions like Barbie alone injected £80 million and created 700 jobs.

A 2003 Communications Act helped UK TV exports grow seven-fold since 1998 by requiring broadcasters to source 25% of content from indie studios. As a result, UK studio space has doubled since 2019, attracting major investments from Sky, Warner Bros, and Netflix. By 2025, the UK will have the second-largest studio capacity after Hollywood.

The Rise of Streaming and Its Consequences

Streaming platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney+ have transformed the industry, with 59% of UK households now subscribed to Netflix. Streaming revenues doubled between 2018 and 2023, strengthening their dominance.

While streaming giants initially pumped money into UK productions, post-pandemic budget cuts and rising costs have reduced commissions, straining smaller studios. Disney alone cut £2.4 billion from its content budget in 2023. Meanwhile, the decline of traditional TV advertising has led to fewer commissions from UK broadcasters.

Challenges for UK Production Companies

The industry is battling rising costs, lower consumer demand, and global disruptions. The Writers Guild of America (WGA) and SAG-AFTRA strikes in 2023 led to a $5 billion loss in global revenues, affecting UK production firms reliant on Hollywood. Iconic studios like Euston Films, Label 1, and RDF have shut down, while indies are being squeezed by higher rents and energy costs.

The BBC is also struggling, cutting jobs and programming due to a government-imposed license fee freeze, forcing it to save £700 million annually. Meanwhile, private investors are hesitant to fund productions due to high borrowing costs.

Freelancers: The Hardest Hit

The crisis has severely impacted freelancers, who make up much of the industry’s workforce. A 2024 Bectu survey revealed that 68% of freelance screen workers are unemployed, and 75% are struggling with mental health issues due to financial uncertainty. A staggering 37% plan to leave the industry within five years, threatening its sustainability.

What Can Be Done?

The UK government must act to stabilize the industry. Proposed measures include:

1. Regulating Streaming Platforms – Adopting France’s model, which requires Netflix and Disney to reinvest 20-25% of domestic revenues into local productions.
2. Supporting Freelancers – Introducing an unemployment benefits scheme similar to France’s intermittent du spectacle, offering financial security for creative workers.
3. AI Regulation and Industry Protection – Ensuring responsible AI use in scriptwriting to prevent further disruption and protect creative jobs.

The UK’s film and TV sector stands at a crossroads. Without intervention, the industry could see lasting damage. With the right policies, however, it can reclaim its place as a global powerhouse for film and television.

SOURCE:

https://www.economicsobservatory.com/why-is-the-uk-film-and-television-sector-struggling

The post The UK Film and TV Industry: Challenges and Uncertain Future first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Following a hearing at Southwark Crown Court, Guy Flintham, 46, was today sentenced to 6 years for fraud.

On 19 February 2024, Mr Flintham pleaded guilty to fraud by false representation, following a prosecution brought by the FCA.

Between January 2016 and November 2021, Mr Flintham, based in Blackburn, Lancashire, defrauded more than 240 investors by making false representations to persuade them to invest approximately £19m in an investment scheme operated by him.

Among these representations was the claim that he was a successful trader: in reality he was not.

He lied about how the scheme was operated and the profits that he was making for his investors. He sent them falsified trading statements which showed healthy returns. Any money that was paid out to them as returns was money received from other investors – or their own investment paid back to them.

Only £1.14m was ever placed into trading accounts by Mr Flintham, with a further £10m paid back to investors as ‘profits’ or withdrawals of capital. Mr Flintham spent substantial sums on an extravagant lifestyle, including more than £1m on vehicles, personalised number plates, jewellery and designer goods.

In sentencing, His Honour Judge Milne, remarked:

‘The fraud [in this case] relates to money being taken from friends, from family. It relates to people you know, who you met… you took money from them having looked them in the eye and no doubt shaken their hand.

‘I read the victim impact statements: they are heartbreaking… over and over again I read of the devastation left in the wake of [the fraud you perpetrated].

‘People were devastated by what has happened; people’s lives have been irrevocably damaged.’ 

Steve Smart, Joint Executive Director of Enforcement & Market Oversight at the FCA, said:

‘Over a 5-year period, Mr Flintham deliberately lied and misled people to persuade them to invest in what amounted to little more than a Ponzi scheme.

‘The sentence imposed today demonstrates the seriousness of Mr Flintham’s offending and is a warning to others who choose to engage in fraud.’

The FCA has commenced confiscation proceedings against Mr Flintham, with a hearing listed for 18 July.

The FCA took proactive steps using their powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to secure available assets at an early stage in the investigation to make them available for confiscation.

A further count of carrying on regulated activity without authorisation or exemption, contrary to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, was ordered to lie on file.

Notes to editors

1. Guy Flintham’s date of birth is 7 July 1977.
2. Fraud by false representation is contrary to section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006. It is punishable by a fine and/or up to 10 years’ imprisonment.
3. Mr Flintham pleaded not guilty in respect of the offence of carrying on regulated activity without being authorised or exempt at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 22 January 2024.
4. Mr Flintham did not indicate a plea in respect of the fraud offence and the case was sent to Southwark Crown Court for a Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing which took place on 19 February 2024.
5. Find out more information about the FCA.

The post Guy Flintham sentenced to 6 years for fraud over unauthorised investment scheme first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Put simply, small and medium sized festivals, and those who work for them, grovel to the bigger festivals, and the people who run them, by selecting the same films as they do.

