my experience making my first low-budget feature

[roei z]

Hi.
i wanted to share and consult with you some of my experience with a feature i was trying to make.

i bought the GH2 once it got out, testing it and deciding i could make a super low budget film with it, using vintage FD's.
i'm usually a one man do it all person (i used to shoot, edit and direct shorts on and off through the years, and i edit trailers in my day job).
so i had a basic idea for a main hero in a dark Lynch type of feel.
i wrote a full screenplay in a few months and thought it was pretty original and unique.
and then i started shooting slowly with my girlfriend as sound recorder, with a main non-actor i took a chance with.
after i shot a few scenes, (Around 20% of the script), the actor chickened out and quit.
it was kind of lucky cause he couldn't carry the character anyway.
so after a while i decided to be more serious, pay a minimum (full pay "if and when") for actors and a serious sound guy.
so, i finished shooting most of the scenes and was happy to pass the main difficulty.
then i spent 2 weeks syncing audio and video, and then edited some shots that looked really good and had a good feel:
http://vimeo.com/25975171
after that i finally decided to edit a kind of a rough cut, and start showing it to a few friends, and around 5-6 producers that showed interest.
my goal was to get sponsored by a producer who could elevate the film and get the rest of the budget needed.

and then i woke up-
all the people who saw the rough cut thought it didn't work at all. acting and script were too problematic and simply not good enough.
so, i finally understood where i failed.
i was too eager to start shooting, and didn't really shared the script with many people. and when a friend DID tell me there were some problems with it, i simply didn't listen and moved on, thinking i should believe in the spirit of the film, the feel and darkness of the story.

i got a bit traumatized by all this, putting it all aside and not being able to look at a frame of the footage since then (a few months ago).

so now i can slowly turn back and think on my position.
now that the GH2 got hacked and being the best bet on a budget features, i can start imagining new goals for myself.
i'll be glad to hear any shared thoughts on my "case", any tips, any ideas that might take me to a new path.

my main options at the moment:

-when i'll be able to, face the footage and edit some version that will work, even at 30 minutes, whatever.
-leave it for now, and start writing a new idea. not to be far fetched, think really small for now, start with a short, perhaps even in the dvxfests here.

i am convinced i'm a decent director, shooter and editor, maybe not on a full feature yet, but good enough to believe in myself.
BUT- i MUST find someone who can write for me or with me. it's obviously my weakest part, and i didn't find someone here in Israel. maybe through HERE?
i'm trying to read some scripts that won in those scriptfests but they're not online anymore.
i really wish to collaborate with someone from the writers around here.
i know there's a language barrier but maybe it's possible to somehow work together.
i tent to go for the easy to produce stories, situation driven with dark story and characters, a touch of horror and thriller, with some dark humor. some action and violence could also be nice. again, targeting a short film at start, 5-10 minutes.

thanks for reading and waiting for any thoughts on the matter.

[Jordan Scott Price]

A few things stand out to me:

For one, don't jump into a feature unless you have everything you need to make it happen. Shorts are huge undertakings alone; a feature can be downright suffocating if not done properly. It takes months - usually years - of planning, writing, rewriting, funding, and more planning to pull it off.

Secondly, if you want to be able to put a quality film together, I highly recommend finding a DP with whom you can work and whose work you enjoy. Trying to direct AND shoot is going to be disastrous. The performances will always sink if you are trying to direct and operate the camera or direct the lighting. When you have a strong relationship with your DP, the two of you will feed off each other and anticipate each others' moves, which makes the process invigorating, not exhausting.

And, absolutely, start with shorts. Master the craft of the short form, then move on to features. Many would argue shorts are harder to make than features - shorts are shown in droves at festivals, so they have to be really, really good; you have to hook, tell, and get out as fast as possible; less room for error in the story, continuity, or performance; etc. - but features are daunting undertakings than can snuff you out before you even shoot one frame. Also, be very careful making "horror" shorts. Horror stories - at least, good ones - are built on the audience gradually feeling more uncomfortable as the film progresses; shorts don't have that kind of time. Dark humor, however, can be a real winner in a short.

Also, find a good producer. As the Director, you shouldn't have to worry about locations and call times and people dropping out - that is for your producer(s) to worry about.

I think DVXUser is a great place to find connections, air out ideas for scripts, and get feedback. The Screenwriting subforum is always active with people talking about story ideas and such. You may even find crew here.

Just my thoughts.

[roei z]

A few things stand out to me:

For one, don't jump into a feature unless you have everything you need to make it happen. Shorts are huge undertakings alone; a feature can be downright suffocating if not done properly. It takes months - usually years - of planning, writing, rewriting, funding, and more planning to pull it off.

