TiPsters -

For eighteen extraordinary years, the TiPsters transformed independent filmmaking into an art form of brilliant efficiency and creative genius. The numbers tell only part of the story: 876 dramas (176 features, 700 shorts), over 6,000 festival entries, and more than 500 international awards. But the real magic? A new film every single week, each one a testament to creativity triumphing over constraints.I had the privilege of reading every script, meeting every director and producer—2,400 visionaries who passed through our rigorous approval system. Each one brought something unique, something special. These weren't just low-budget productions; they were masterclasses in creative problem-solving, proving that limitation breeds innovation. Our TiPsters didn't just make films; they reinvented the art of possibility.No one got rich in dollars, but we all became wealthy in ways that matter more: in experience, in wisdom, in the art of making something extraordinary from nearly nothing. Every name in my contact list represents a story of determination, a moment of breakthrough, a triumph of imagination over resources.When I make that blockbuster—and it's always a when, never an if—every TiPster will be there at the premiere. Because success isn't just about the end result; it's about the brilliant minds who taught me that creativity, when fueled by passion, knows no bounds. Not a day passes without some TiPster moment making me smile. We didn't just make films; we created a legacy of brilliant storytelling, proving that when you pour your heart into your creative work, success follows in ways you never imagined. It was demanding, yes, but it was also pure magic—the kind that only happens when extraordinary people dare to dream beyond their resources.To every TiPster: you didn't just make films, you redefined what's possible in independent cinema. And that brilliance? It still lights the way forward.

Why does it feel like 20 years ago when the Sars crisis closed down the film industry. Had it not been for TiP there would have been zero productions going on. TiP productions exceeded the entire production listings on the board. At the time, to save money it was suggested to close down the program but Brian Topp and the council who hired me to create and run the program thought otherwise. Now I'm hearing there is a dearth of Canadian productions, licensing fees are half, and there's no choice for some indie producers but to go non-union. I don't know what my former colleagues are up to, however, there is this perception that the current low-budget program which followed TiP does not allow seasoned producers to access the program. I find this interesting that the Unions want exclusivity of Telefilm funding, low budget motion picture projects are only available to emerging producers, and the licensing is now reduced by half. I'm not making this up this is what I was told. The TiP program was initially set up to compete against low-budget non-union productions and there were no restrictions with respect how many times you employed the program. Of course, few repeat producers applied because they wanted to produce bigger projects with higher budgets. Now the license fees are so low that Union performers cannot participate in low budget productions because seasoned producers can't access low-budget union programs. What does this mean? More work for non union performers and crews because the unions don't fit into their business plan. So if you haven't had a good year in 2024 why would you expect 2025 to be any better? I understand everyone has a position on this. I don't. All I know is if I were a producer I would find the best talent with the best crew and shoot the best possible picture and take it to the film market. If it is good it will be bought. Good films, well thought out, and understanding the market is the key to success. For what it is worth. The difference between people who know what they are doing and not knowing what they are doing is well studied talent.
How many know that when the original Degrassi Street series came to the market it was sold to CBC Children's Programming as one of the first Independently produced series, You didn't know that it was completely non-union for several years. No one had a problem with that except the Unions of course. Nothing more, nothing less, hope y'all figure it out.
Here’s your text with corrected spelling and punctuation:

Why does it feel like 20 years ago when the SARS crisis closed down the film industry? Had it not been for TiP, there would have been zero productions going on. TiP productions exceeded the entire production listings on the board. At the time, to save money, it was suggested to close down the program, but Brian Topp and the council who hired me to create and run the program thought otherwise.

Now I'm hearing there is a dearth of Canadian productions, licensing fees are half, and some indie producers have no choice but to go non-union.

I don't know what my former colleagues are up to; however, there is this perception that the current low-budget program which followed TiP does not allow seasoned producers to access the program. I find it interesting that the unions want exclusivity of Telefilm funding. Low budget motion picture projects are only available to emerging producers, and the licensing fees are now reduced by half. I'm not making this up; this is what I was told.

The TiP program was initially set up to compete against low-budget non-union productions, and there were no restrictions on how many times you could employ the program. Of course, few repeat producers applied because they wanted to produce bigger projects with higher budgets. Now the license fees are so low that union performers cannot participate in low budget productions because seasoned producers can't access low-budget programs. What does this mean? More work for non-union performers and crews because the unions don't fit into their business plan. So if you haven't had a good year in 2024, why would you expect 2025 to be any better?

I understand everyone has a position on this. I don't. All I know is if I were a producer, I would find the best talent with the best crew and shoot the best possible picture and take it to the film market. If it is good, it will be bought. Good films, well thought out, understanding the market is the key to success. For what it's worth, the difference between people who know what they are doing and those who don't is well-studied talent. How many know that when the original Degrassi Street series came to market, it was sold to CBC Children's Programming as one of the first independently produced series, and it was non-union for several years? No one had a problem with that except the unions, of course. Nothing more, nothing less. Hope y'all figure it out.

Congratulations to Dan Bekerman on his new film "The Apprentice"... Michael Moore is playing it for a second consecutive week at this Cinema in Traverse City> Moore declares it is one of the best motion pictures he has seen in 2024. The film about the young Donald is slated for general release I believe in the upcoming week. Congrats Daniel Bekerman... a TiPster delivering to the screen.