This approach is convenient for them for two reasons:

First, it means that they don’t have to spend time watching hundreds or thousands of films in order to create the lineup for their festivals.

Secondly, and more importantly, it signals to the “higher ups” in the ecosystem that they are willing to “play ball” with how the system is set-up. By doing so these individuals make themselves available for promotions within the greater system, from smaller festivals, to medium ones, and finally to the biggest festivals and other important companies or organizations.

Power flows from the top downwards:

The more “well connected” a filmmaker (or his producer) is, the wider the selection of his or her film will be within the broader ecosystem, not only because of personal relationships, but because smaller festivals want to be aligned with the prevailing “politics” and ongoing “day to day” business of running the industry’s “merry go round.”

By doing so, the programmers of the smaller festivals hope, and often succeed, in climbing up the industry’s ladder, getting closer and closer to the inner circle, where the real holders of power and distributors of resources are, namely the 3-4 biggest festivals, film funds, or large production or sales companies.

In other words: “power” and decision making is projected from the top of the pyramid downwards to the smaller players.

The smaller players, who want to align themselves with the system, must accept many of the films selected by the “big boys”, in order to become part of the “ecosystem” or they will simply stay out of it.

We refer to the industry as an “ecosystem”, and in a more cheeky way “the syndicate,” to point out the complexities of how power and influence flows through it, and to the fact that it is mostly a closed system, shut off to outsiders.

In reality, the European film industry is controlled by a small group of people who work across different festivals, sales companies, and other film-related organizations, who are all “following the steps” of the higher ups, for their personal benefit within the ecosystem’s employment market, and for the benefit of the smaller festivals that they the work for.

And, as we’ve noted above – it saves them from watching 10,000 submissions.

As a side note, the power in the industry is classically distributed – it is held and projected from a small circle outwards. The smallest circle includes a few dozen people, with each subsequent circle including more and more people, with decreasing amount of political importance.

As we’ve pointed out numerous times, this situation creates barriers for new entrants, limits creativity, and concentrates power and resources in the hands of few.

The image below is an example for how individuals often hold multiple roles in multiple organizations, concentering power, and slowly moving up, or inward, the ecosystem, towards the central holders of power and resources, who are sometimes referred in the industry as exactly what they are – “decision makers.”

If this type of analysis appeals to you, please consider contributing to the study of the film industry, by researching it towards a Master’s or Phd, and consider applying for financial support here.

Sign-up to our website to be informed when the final version of this article be published.

The post How Medium sized Festivals Grovel to the Big Boys, by Selecting the Same Films first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

New this month:

Paul Morrissey Ltd (Paul Morrissey as a director) 7 Frobisher St, London, England, SE10 9XB, official: Yann Allsopp

Be Part of It Productions Limited, trading under ‘Sneaky Experience'(Julia Benfield as a director) 8 Fusion Court, Aberford Road, Garforth, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS25 2GH official: YA

Brand Fuel Limited (Michael David Ball, Andrew Michael Mitchell and Susan Mary Sawyer as directors) Elgin Lodge, Eversley Road, London, SE19 3PY official: Carwym Donovan

City Girls Productions Ltd (Lee Beasley and Alan Latham as directors) Highfield Grange Studios, Bubwith, Selby, YO8 6DP official: Stefan Vassalos

Cypherpunk Studios (Hashim Alshubbar as a director) 64 Nile Street, London, N1 7SR official: Jessica Glaisher

Glow Arts Ltd (Lisa Carpendale as a director) Unit A 82 James Carter Road, Mildenhall, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk IP28 7DE official: Simon Nightingale

Looped Films Ltd (Sarmad Varraich as a director) 517 Mappin House, Winsley Street, London W1W 8HF official: Sean Kelly

NBL Film Limited (Adam Rolston, David Simon Braithwaite as directors) (Company Number 11730180) Suite A, 82 James Carter Road, Mildenhall, Suffolk IP28 7DE, formerly of c/o Twickenham Studios the Barons Twickenham TW1 2AW, officials: Paul Evans and Spencer MacDonald

New Gen Entertainment aka New Gen Cipher CIC (Daniel Lukokombo Nzena as a director) 18 Caro House 6 Watteau Square, Croydon, CR0 3FE official: SK

Orbit Staging (Carl Ryderas a director), Horton Grange Farm, Horton in Craven, Skipton, BD23 3JT official: Adam Flanders Pinch Media Film Ltd (Enrico Tessarin, Mirko Pincelli, Winnie Wongas directors) 1 Tollard House, 388 Kensington High Street, London, W14 8NL

Rebel Sister Films (Siobhan Cleary) 4 Marina House, George’s Quay, Waterford, Ireland official: SN
Saints and Savages Ltd (John Pavlakos formerly a director), 31 Holtwhite Avenue, London EN2 ORS (also trades under Purple Lion Pictures (dissolved), Saints Cinema Ltd, JPictures Ltd) official: JG

Serran Ltd (Randell Sergeant as a director), Studio A401, Almond Building, Biscuit Factory, 100 Drummond Road, London SE16 4DG official: SK

Spark Content formerly trading as GoTV Media Ltd, (Marc Hayward)
64 Newman Street, Fitzrovia, London, W1T 3EF

SOURCE:

The post Bectu list of alleged failures to properly observe obligations to members (UK) – December 2023 first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Maia Films, a company seemingly born from the ashes of the alleged notorious Spectrecom Films, carries a heavy inheritance. Whispers of late payments and unpaid invoices haunt both companies, with the specter of Andrew Greener, the individual who steered Spectrecom to financial ruin, looming large over both.