Secondly, if you want to be able to put a quality film together, I highly recommend finding a DP with whom you can work and whose work you enjoy. Trying to direct AND shoot is going to be disastrous. The performances will always sink if you are trying to direct and operate the camera or direct the lighting. When you have a strong relationship with your DP, the two of you will feed off each other and anticipate each others' moves, which makes the process invigorating, not exhausting.

And, absolutely, start with shorts. Master the craft of the short form, then move on to features. Many would argue shorts are harder to make than features - shorts are shown in droves at festivals, so they have to be really, really good; you have to hook, tell, and get out as fast as possible; less room for error in the story, continuity, or performance; etc. - but features are daunting undertakings than can snuff you out before you even shoot one frame. Also, be very careful making "horror" shorts. Horror stories - at least, good ones - are built on the audience gradually feeling more uncomfortable as the film progresses; shorts don't have that kind of time. Dark humor, however, can be a real winner in a short.

Also, find a good producer. As the Director, you shouldn't have to worry about locations and call times and people dropping out - that is for your producer(s) to worry about.

I think DVXUser is a great place to find connections, air out ideas for scripts, and get feedback. The Screenwriting subforum is always active with people talking about story ideas and such. You may even find crew here.

Just my thoughts.

thanks for responding.
most of what you say i somewhat learned during the process.
but the thing is, i really find that i'm at my best when dealing with the minimum people as possible through my work.
except from story writing and scripts, of course :)
the main reason to take this lonely rout was to be able to be limitless in my thoughts, actions, decisions and feelings.
it doesn't mean i didn't think of involving another editor when the time comes, or edit from scratch.
i know it makes other problems as you described, but i thought i could get over them somehow.
the main limitations HAVE to go into considerations in the script itself-
which means, thinking of a story that uses the available atmosphere with the minimum need of production.
i know it's not easy. but i was thinking along the lines of Hitchcock and Lynch.. injecting tons of feel into the scenes.
besides the reason it failed because of aspects you pointed out,
the core of the weak result in my opinion is the script and characters.
there were better scenes and weaker scenes, but the basic plot and story played around 70% of it.

[OldCorpse]

Hi - thank you for putting this out here. This is important, because it's real life - this is what happens to many, many people just starting out in film. The impatience to shoot - there are two ways to think about it. One, is the obvious, as you experienced, you go in without enough resources in script, acting, crew, money or experience. But, there is another way to think about it - you had to do it. You didn't have the option to wait until everything was perfect, because that way you can wait until you are 400 years old and never shoot a frame. What did you get out of shooting this "prematurely" without enough resources? You got something extremely important - you got knowledge. Now you know what you can and can't do. Take it back in thought:

"and when a friend DID tell me there were some problems with it, i simply didn't listen and moved on, thinking i should believe in the spirit of the film, the feel and darkness of the story."

Well, how could you know you would be wrong without doing it? You had a choice - trust your own instincts and improvisational abilities, or listen to criticism from outsiders. Without actually shooting - testing this - you would never know the answer. Now you know. There really was only one way to find out - to shoot. What you learned was the limits of "believe in your instinct" and "I'll just fix it with atmosphere". Next time you have this situation, you will have this experience to draw upon.

That is why I don't think this film should be put in the way you did - like a trauma. It was very, very valuable. Without doing it, you would never move forward as an artist. You should thank yourself for going forward. It's like losing your virginity - it may hurt a bit, but it is necessary if you want to f... eh, forget this analogy. Many directors made terrible first features. But apparently they had to do it to find their way forward.

Now when you think about making a movie, you will think about all the experiences you had and you'll be much better off than before. Don't hate this experience - love it, because it was a great Teacher.

I'll have some more thoughts about your situation now going forward, later on... right now, I have to get back to work :)

[clang]

We see exactly the same problems all the time with Hollywood features costing hundreds of millions - if you don't have a great script (with great characters and plot), you've got nothing. There's nothing anyone can do during production or post-production to fix script problems.

As you've discovered, the downside of writing and making your own film is that it's easy to be blind to your own script's problems. Time can help with that - put the script away for at least six months then read it again, wou'll be amazed how many flaws are suddenly obvious. :) But getting constructive criticism from others is even better - if you can find people who can give useful constructive criticism. :(

I totally agree with Jordan that you should do more shorts - it's better (and easier) to make 9 ten minute shorts, some of which turn out good, rather than one mediocre 90 minute feature...