If you persist to swim in the shallow up stream, you will will drown in the calm of a deep pool as you tread water. Tasso Lakas

Sing Sing… playing in Toronto.

Sing Sing is not about the famous prison 30 miles north of Manhattan ; it is about the inmates who form a theatrical group within its walls. The star of the film is the story. The characters are real and engaging. If you go and see the movie, you must sit through the credits to understand the nature of what the film is about. You can research Sing Sing on Google if you want to know more about the prison itself.

I urge all micro-budget producers to go and see the film. The big reveal is how much emotion a good director with a good story can generate. Engage with the faces of the characters in the story; come to understand the human dynamic expressed. You’ll be entertained when you get inside the DNA of the story as it unfolds. You will come to understand that no stars are required to instill some humanity in your soul. The story is one man’s fantasy and another man’s reality. Believing in the make-believe is to believe in the reality of your own imagined life for which you are accountable for. .
If you understand what this means and you feel you want to experience it personally, go and see Sing Sing.

As a micro-budget content evaluator, I can tell you this: if I had read the script, I would have approved it for production because it reveals what a motion picture is all about—reading character on the surface, knowing that below the surface, the evil that lurks is not the evil which makes you vulnerable and creative. Enough said; it is worthy of your time. If you want to talk or write about it, I’d be pleased to engage you.

Sing Sing… is a song with lots of lyrics surrounded by the music of the incarcerated mind—believable and questionably forgivable. There's genius in this film if you are sensitive enough to understand it.

For those who don't know about Popeye the Sailor Man, read this small piece and you'll come to understand that real-life experiences bring greater success to the screen than a copy-and-paste mentality. Throughout my career, I have learned that adapting books to the screen is fine, but there's more to motion picture storytelling. The visual inspiring force challenges the director to bring their vision to the screen by employing today's technology. It's all about the heart and soul being moved by the storyteller's audience. Move the emotions of your audience, and you will forever have their support.

For those who don't know about Popeye the Sailor Man, read this small piece and you'll come to understand that real-life experiences bring greater success to the screen than a copy-and-paste mentality. Throughout my career, I have learned that adapting books to the screen is fine, but there's more to motion picture storytelling. The visual inspiring force challenges the director to bring their vision to the screen by employing today's technology. It's all about the heart and soul being moved by the storyteller's audience. Move the emotions of your audience, and you will forever have their support.

His real name was Frank "Rocky" Fiegel.
He was born in 1868 in Poland and, as a child, immigrated to the United States with his , who settled down in a small town in Illinois.
As a young man, Rocky went to sea. After a 20-year career as a sailor in the Merchant Marines, Fiegel retired. He was later hired by Wiebusch's Tavern in the city of Chester, Illinois as a ‘Bouncer’ to maintain order in the rowdy bar.
Rocky quickly developed a reputation for always being involved in fighting ( and usually winning). As a result, he had a deformed eye ("Pop-eye").
He also ‘always’ smoked his pipe, so he always spoke out of one side of his mouth. In his spare time as a Bouncer, Rocky would entertain the customers by regaling them with exciting stories of adventures he claimed to have had over his career as a sailor crossing the ‘Seven Seas.’
The creator of Popeye, Elzie Crisler Segar, grew up in Chester and, as a young man, met Rocky at the tavern and would sit for hours listening to the old sailor’s amazing ‘sea’ stories.’
Years later, Segar became a cartoonist and developed a comic strip called ‘Thimble Theater.’ He honored Fiegel by asking if he could model his new comic strip character, ‘Popeye the Sailor Man,’ after him. Naturally, Fiegel was flattered and agreed.
Segar claimed that ‘Olive Oyl,’ along with other characters, was also loosely based on an actual person. She was Dora Paskel, owner of a small grocery store in Chester. She apparently actually looked much like the Olive Oyl character in his comics.
He claimed she even dressed much the same way..
Through the years, Segar kept in touch with Rocky and always helped him with money; giving him a small percentage of what he earned from his ‘Popeye’ illustrations.
WHO didn't love the cartoons??? We watched them religiously... so funny, so moral... each story had a good ending... Wonder if kids these days even KNOW who Popeye is???
Who knew he was a real man??”

g:

When the TiP program morphed into a part of the IPA Agreement as a low-budget option, it no longer had a coordinator. During my 18 years as its creator and coordinator, I listed over 2,300 producers, writers, and directors on my contact list. As of today, June 15, 2024, I read posts from past participants like Mark Montefiore, Jeremy Lalonde, Warren Sonoda, Kris Lefcoe, Brigitte Kingsley, and many, many more. There's a huge alumni network of program participants. For example, Samantha Bee and Jason Jones starred in their very first feature film, Ham and Cheese, directed by Warren Sonoda in his first drama. The program made it possible for most of its participants to engage in their very first serious professional film project.

Intiially I thought with the closing of the program, there wouldn't be much interest, but I think I'm wrong. I think there were so many success careers launched the program that when ACTRA decided to cancel it something was lost and that was the camaraderie of so participants. So I'm seriousnly thinking of extending the program to cover all those who participated in the program to be a part of the TiPster newsletter. Why? I believe, and so many have told me over the years without TiP their careers might find the mainstream work they are involved in today. What do you think? Should we revive and follow the TiPsters of yesteryear and celebrate their success in today's world of filmmaking?

Let me know what you think and how you would like to participate.