Freelancers, the lifeblood of the film industry, are often left holding the empty bag. Maia Films appears content to accept their work but hesitates, or outright refuses, to compensate them fairly. This pattern echoes the experiences of those who allegedly dealt with Spectrecom under Greener’s leadership, a trail of frustrated freelancers stretching back years.

Maia Films Disguises under Various Names

Adding to the concerns is the web of rebranding and deception. Spectrecom Studios still operates, disguised as Kennington Film Studios. This tactic raises serious questions about transparency and accountability. As one commenter aptly points out, such rebranding allows these companies to escape the consequences of their past and continue their exploitative practices under a new facade.

The human cost of these broken contracts is starkly evident in stories like Gil Kahn’s. Trapped in receivership due to late payments, he now awaits promised compensation, his financial security hanging by a thread. Kahn’s experience is just one example of the many who have fallen victim to this cycle of empty promises and financial manipulation.

However, freelancers shouldn’t face this alone. Sharing experiences and raising awareness is crucial to protect vulnerable workers and hold companies accountable. Jonathan Paul Green’s comment serves as a warning to others considering work with Maia Films, while Mark Watson’s extensive list of victims underscores the gravity of the situation.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Maia Films: A Cloak Covering Spectrecom Films first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The festival, a highlight of the UK’s cultural scene, has historically been a platform for a diverse range of international films. In its 2023 edition, it boasted an impressive 90% occupancy rate across its screenings and saw a significant number of new attendees, indicating its ongoing popularity and influence. However, beneath the surface of these successes lie questions about the integrity of its selection process and the broader implications for the UK film industry.

A closer look at the festival’s lineup reveals a substantial representation of BFI-backed films. For instance, the 2021 festival featured 19 films developed and produced with support from the BFI Film Fund, such as “Mothering Sunday,” “The Souvenir: Part II,” “Ali & Ava,” and many others:

• Mothering Sunday (BFI Patron’s Gala)
• The Souvenir: Part II (The Londoner Gala)
• Ali & Ava (The Mayor of London’s Special Presentation)
• Benediction (Special Presentation)
• The Phantom of the Open (Special Presentation In association with Empire)
• True Things (Official Competition)
• The Feast (Gwledd) (First Feature Competition)
• Nascondo (Hide and Seek) (Documentary Competition)
• ear for eye (Debate)
• Earwig (Dare)
• The Wolf Suit (Journey)
• The Real Charlie Chaplin (Create)
• Laika (Expanded)
• Child of Polycritus (What Are You looking at?)
• Diseased & Disorderly (What Are You Looking At?)
• Egúngún (Masquerade) (My Identity, No Crisis)
• Hanging On (Find Me Here)
• Know the Grass (Weird & Wonderful World)
• Precious Hair & Beauty (Your UK or Mine?)

This support comes from the National Lottery, which the BFI utilizes to fund the development and production of feature fiction films, documentaries, and short films. While the support is lauded for promoting bold and original storytellers, it also raises questions about whether the BFI’s financial involvement influences the festival’s film selection process.

The concern is not just about the number of BFI-backed films in the festival but also about the implications this has for independent filmmakers. With limited spots available and a significant portion potentially going to BFI-supported films, independent artists may find it increasingly difficult to gain the visibility and recognition such festivals provide. This situation can create a closed circle where BFI-supported films are more likely to be showcased, thereby reinforcing the dominance of certain voices and narratives within the UK’s film landscape.

Critics argue that for the festival to maintain its integrity and reputation as a fair and inclusive platform, it must implement more transparent and equitable selection criteria. This includes clearly defining and separating the roles and influence of the BFI in both funding films and selecting them for the festival. Furthermore, there’s a call for more stringent guidelines to ensure that all films, regardless of their funding source, compete on a level playing field.

The BFI London Film Festival’s situation reflects a broader conversation about the balance between supporting national cinema and maintaining a fair competitive environment for all filmmakers. As the festival looks to the future, it must address these concerns head-on to preserve its esteemed place in the international film community and continue to be a beacon for diverse and innovative storytelling​. Read more about this issue in our case study about the Cannes Film Festival and its relationship with Canal+.

We invite UK based filmmakers to contact us with more information about their local film industry. Our organization is dedicated to unveiling the true decision-making processes and power dynamics within the film industry. The chart below provides a comprehensive summary of these elements. Our goal is to democratize access and provide talented, emerging young filmmakers with the opportunities they rightfully deserve to succeed in the industry.

SOURCES:

1. https://www.screendaily.com/news/bfi-london-film-festival-records-highest-attendance-in-five-years-as-gassed-up-takes-top-audience-award/5176855.article
2. https://www.bfi.org.uk/bfi-backed-films-bfi-london-film-festival-2021

The post London Film Festival Conflicts of Interest, BFI as a Monopoly first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The agency’s distributed short films have consistently garnered awards and cash prizes at the festival. Notably, in 2022, the Square Eyes film “Handbook” won the prestigious Bill Douglas Award for International Short Film, which includes a £1,000 cash prize. Depending on the agreement with the film’s producer, this prize money may have been shared with the distribution company. Pavel Mozhar, the director of “Handbook,” then joined the festival jury in 2023. That year, the Bill Douglas Award, along with its £1,000 cash prize, went to “45th Parallel,” another film distributed by Square Eyes. Additionally, at the 2022 festival, the jury’s Special Mention, a secondary prize, was awarded to “Sierra,” also a film from the agency’s portfolio.