[roei z]

thanks for the ultra positive attitude :), OldCorpse.

all the replies are very interesting to read, and also varies in different way of seeing many aspect of things.
nice.

but don't forget, (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?66736-Jordan-Scott-Price) Jordan, i live in Israel and try to do my best here. totally different attitude.
i will do my best trying to collaborate with screenwriters here in dvxuser.
i don't know if it's possible to do it between two countries and languages, but i'm willing to try.
i still don't have any idea about what kind of writers hang around here,
and i just can't find a way to get to past scriptfest winners. any ideas? all the viewing links are dead.
it could be a good place to feel how people write here, especially for short scripts.

[Kholi]

Good post, Corpse.

[OldCorpse]

Thanks, Kholi.

Couple of other thoughts, roei. Just trying to be realistic, collaboration with a writer is hard for a first time director - or a director that is not established. I'm not saying it never happens, but look at the careers of those who come up - a lot of them wrote their own stuff: just off the top of my head, R. Rodriguez, Tarantino, Jarmusch, Aronofsky, Scorsese, Soderberg, Shane Carruth, Guy Ritchie, Nolan, Kevin Smith, Sam Raimi, Night Shyamalan, oh the list goes on and on and on. Actually, it's pretty rare for an indie directing career to get started not writing your own stuff... can you think of one?

Isn't this something to think about?

Here's another realistic thing. Good writers are rare. Rare. I have all the respect in the world for the writers on DVXuser, but I'm just being real with you - it's very, very, very rare. Guess what the odds are you'll find one, who is not going to want to direct his own stuff. Also: if he's really good, he's already a professional who is making $$$ in Hollywood. So you want to find a really good writer who is great, but somehow can't get work in Hollywood, and doesn't want to direct, but is happy to choose YOU - of all the directors in the world - to collaborate on a script?

I'm not saying this to be negative. I'm saying this to be real, because I respect you enough to tell you this. You may end up wasting a lot of time looking for a writer and end up with not much to show for it.

What I'm getting at, is that sometimes life deals us unpleasant options. You may have no option. You can gamble on getting a great writer - but the truth is, you are unlikely to succeed at that. So, you do what you have to do. When you have no access to a great writer, what will you do - not shoot the movie, ever, or write it yourself? Yes, you may not be very good, but then, the solution is not to get another weak writer, but to get better yourself. You must get better at writing.

That's the most efficient option, in my humble opinion. I believe this is the only realistic way. It's better to think about that now, instead of wasting a lot of time - maybe years - looking for a great writer. Try to get better at writing yourself. Watch films as stories. Think about it. Read screenplays. Think about them. Not only will you become a better writer, but you'll become a better director.

I hope this saves you some time, and represents some food for thought, even if it sounds like a hard thing to say.

[roei z]

thanks,
i thought i might have a chance to find some short script writers here who would just like to write and might have interesting ideas..
am i that off the track?
it's indeed very quiet around the script writers here.. no one really bothers to answer me.

[Jordan Scott Price]

which means, thinking of a story that uses the available atmosphere with the minimum need of production.
i know it's not easy. but i was thinking along the lines of Hitchcock and Lynch.. injecting tons of feel into the scenes.

This is interesting. Can you elaborate? What do you mean about injecting "feel."

You have to remember, too, that a great script will not make your movie. Just because there is life, depth, character, conflict, business, action, and emotion in your script does NOT mean the performances will be good. That is for you, as a Director, to imbue into the film - those qualities are the essence of what you're capturing with a camera. I have seen good Directors turn a flat script into a beautiful film by working with the actors to create depth and life in each scene - sometimes without shooting the scene with anything other than a wide shot.

If you have not read it yet, buy Directing Actors by Judith Weston. It is my bible when I direct and one of the greatest filmmaking resources, in my opinion, and others here will agree.

[PopcornFlix]

+1 on directing more shorts.

Shorts give you more experience faster. They help you improve more rapidly.

Re the existing footage: finish it. Finishing projects is an important skill to practice. Many artists sabotage themselves by leaving a trail of unfinished projects and no body of work. Get into the habit now of finishing everything you start. That will also serve the purpose of making you consider very carefully before agreeing to start something.

Also, once you get a rough cut, show it to some friends who are good at story to see if you can fix it with reshoots. There may be a way to add a little new footage and save the picture. It worked for CASABLANCA.

You might consider the idea that you are a visual stylist like Lynch, instead of a writer-director. Try visiting a writer-heavy forum like trigger street.com or done deal.com. Lots of competent semipro writers there who would like to have something produced.

HTH.

[roei z]

This is interesting. Can you elaborate? What do you mean about injecting "feel."

i do understand what you mean by turning a flat script to a "lively" one. question is, the difference between flat and bad.
one way of injecting feel into something out of nothing is THIS (http://vimeo.com/17957391) experiment i did..
not exactly what you mean, but with a decent script that has those kind of moment along with some interesting characters,
i believe i can pull it off as a director.

[roei z]

You might consider the idea that you are a visual stylist like Lynch, instead of a writer-director. Try visiting a writer-heavy forum like trigger street.com or done deal.com. Lots of competent semipro writers there who would like to have something produced.

thanks :)
something fresh to investigate!

*wow, these are serious sites.
i registered to trigger st, and i need to start reviewing stuff.
how do i talk or contact writers there?

[Hutchman]

Hi Roei,

First of all, those shots on vimeo are really nice. I especially love the opening shot, reminded me of the opening to CRASH. How did you do it? Car mount?

Your footage certainly looks a lot better than movies like MARICAHI and Chris Nolan's FOLLOWING, which were shot on grungy 16mm.

You should check out FOLLOWING which is online for free:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6618880831029867065

It's a solid, but not exceptional film. Script is pretty good, but the acting, direction, lighting is so-so. But it got a release and Nolan went on to direct MEMENTO and the rest, as they say, is history.

If you want to make yourself feel better, try and track down Tarantino's first feature, MY BEST FRIEND'S BIRTHDAY. I don't think the whole movie exists anymore, but some of it does, and it's AWFUL. Truly bad. But Tarantino said he learned a lot from it and a couple of years later he made RESERVOIR DOGS.

I'm also reminded of an ad Michael Jordan made for Nike some years ago. He talked about all the failures he had in his life - a LOT - and finally concluded:

"I have failed over and over in my life. And that is why I succeed".

You learn a lot more from your failures. Stick with it, man.

PS How did the audio turn out? I'm curious. And what audio equipment did you use?

[Searcher]

Hi Roei! I was one of the people getting excited by your project over in the GH2 section and I've been wondering how you were doing. Glad to hear you want to get back on the horse even if you're a bit bruised and battered.

You shot a feature- you should be proud.

Judging from your vimeo footage you know how to shoot and how to direct.

Seriously all you need is a great script and you'll probably make a good film. I have decided that the script has the to be the best thing about your film. I've been reading a bunch of scripts lately and while I didn't think some of the films were that good when I watched them, ALL the scripts were amazing. Only Chinatown and Rear Window were directed and shot at the same quality as the scripts were written. I concluded from this that if you don't start with a great script you're pretty much screwed. The script is at the core of your film. If the core is rotten then you're screwed. I don't know if I've explained myself very well but what I'm saying is that basically the more I read scripts the more I realise how the script is the single most important aspect of a good film. It sounds obvious but it's amazing how many people half ass the script.

You had the patience and determination to write a feature script. That' more than a lot of people are able to achieve. And like Corpse said if you wait for everything to be perfect you could be waiting a long time.

So become a better writer. Start writing your next feature and this time take as long as it takes for it to be the best script you can write. Write multiple drafts and take feedback very seriously.

How many scripts and script writing books have you read?

[roei z]

Hi Roei,


You should check out FOLLOWING which is online for free:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6618880831029867065

It's a solid, but not exceptional film. Script is pretty good, but the acting, direction, lighting is so-so. But it got a release and Nolan went on to direct MEMENTO and the rest, as they say, is history.



PS How did the audio turn out? I'm curious. And what audio equipment did you use?

thanks.
yes, like i said, i have enough confidence as a director, shooter, etc.
i just thought about it and realized, that even if i shoot myself and loose some of the control on acting,
i tend to have a lot more confidence in myself while I have the camera. like a weapon, it makes me more focused.

about Following, yes i saw it before i made the feature. i remember it was nice as a low budget. and yes the story was solid,
except that i started to figure out the end before Nolan meant i would ;)
i wish i could translate my script so that some people here would read and make things more clear for me.
right now i feel it's so unbaked that i cannot even look at it.

*btw- getting released and interested by producers is tons harder here in Israel than in more artistically motivated countries.

about audio- most of the scenes sound nice. uncontrollable locations have some problems.
the sound guy had his own device (don't remember exactly), only that it was better than my DR-100 and was more professional.
also bought NTG-3.

i still think that my best enviourment is using a "16mm way"- minimum lighting if required, sound guy and myself.
of course the story needs to be written "right" (production wise) for this to work.

[roei z]

Hi Roei! I was one of the people getting excited by your project over in the GH2 section and I've been wondering how you were doing. Glad to hear you want to get back on the horse even if you're a bit bruised and battered.

You shot a feature- you should be proud.

Judging from your vimeo footage you know how to shoot and how to direct.