In in a different but related case, in 2022, Mandy Fleifel, a filmmaker whose work is represented by Square Eyes Sales, served on the jury at Vienna Shorts. During this event, the film “And Then They Burn the Sea” by Majid Al-Remaihi, also represented by Square Eyes Sales, received an award. This situation presents a potential conflict of interest, as a juror was affiliated with the same agency that represents one of the award-winning films. This overlap might raise questions about the impartiality of the judging process, since a juror had a professional connection to one of the awarded filmmakers. [1,2,3,4]

These situations further exemplifies the entrenched issue of nepotism within the film industry. It highlights a scenario where individuals hold multiple influential roles, leading to a consolidation of power. This concentration of authority in the hands of a few creates significant barriers for newcomers, especially those lacking industry connections, making it exceedingly difficult for them to gain entry into the industry.

UPDATE 11/1/2024: Within less than a month of publishing this report, an announcement on social media indicated that Sanne Jehoul will part ways with Square Eyes. We extend our best wishes and good luck to her in her future endeavors.

For further reading: Nepotism at TIFF, Wim Vanacker, Ben Vandendaele – NISI MASA conflicts of interests, Revolving doors at the Israeli film funds, Conflict of Interest Taints 2019 Cannes Palme d’Or Award, Dominique Welinski

SOURCES:

https://squareeyesfilm.com/shorts-categories/narrative-2022/

https://squareeyesfilm.com/shorts-categories/documentary-2022/

https://www.screen.scot/news/2021/02/glasgow-short-film-festival-returns-for-its-14th-edition

https://glasgowshort.org/shows/flores-del-otro-patio/

https://glasgowshort.org/shows/the-fruit-tree/

https://glasgowshort.org/shows/neighbour-abdi/

https://glasgowshort.org/shows/abyss/

https://glasgowshort.org/latest/news/announcing-the-gsff22-award-winners/

https://glasgowshort.org/latest/news/gsff23-award-winners/

[1] https://squareeyesfilm.com/shorts/3logicalexits/

[2] https://www.viennashorts.com/en/news/das-sind-unsere-juries

[3] https://www.viennashorts.com/en/festival/festival-archive/2022

[4] https://squareeyesfilm.com/shorts/andthentheyburnthesea/

The post Dual Role as Glasgow Short Film Festival Programmer & at a Short Films Distribution Company first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The National Youth Film Academy, a name that once inspired confidence in film and media education, now faces serious allegations. A mentor has come forward with claims of unpaid wages and a lack of responsiveness from the leadership. This comprehensive exploration delves into these allegations, offering a detailed account of the mentor’s experiences and their potential impact on the industry’s professional standards.

The Mentor’s Journey: High Hopes to Alleged Disappointment

In 2018, a mentor with a strong background in teaching and low-budget films was recommended to the National Youth Film Academy. They joined the SetReady program, eager to bring a more organized approach to training. Despite early concerns about the CEO’s alleged lack of educational expertise, the mentor was committed to helping the young people who trusted the organization.

Over time, the mentor’s role expanded to developing and delivering a core skills program. They worked diligently, guiding young producers in creating short films, and were proud of the students’ achievements in completing multiple film projects. However, the mentor alleges a troubling turn of events. According to them, the academy failed to manage its finances effectively, leading to the alleged loss of 2022 members’ money and unfulfilled promises for crowdfunding campaigns. This reportedly resulted in many actors and industry mentors not receiving their due payments.

A Widespread Issue: Other Professionals’ Alleged Experiences

This situation, the mentor claims, isn’t unique to them. They suggest that other professionals associated with the academy have faced similar issues of delayed or non-payments. This pattern, if true, hints at a deeper problem within the academy’s financial management, undermining its credibility and the trust of its staff and partners.

The mentor describes their attempts to reach out to the academy’s CEO, only to be allegedly met with silence. Adding to their frustration, they claim they were advised against going public with their concerns, with the alleged implication that speaking out could jeopardize their chance of receiving any future payments. This situation presents a significant ethical dilemma and highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in educational institutions.

The mentor also expresses their disappointment and alleges that the academy’s actions may border on illegal activities such as operating a Ponzi scheme or trading while insolvent. They mention that the academy continued recruiting for new programs despite allegedly being unable to pay existing debts, which raises questions about its operational ethics.

In a surprising turn, the mentor alleges that they were offered the opportunity to take over the Set Ready program by the academy’s CEO. This offer came at a time when the academy was still planning future programs despite the outstanding financial issues. The mentor declined this offer, choosing to distance themselves from the organization.

No Resolution in Sight: The Ongoing Struggle for Payment

Despite promises of installment payments, the mentor claims they only received partial payments and are still owed a significant amount. They describe this as a frustrating and disheartening experience, one that has left them and others in a challenging financial situation.

The mentor’s decision to share their story is a brave one, considering the alleged risk of losing their payment. This decision underscores the need for stronger protections and support systems for educators and mentors in the film industry. It’s not just about getting paid; it’s about ensuring respect and fairness for those who dedicate their time and expertise.