Seriously all you need is a great script and you'll probably make a good film. I have decided that the script has the to be the best thing about your film. I've been reading a bunch of scripts lately and while I didn't think some of the films were that good when I watched them, ALL the scripts were amazing. Only Chinatown and Rear Window were directed and shot at the same quality as the scripts were written. I concluded from this that if you don't start with a great script you're pretty much screwed. The script is at the core of your film. If the core is rotten then you're screwed. I don't know if I've explained myself very well but what I'm saying is that basically the more I read scripts the more I realise how the script is the single most important aspect of a good film. It sounds obvious but it's amazing how many people half ass the script.

You had the patience and determination to write a feature script. That' more than a lot of people are able to achieve. And like Corpse said if you wait for everything to be perfect you could be waiting a long time.

So become a better writer. Start writing your next feature and this time take as long as it takes for it to be the best script you can write. Write multiple drafts and take feedback very seriously.

How many scripts and script writing books have you read?

it's obvious that script writing and deep character study is not my talent.
i think i must at least try to collaborate once. but as people here said, it's even harder to achieve that writing alone.
especially when i live in Israel and have a different cultural codes and behaviors..

[Erich Ocean]

and then i woke up-
all the people who saw the rough cut thought it didn't work at all. acting and script were too problematic and simply not good enough.

IMO, you need to bring on another editor (and this is also an area where a good producer would have helped).

I see a lot of stuff that's in rough cut form and it's universally terrible. Really bad. And this is footage being made by experienced, industry people like yourself, oftentimes with substantial budgets (for indie film).

The truth is, many, many things can be fixed in the edit suite. It's actually quite amazing.

Having a separate editor really, really helps, so let someone else take a crack at the raw footage and see what they come up with. Then, and only then, should you throw in the towel.

[roei z]

IMO, you need to bring on another editor (and this is also an area where a good producer would have helped).

I see a lot of stuff that's in rough cut form and it's universally terrible. Really bad. And this is footage being made by experienced, industry people like yourself, oftentimes with substantial budgets (for indie film).

The truth is, many, many things can be fixed in the edit suite. It's actually quite amazing.

Having a separate editor really, really helps, so let someone else take a crack at the raw footage and see what they come up with. Then, and only then, should you throw in the towel.

i should definitely try this.
but right now it's quite hard for me to invest myself again emotionally into all this.
i have a friend who might get in and help me on this.
yyyyyach, just thinking of seeing the footage again :(

[Ted Spencer]

Sounds like Erich might have the right idea re: an outside editor. I know how it feels to not want to look at your work for a while. I've got a script out for feedback to numerous folks right now, and for the time being I do *not* want to look at it myself. It's been about a month since I signed off on the 'feedback draft', and I haven't read it since.

If, as you say, you have an editor friend willing to take a crack at it I'd say jump on it. S/he'll have fresh eyes, and what s/he comes up with will be at least substantially 'new' to you, allowing your eyes to 'freshen' a bit as well. S/he might come up with some great solutions for you as well, but even if not you've lost nothing. You can always recut.

(Dual gender references added here in part because great editors are quite often female)

[Ted Spencer]

Well OldCorpse, it's already been well-established in previous threads/posts that we see eye to eye on almost nothing where all of this is concerned, but how you can take a 'just do it' stance on shooting a film in general at the same time as what amounts to a 'just give up' stance on collaborating with a screenwriter (especially with writing being roel z's self-admitted shortcoming) is completely beyond me. It's as though you're saying that young, talented writers (that are as yet 'off the radar' in terms of larger success) simply don't exist. Nothing could be further from the truth. After all, every single successful screenwriter started out as a complete nobody. Aspiring, and yes even highly talented screenwriters are surprisingly easily found at places like...well...here, as well as other sites like zoetrope.com, triggerstreet.com and lots of other places. And the notion that one shouldn't try to collaborate with them because they all "want to direct their own stuff" or are "already professionals making $$$ in Hollywood" is utter hogwash.

In addition to many lively discussions right here on screenwriting, I participate regularly on zoetrope.com. The way it works is that for me to get reviews of one of my scripts, I must read and submit reviews of four others among a list of a dozen or so the site creates for me. I've submitted four scripts so far, which means that I've been required to read and review 16 (and I've read a number of others that weren't required). A significant number of these were very well written IMHO (especially shorts, which attract fewer starry-eyed delusional types). Quite a few have won signifcant screenwriting competitions. And having looked up the profiles of these folks, it's clear that like screenwriters everywhere, many of them have next to no aspirations as director/shooters. In very substantial part they're *just writers*; that's what they *do*. And it's not a requirement on zoe, if one isn't looking for reviews on their own writing, to review any scripts at all. You can simply sign up and read any script that's posted there. You can easily communicate with the writers by internal "Z-Mail" (like a PM here), to engage in a discussion of their interest in having you make one of their scripts into a film. Like most writers, they tend to have more scripts than they could ever possibly film, *even if they wanted to do so*. And like many writers, they'd be thrilled to have *someone else* do it.

Right here on DVXuser there are numereous good writers winning "Scriptfests" in addition to posting in forums, and most have back-catalogs of other scripts. Alex Whitmer, a very talented guy who's posted here extensively and won at least one Scriptfest (maybe more), has literally dozens, if not hundreds of completed scripts. I've read a few of 'em. He's very good. And he's *completely* open to writing for other fillmmakers, or having them produce one of his existing scripts. That's just *one* example of someone I know of personally. There are *many* others.

Any smart team-player seeks out others to do what he's less suited for, and filmmaking is the very definition of a team effort. Does every great actor insist on writing and directing his own films? Of course not, although a few do. Same thing with writers. They need shooters, directors, producers, etc. just as much as actors do...

To actively dissuade a self-described 'highly writing-challenged' filmmaker from seeking others who specialize in that very thing, when such individuals (at least at a similar skill level to the individual in question's ability as a filmmaker, if not higher) are out there waiting to help, is perhaps the worst piece of advice I've ever seen put forth on this or any other forum. To do so in the same breath as saying said filmmaker should go ahead and make a film anyway (and "learn to write better" - yikes - the guy *admits* he stinks at it), given the cost to make a film in blood, sweat, and cash, elevates an irresponsible position to the metaphoric equivalent of "Don't worry - just jump out of the plane - you'll have plenty of time to figure out all that parachute business on the way down."

Shame on you.



Here's another realistic thing. Good writers are rare. Rare. I have all the respect in the world for the writers on DVXuser, but I'm just being real with you - it's very, very, very rare. Guess what the odds are you'll find one, who is not going to want to direct his own stuff. Also: if he's really good, he's already a professional who is making $$$ in Hollywood. So you want to find a really good writer who is great, but somehow can't get work in Hollywood, and doesn't want to direct, but is happy to choose YOU - of all the directors in the world - to collaborate on a script?

I'm not saying this to be negative. I'm saying this to be real, because I respect you enough to tell you this. You may end up wasting a lot of time looking for a writer and end up with not much to show for it.

What I'm getting at, is that sometimes life deals us unpleasant options. You may have no option. You can gamble on getting a great writer - but the truth is, you are unlikely to succeed at that. So, you do what you have to do. When you have no access to a great writer, what will you do - not shoot the movie, ever, or write it yourself? Yes, you may not be very good, but then, the solution is not to get another weak writer, but to get better yourself. You must get better at writing.

That's the most efficient option, in my humble opinion. I believe this is the only realistic way. It's better to think about that now, instead of wasting a lot of time - maybe years - looking for a great writer.

[Ted Spencer]

+1


We see exactly the same problems all the time with Hollywood features costing hundreds of millions - if you don't have a great script (with great characters and plot), you've got nothing. There's nothing anyone can do during production or post-production to fix script problems.

[Ted Spencer]

If you have not read it yet, buy Directing Actors by Judith Weston. It is my bible when I direct and one of the greatest filmmaking resources, in my opinion, and others here will agree.

Absolutely. IMO it should be required reading for any aspiring director. It's been lauded by more other authors in their books and materials on all aspects of filmmaking than I can count. Ms. Weston has given all of us a tremendous gift.

[roei z]

i personally like things spicing up around the thread, as long as it's not entirely serious.
i guess OldCorpse had some rough moment trying to write or collaborate, whatever..

anyway, Ted, as you mentioned above, i still like to try and find some short scripts writers who actually don't want to direct.
i've checked the trigger street forum and started reviewing there, even left a thread with my questions.. but it looks a bit slow down there.
so you're saying that at zoetrope.com i might find more resources?
btw- i'm still trying to find some older scripfests to read and give my thoughts on, but it seems impossible to find or download any of them..
is it "secret"? or it's just that they deleted past URL's?
and what about this Alex Whitmer? should i contact him about collaborating?

[roei z]

signed up at zeotrope..
i think your about to get reviewed, Ted ;)

[Ted Spencer]

signed up at zeotrope..
i think your about to get reviewed, Ted ;)

LOL! I'll be honored! Please say what you mean there, too. No need to consider anything else : )

[roei z]

will do.

[Ted Spencer]

btw- i'm still trying to find some older scripfests to read and give my thoughts on, but it seems impossible to find or download any of them..
is it "secret"? or it's just that they deleted past URL's?