Reflecting on Ethics and Accountability

The comprehensive allegations against the National Youth Film Academy paint a concerning picture of the challenges faced by educators and mentors in the film and media sectors. While these remain allegations, they emphasize the necessity of ethical business practices and the fair treatment of professionals. The mentor’s experience calls for a serious reflection on practices in the film and media education sector to ensure fairness, transparency, and respect for all its members.

In conclusion, the mentor’s detailed account of unpaid wages and unresponsive management at the National Youth Film Academy highlights significant concerns. While these allegations have yet to be proven, they demand attention and action to ensure that educational institutions uphold their responsibilities and maintain the trust of their staff, students, and the wider film community.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Unpaid Wages at The National Youth Film Academy: A Mentor’s In-Depth Account first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The Perils of Unfulfilled Payments

Mastermind Productions, a relatively small player in the film industry, has allegedly garnered some negative attention for its handling of payments to freelancers. Several individuals have shared their experiences of working with the company and facing difficulties receiving compensation. These incidents highlight the broader issue of late or unpaid invoices that plague the freelance film community.

In an industry where many professionals rely on project-based work, timely payment is crucial for financial stability. Late or unpaid invoices can cause significant hardships for freelancers who depend on these earnings to cover their living expenses, bills, and other financial commitments. It is allegedly essential for freelancers to be aware of their rights and take proactive steps to protect themselves from potential payment issues. By establishing clear payment terms, communicating effectively with clients, and seeking legal recourse when necessary, freelancers can navigate the challenges of the industry and ensure they receive fair compensation for their work.

A Shared Experience

One freelancer, who preferred to remain anonymous, shared their experience with Mastermind Productions and their project, ‘Snatching Sanity,’ which was filmed in London. The freelancer described the challenges they encountered when trying to secure payment for their work on the project. They emphasized the importance of freelancers receiving their pay in advance, especially when dealing with unfamiliar or potentially unreliable production companies.

Another individual echoed these sentiments, reinforcing the idea that timely payment is crucial when collaborating with production companies like Mastermind Productions. They expressed disappointment at being mistreated and blamed when things went awry on set, all while not receiving the compensation they were promised.

Navigating Payment Challenges

For freelancers in the film industry, navigating payment challenges is an unfortunate but often necessary aspect of the job. Here are some tips for mitigating such issues:

Get It in Writing: Whenever you accept a freelance project, ensure that the terms of your agreement, including payment details, are documented in writing. A clear contract can be a reference point if payment disputes arise.

Request Advance Payment: If you have concerns about a production company’s reliability, consider negotiating for an advance payment or milestone payments throughout the project. This can provide you with some financial security.

Research the Company: Before accepting a project, research the production company and its reputation. Online forums, reviews, and social media can be valuable resources for gaining insights into their track record.

Network with Peers: Connect with other freelancers in the industry to share information about production companies and their payment practices. This community support can help you make informed decisions.

The Bigger Picture

While unfortunate experiences with production companies like Mastermind Productions are disheartening, they shed light on the broader issue of payment challenges in the film industry. Freelancers, the lifeblood of many film projects, deserve to be treated fairly and professionally.

By sharing their stories and offering guidance on how to navigate these challenges, freelancers can empower one another to make informed decisions, protect their interests, and continue pursuing their passion for film while avoiding the pitfalls of unscrupulous production companies. The film industry thrives when all its participants are respected and compensated for their hard work and creativity.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Navigating Payment Challenges: Freelancing in the Film Industry first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Cautionary note to anyone considering working with Callan Allen.

Several individuals, including myself, have worked on his previous film ‘Clued Up’, and over the past several months, he has engaged in dishonest behavior by lying, refusing, and ignoring payment for invoices. I have been forced to involve High Court enforcement to chase down payment, and even then, he has been reluctant to pay on time.

Furthermore, Callan Allen has now allegedly started filming a new project as per his Twitter feed, and I want to alert others to his dishonest tendencies. It’s important to be aware of the risks before considering any professional engagement with him.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Callan Allen first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Prospect (Bectu) first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The affected individuals allegedly reported the issue to the university where they found the job posting, and the company’s profile has since been taken down. Despite the initially attractive pay offered by INJKT Social Group, the individual advises others to avoid working for them to avoid similar troubles. According to an update, as their invoices were approaching their due dates, they received an email from the company imposing fines for late deliveries and unfinished shows. The individual finds these fines inexplicable and outrageous, as they now apparently owe around £1,000,000, with due dates varying for different individuals, including their own, which is due in just three days. The situation has left them questioning the company’s credibility and sanity.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post INJKT Social Group first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Neil Garrett, the Executive Producer at OMG Media, was confronted by Bea about the delay in payment for her invoice after 40 days. Bea was surprised and frustrated by the delay and allegedly asked Neil for an explanation. In response, Neil showed a lack of professionalism, stating, “Bea, we actually have 60 days to pay you. So I suggest you back off or I will ensure you don’t get paid until every one of those 60 days is up.” Bea was taken aback by Neil’s harsh response and was disappointed with his unprofessional behavior.

But that wasn’t the only issue Bea had with Neil. On the shoot day, Neil allegedly disappeared for six hours, leaving the crew without any production support, water, snacks, or anything else they needed. The absence was later revealed to be due to Neil attending his kids’ football game. Bea found Neil’s behavior to be unprofessional and irresponsible, leaving the crew in a difficult situation during the shoot.