The first 8 scriptfests can be seen here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?135-Previous-ScriptFests


and what about this Alex Whitmer? should i contact him about collaborating?

Go here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/search.php

...and search on his name. You'll find a long list of his posts, which are well worth reading. Simply click on his name in any one of them and you'll be able to send a PM to him. He's a very friendly guy, loves screenwriting (and movies of course), and I'll bet he'll be more than happy to help you out in one way or another. Please say hi to him for me, and tell him I steered you his way.

And please keep us posted on your progress. Best of luck to you!

EDIT: Alex was third place in Scriptfest I and won Scriptfest II.

[Patryk_Rebisz]

Before taking on the feature problems why don't we talk about the "trailer"? Is it telling the story you intended (i hope not as i don't see any viable story), is it setting up the mood you had in mind (again i hope not as the mood simply ins't there as the music has very disjointed felling to the images and the images lack formal rigidness of a moody piece)? Now because of the formal shortcoming you might be forced to "settle" on telling just a story and for that you need to know:
a.) what story am i telling? (a guy going a trip to find an abandon house that he keeps on obsessing about? if so is this story interesting enough?)
b.) what am i "hiding" behind this story? (if this is indeed the story i'm trying to tell why am i attracted to it and thus what's the actual essence of the film?) This answer will allow you to see "bigger" picture of your film (if there is one or if you can find it)

Then you can go back and ask, why is the piece not as moody as i'd hoped for? Would more unique lighting, framing, camera moves, characters, atmospheric effects bring that mood atmosphere i'm after for (since you mentioned Lynch)? Am i capable of creating all the visual splendor or would i be better served to hire a pro DP?

You mention that:
"the main reason to take this lonely rout was to be able to be limitless in my thoughts, actions, decisions and feelings."

But isn't the lone gunner actually working against it? Instead of thinking about the scene you think about the scheduling issues, instead of acting out this scene you make the calls to confirm your next location, instead of deciding on where to place the camera now you have to decide on what time to break for lunch instead of introducing feeling into your frame you shoot most basic coverage possible within you time constrains...

[OldCorpse]

Well OldCorpse, it's already been well-established in previous threads/posts that we see eye to eye on almost nothing where all of this is concerned, but how you can take a 'just do it' stance on shooting a film in general at the same time as what amounts to a 'just give up' stance on collaborating with a screenwriter (especially with writing being roel z's self-admitted shortcoming) is completely beyond me. It's as though you're saying that young, talented writers (that are as yet 'off the radar' in terms of larger success) simply don't exist. Nothing could be further from the truth. After all, every single successful screenwriter started out as a complete nobody. Aspiring, and yes even highly talented screenwriters are surprisingly easily found at places like...well...here, as well as other sites like zoetrope.com, triggerstreet.com and lots of other places. And the notion that one shouldn't try to collaborate with them because they all "want to direct their own stuff" or are "already professionals making $$$ in Hollywood" is utter hogwash.

[...] A LOT OF STUFF [...]

Shame on you.

Ted, we've gone round and round in the past, but I am not going to engage you anymore because after the last time I've been cautioned by a mod, and so don't feel like I can take a risk to ruffle your feathers with a differing point of view.

It is entirely obvious that as usual you understood nothing of my post. Nothing. Fine. This is not about me or you. This is about roeiz and his path forward, so there is no sense in derailing this thread by you and I going back and forth.

I've put my view forward, and so have you. Roeiz will take from this what he feels will benefit him. Sometimes people are not ready to hear certain kind of advice, because they are so focused on a different outlook. If that's the case with roeiz, then he'll discard my advice. I absolutely stand by it. Time will tell. On that note, however, time is something that's limited for all of us.

And I end it not by saying "shame on you" - because I'm sure you are sincere in your advice. Just as I am. And there is no shame in offering the best advice you have. Good luck!

[roei z]

Before taking on the feature problems why don't we talk about the "trailer"? Is it telling the story you intended (i hope not as i don't see any viable story), is it setting up the mood you had in mind (again i hope not as the mood simply ins't there as the music has very disjointed felling to the images and the images lack formal rigidness of a moody piece)? Now because of the formal shortcoming you might be forced to "settle" on telling just a story and for that you need to know:
a.) what story am i telling? (a guy going a trip to find an abandon house that he keeps on obsessing about? if so is this story interesting enough?)
b.) what am i "hiding" behind this story? (if this is indeed the story i'm trying to tell why am i attracted to it and thus what's the actual essence of the film?) This answer will allow you to see "bigger" picture of your film (if there is one or if you can find it)

Then you can go back and ask, why is the piece not as moody as i'd hoped for? Would more unique lighting, framing, camera moves, characters, atmospheric effects bring that mood atmosphere i'm after for (since you mentioned Lynch)? Am i capable of creating all the visual splendor or would i be better served to hire a pro DP?