Bea’s experience with Neil and OMG Media left her dissatisfied with their lack of professionalism and alleged failure to pay invoices on time. She warns others to avoid working with OMG Media if they value timely payments and professional behavior in their business partners.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post OMG Media first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

As filming commenced, the person in question allegedly noticed some unprofessional practices on set that they, as a filmmaker themselves, would never do. However, they continued to work diligently, believing that the show must go on.

After completing their work on set, the person in question faced issues with getting paid for their services. One of the directors/producers, Deren Stevens, who was one of the two people in charge of the production, ignored their attempts to contact him regarding their invoice. They were allegedly ignored, lied to, and made to wait.

Frustrated, the person in question then reached out to the other partner in charge, who allegedly eventually paid them for their work in a respectful manner. However, upon conducting further research, the person in question discovered that Deren Stevens had a media company that was supposed to be dissolved years ago, and he was possibly avoiding taxes by running an unregistered company. Moreover, the person in question found that Deren Stevens had no job title or official role with the production company they worked for, and he had signed contracts that were void as his name was not part of the company at the time of their contract being signed.

The person in question reflects that they are glad they had the opportunity to check out Deren Stevens and highlight the importance of conducting thorough research in the entertainment business. They urge others to verify websites, links, and registration details with the company’s house to avoid being taken advantage of by unscrupulous individuals.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Deren Stevens first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

A filmmaker whose film was distributed by Mark Thomas of Ballpark Films in the UK, allegedly based in Sheffield, had a negative experience with the distributor. In 2013, the distributor had promised to distribute the film, sell DVDs, and license it to TV, but the he allegedly never received any sales reports or payments. Instead, they only received rude emails from the distributor.

the filmmaker fortunately, was able to regain the rights to their film and has allegedly decided to release it with a new distribution company. However, they caution others to avoid dealing with Mark Thomas and Ballpark Films due to their unprofessional behavior and failure to provide proper sales reports and payments.

The filmmaker felt frustrated and disappointed by the lack of transparency and professionalism displayed by the distributor. They urge other filmmakers to be cautious when entering into distribution agreements and to thoroughly research and vet potential distributors to avoid falling victim to financial scams in the entertainment industry. The filmmaker is determined to move forward with a new distribution company and ensure that their film is properly promoted and monetized.

Feedback and Corrections
If you are a person mentioned in this article and would like to discuss its contents or add information, please feel free to contact us.

The post Ballpark Films first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

However, as the shooting date approached, the director discovered that there were no signed contracts with investors, despite what had been allegedly promised. Shocked and disappointed, the director pulled out of the project, and many of the crew members followed suit, realizing that the film’s funding was not secure.

Months passed, and some crew members, including the storyteller, had still not been paid for their work in the pre-production phase of the film. The production company, Genlock Films Limited, located at Rays House, North Circular Road, NW10 7XP, had failed to fulfill their financial obligations to the crew, leaving them out of pocket and feeling deceived.

The situation was frustrating and disheartening, as the crew had invested their time and efforts into the project based on the assurance of signed contracts with investors. It was allegedly a clear case of cast and crew non-payment, where promises were made but not fulfilled, resulting in financial hardship and wasted time for those involved.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Genlock  Films  Limited first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Sheerluxe first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Photographer X is now allegedly left wondering if they have any legal recourse against Luigi Masi and DSP Cosmetics LTD, a company that seems to constantly change its name and address but continues to use their work without authorization.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Luigi Masi first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

A cautionary tale about Charlie Southall and DragonFly.co.uk has emerged due to their alleged failure to pay invoices. After a year of attempts to contact them, legal action had to be taken in the form of a Small Claims Court letter before they allegedly finally responded. Even then, their behavior was highly unprofessional and included swearing and threats via email, in an attempt to intimidate the claimant. Only once a court date was set did they offer an out-of-court settlement for the full amount owed, despite claiming they ‘didn’t know who I was’. It’s important to exercise caution when dealing with such individuals and companies and to take legal action if necessary to secure payment for services rendered.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post DragonFly.co.uk first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The history of a production company called Floodlight Broadcasting Network has emerged, shedding light on the behind-the-scenes drama of one of its failed projects. In a bid to recruit a new team for her series, the company’s owner, Evelyn Olamere Obahor, promised to pay for their work, despite the company having been liquidated and declared bankrupt two years prior. After convincing crew members to rent equipment worth over £3000 per day, the shoot was allegedly disorganized, with no catering, unit base, or coffee table. Despite repeated promises to pay the crew, they were allegedly never compensated for their work, and many are still chasing their money through legal channels.

Evelyn has since claimed that her investor pulled out and that she does not have the money to pay her crew. However, she continued to make promises and even allegedly asked actors to return “updated contracts” for the project, despite owing over 20 people money. Her behavior has caused outrage among crew members who had counted on the job for their livelihoods.

This situation serves as a stark reminder that when an opportunity seems too good to be true, it probably is. Young filmmakers and freelancers must be cautious of those looking to take advantage of their talent and dedication. Despite the hardship faced by those involved, this history is a valuable lesson for anyone starting out in the industry.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Floodlight Broadcasting Network first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

A couple of years ago, the person in question worked on a production called “Driving Force.” However, despite their contribution to the project, they still haven’t allegedly received payment for their work. As time went by, the person in question became aware that there may be others who have experienced similar issues with alleged Rosemary Reed or POWtv, the production company behind “Driving Force.”

The person in question, eager to connect with others who may have faced unpaid payment issues, reached out to anyone else who had worked on the project. They expressed their willingness to speak with others who had not been paid, hoping to find solidarity and support in their shared experiences.

With a sense of determination, the person in question awaited responses, hoping to connect with others who could relate to their situation. Their story was one of seeking justice and fairness for themselves and others who had faced similar challenges in their dealings with alleged Rosemary Reed or POWtv. They were resolute in their pursuit of the resolution, and eager to speak with anyone who could provide more information or support.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post POWtv first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The person in question, an individual who had alleged dealings with a company called Film Volt, and a person named Mark Busby, were experiencing intense moments due to their recent interactions with this organization. They found that Film Volt and Mark Busby had allegedly breached significant agreements and that these agreements were made in the name of nonexistent companies.

The person in question had encountered issues with contracts and realized that Film Volt and Mark Busby had allegedly misled them by claiming to represent companies that did not actually exist. This raised concerns about the legitimacy and credibility of Film Volt and Mark Busby’s operations.

Feeling frustrated and misled, the person in question sought to share their experience and warned others about their dealings with Film Volt and Mark Busby. They hoped to raise awareness about the lack of proper contracts and non-payment issues in the entertainment industry and encourage others to be cautious when dealing with similar organizations. The person in question was determined to take appropriate action to address the breaches in agreements and seek a resolution for the situation they were facing.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Film Volt first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The Art Director politely pushed back, explaining that it was uncommon for crew members to be personally charged for damages, especially considering the small amount of £100, which was only an eighth of their total fee. However, Stormlight Media was allegedly rude and gaslighted the Art Director, claiming they had already gone out of their way to accommodate them.

Despite being able to cover the cost with the art department budget, the Art Director was unhappy with the way Stormlight Media handled the situation. They have yet to receive a satisfactory response from the production company and are still waiting to be paid for their work. This serves as a cautionary reminder to be wary of how production companies handle damages and fees, and to ensure that clear communication and fair treatment are prioritized in any work agreement.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Stormlight Media first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Jay Alpha, also known as J Alpha Productions or Alpha Red, is allegedly under scrutiny by talent agents for potential scam or hoax activities. One client of mine allegedly applied for a job with them after seeing an Instagram post before signing with me as their talent agent. Since then, we have noticed several red flags in their dealings with my client:

• The role offered to my client was initially “Elijah”, but with no notice, it was changed to “Witch”, and then to “Jack” in email communication. My client did not audition for any of these roles.
• My client has not met any of the crew or production team, despite being offered a role.
• He was told he should have received emails, but hasn’t received any information about the production.
• The contract provided had no day rate, only an episodic rate.
• The production was initially presented as a film but was later claimed to be a TV series.
• There is no address or contact information on the contract.
• There are no contracted or production dates specified, and it doesn’t mention the year it started, only assumed to be 2022.
• There is no mention of travel costs, daily fees for ADR (Automated Dialog Replacement), photography, etc. being paid.
• There is no mention of work permit costs being covered by the production.
• There is no mention of merchandise, royalties, etc.
• The TV series is allegedly claimed to be called “Alpha Red” and directed by David Von Ancken, known for directing Vampire Diaries. However, I have contacted David Von Ancken’s agent who confirmed he is not directing this series.

These discrepancies and misleading information raise suspicions about Jay Alpha, J Alpha Productions, or Alpha Red and their credibility. Talent agents and actors need to be cautious and thoroughly investigate any job opportunities offered by them.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Stormlight Media first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Maia Films is allegedly run by Andrew Greener, who also ran Spectrecom Films. Unfortunately, Greener has developed an alleged reputation for being a liability in the industry, leaving many unpaid and late-paid workers in his trial over the years. For this reason, it’s recommended that you avoid any company with his name attached.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Maia Films first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

The Art Director allegedly politely pushed back, explaining that it was uncommon for crew members to be personally charged for damages, especially considering the small amount of £100, which was only an eighth of their total fee. However, Stormlight Media was allegedly rude and gaslighted the Art Director, claiming they had already gone out of their way to accommodate them.

Despite being able to cover the cost with the art department budget, the Art Director was unhappy with the way Stormlight Media handled the situation. They have yet to receive a satisfactory response from the production company and are still waiting to be paid for their work. This serves as a cautionary reminder to be wary of how production companies handle damages and fees, and to ensure that clear communication and fair treatment are prioritized in any work agreement.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Stormlight Media first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post RK Switch first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Evelyn Olamere Obahor, a filmmaker, allegedly approached the person in question to help recruit for her new series called CHANNEL 52 after her DOP, Sound operator, and director dropped out. Desperate for some money before going back to school, the person in question agreed to help Evelyn. However, they soon discovered that Evelyn’s company, FLOODLIGHT BROADCASTING NETWORK, had been allegedly liquidated and declared bankrupt over two years ago.

Despite the financial concerns, the person in question proceeded with the project. However, on the shoot day, they realized that nothing was organized, with no catering, unit base, or coffee table. Moreover, Evelyn had allegedly rented out equipment worth over £3000 per day, promising to reimburse the rental costs, but failed to do so. The entire crew, including the person in question, was not paid, and their repeated follow-ups were met with excuses and promises of payment.

Evelyn allegedly claimed that her investor had pulled out and stopped responding to her calls. She kept changing her story and failed to provide a clear explanation. She even continued to promise actors that shooting would happen, despite owing money to over 20 people. The crew members were left in the dark, and Evelyn asked them to return “updated contracts,” further raising suspicions about her intentions.

Meanwhile, Evelyn continued to post on social media as if nothing was wrong, which frustrated the crew and tarnished her reputation as a producer. The person in question realized that they had been taken advantage of and learned a valuable lesson about being cautious with seemingly lucrative opportunities that sound too good to be true.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Floodlight Broadcasting Network first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

If you are approached by Grofilm or Martin Grof, be wary of potential non-payment for services rendered. One individual reported not being paid for their work as a Production Designer on a low-budget sci-fi feature film, despite doing prep work for the project for several weeks. After the director and producer began to send allegedly rude and controlling messages, the Production Manager encouraged the individual to continue with the project. 

However, when the individual sent their invoice for the agreed-upon amount of £1000, the director and producer attempted to renegotiate and only allegedly offered to pay £350. After allegedly blocking the individual on WhatsApp, it is believed that the director and producer has no intention of paying the individual or other members of the Art Department who worked on the project. The previous Production Designer and Assistant Director reportedly left the project due to the same conduct. If you are approached by Grofilm or Martin Grof, be cautious and take steps to ensure that you are paid for your work.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Grofilm first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

There is an alleged warning about Castle Valley Films / Golden Crab Productions, owned by Karim Prince Tshibangu and Alsan Parvez, based in Pinewood. They are currently working on a film called Shepherd and have been allegedly ignoring all crew members who are owed money, totaling around 50 people. This issue has been reported to BECTU and Equity, but the production company has been allegedly unresponsive, despite some invoices being almost 60 days old.

Some crew members have been told that the production company is still awaiting certain invoices, and they intend to pay all invoices at once. However, it is not fair for late invoices to affect the payment of 50 people who are already owed money. It allegedly appears that Castle Valley Films / Golden Crab Productions may be attempting to avoid paying their crew members, and caution is advised for anyone considering working with them.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Castle Valley Films / Golden Crab Productions first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Frustrated with the delay, the freelancer reached out to Ralle/Moov to inquire about the payment issue. Ralle/Moov had allegedly informed the freelancer that they were experiencing cash flow issues and would be paying the outstanding amount in three installments. The first two installments had been received, but the final installment was due on Monday, and so far, no further action had been taken to pay the remaining balance in full.

The freelancer had also spoken to the production company that had hired Ralle/Moov for the job and confirmed that they had paid all suppliers in full, as per their word. This led the freelancer to trust the production company’s statement. However, upon further investigation, the freelancer found out that other crew members who were also employed by Ralle/Moov had not been paid either, as per their last check a few weeks ago. This raised concerns about Ralle/Moov’s financial situation and their ability to fulfill their payment commitments.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Ralle/Moov Group first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Mohan Nadaar first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Defected and The Remedy Project first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Speed Records first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Alian Forester first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

In the story, the liquidation of Panto Live and Going Live TV is allegedly highlighted by someone who wants to bring attention to the situation. According to this person, several crew members have not been paid, and some are allegedly owed large amounts that do not even cover the costs of hired equipment. The story revolves around the unpaid crew members and the liquidation of the companies, without mentioning any specific individual.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Panto Live and Going Live TV first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Peter Wilson, the notorious chancer, has been running a scam for years, leaving a trail of debt behind him. He has now allegedly disappeared, leaving many creditors out of pocket and searching for him.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Nouveau Media first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Naio Nails first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Leon Butler first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Going Live TV first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Please visit our Types of Scams page to familiarize yourself with different types of scams our members have allegedly encountered.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Jay Nidharshana first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

In the story, a filmmaker named Stephen Patrick Kenny, who runs alleged Hood Up Films in Ireland is being highlighted by someone who wants to make people aware of his alleged actions. According to this person, Kenny allegedly engaged several filmmakers, including themselves, from around the world to create short horror films for a feature-length anthology called ‘Creepy Stories for the Dark’ with the promise of distribution. However, due to reasons including the impact of COVID-19 on the film industry, Kenny is now unwilling to spend money on getting the anthology distributed and has gone back on his word, causing many filmmakers to withdraw their films. The person also claims that Kenny has not returned the hard drives containing the films and BTS videos that were sent to him and that he has taken himself off social media and is not responding to emails. Furthermore, the person alleges that Kenny has also failed to return a hard drive from a previous project, which he claimed was posted back but never arrived. The person believes that Kenny’s actions constitute alleged theft and advises others to be wary of him and Hood Up Films. The most appropriate category for this story would be “Theft,” as it involves allegations of the property being taken and not returned by Stephen Patrick Kenny and Hood Up Films. This information is updated as of September 21, 2022.

If anyone of the people involved has more updated information, please let us know. Always remember to make your own research and confirm the facts on your own.

Feedback and Corrections
If you are a person mentioned in this article and would like to discuss its contents or add information, please feel free to contact us.

The post Hood Up Films first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Studio Cypherpunk first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

In an update on November 15, 2022, the person reports that they have successfully taken Smith to court and obtained a County Court Judgment (CCJ) against him. However, they state that Smith has yet to make any payment, and they have learned that he has three other CCJs against him, one for £11,000 and two for £1,000 or more. The person believes that Smith is allegedly scamming people and wonders if it’s worth pursuing further legal action. They are open to receiving advice on the matter.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Andrew Smith first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post Kennington Creative Group first appeared on Film Industry Watch.

Feedback and Corrections
If you believe your or company’s name was listed on this website unjustly, please CONTACT US.

The post The National Youth Film Academy. first appeared on Film Industry Watch.