You mention that:
"the main reason to take this lonely rout was to be able to be limitless in my thoughts, actions, decisions and feelings."

But isn't the lone gunner actually working against it? Instead of thinking about the scene you think about the scheduling issues, instead of acting out this scene you make the calls to confirm your next location, instead of deciding on where to place the camera now you have to decide on what time to break for lunch instead of introducing feeling into your frame you shoot most basic coverage possible within you time constrains...

very well said, thanks.
may i add some thoughts-
it's definitely not a "Trailer" !! it's just a bunch of shots i chose to represent some kind of footage that came out well.
if it was a trailer, it would of course tell a story, put in some dialog, keep the viewer want more, and so in..
i didn't even been able to reach the "trailer" stage because my carriage in front of horses situation.
what i meant about the advantage of being alone (i forgot to mention hiring a very efficient on set producer),
is that i had the chance to direct some on set promos, and i simply HATE a big functioning set vibe.
i must must must create an intimate workplace for most of the shooting process.
if it means writing a script that will take it under extreme consideration, then that's the price.
i hope you understand what i mean.
in this day and age i think there's a small place for those kind of productions.
am i wrong?

[roei z]

Ted, we've gone round and round in the past, but I am not going to engage you anymore because after the last time I've been cautioned by a mod, and so don't feel like I can take a risk to ruffle your feathers with a differing point of view.

It is entirely obvious that as usual you understood nothing of my post. Nothing. Fine. This is not about me or you. This is about roeiz and his path forward, so there is no sense in derailing this thread by you and I going back and forth.

I've put my view forward, and so have you. Roeiz will take from this what he feels will benefit him. Sometimes people are not ready to hear certain kind of advice, because they are so focused on a different outlook. If that's the case with roeiz, then he'll discard my advice. I absolutely stand by it. Time will tell. On that note, however, time is something that's limited for all of us.

And I end it not by saying "shame on you" - because I'm sure you are sincere in your advice. Just as I am. And there is no shame in offering the best advice you have. Good luck!

OldCorpse, listen,
what if i told you that at the moment, i consider myself about 70% a "tool man" in making a film, and that i DO have some good original "core" ideas, some basic moments that someone can build a whole story around, or, let's say "patents" that have good enough potential.
however, i did try many times to extract them onto bigger scripts, but i'll be truly happy and engaged into letting someone invest himself into the writing process or read a script that will make me click into it and just make it.
you claim it's almost impossible to do at where i am, and Ted claims it's very possible.
i can tell you, as a 38 years old horse, i did try to write some scripts and now this is where i am..
i don't think it'll take more than a month finding out if there's any potential of collaborating.
who knows? at least it's a road i DIDN'T try yet.

* do feel free to derail folks, you have my blessing :)

[OldCorpse]

Roei, I had good reasons to write what I wrote. Basically, it's a unique situation when you're trying to establish yourself. There are the odds of success as I outlined - the odds are already very, very small to get a career like a Tarantino/Aronofsky/Smith etc., but they become almost vanishing when you have to name all those who managed to do so based on a script by someone other than themselves. It's not like it NEVER happens. It can happen - example: James Wan collaborated on Saw with Leigh Whannell (both did the story, Whannell did the script) - now, Saw is not everyone's cup of tea (I liked the first one very much, hated the rest), but undoubtedly it launched James Wan (though it remains to be seen how far he goes). So my point is, odds of doing it that way is really shooting for remote odds.

Why did I advise working on yourself as a script writer? Not only because of the aforementioned. Also because of a psychological effect. When you collaborate with a writer, certain avenues of growth are closed on purely psychological grounds. You come to rely (subconsciously) on the writer, instead of growing yourself. There's this apocryphal story about how the Romans conquered Britain: when the Roman Legions landed on the shore, the commander ordered the ships to be burned. The only way to survive was to win. Do you see? That's what happens to your brain when confronted with a stark situation - it finds a way, and you grow. But if there is the least way out, like another writer - the brain is happy to stop growing, because growing beyond your apparent limits can be very painful.

Here's what I see: you'll spend a lot of time finding and working with a writer. Odds that he'll come up with something that will launch your career, is remote - see the examples I gave above. At the end of the process, you will still not have a career, and more importantly, you will not grow as a director.

That is the background to my post - some people will understand this, some (as you can easily see) are too filled with hate and too limited to understand what I'm getting at. The issue is a lot deeper than it seems on the surface, but of course, sadly, some will not grasp it and instead attack me based on their own limitations - their loss.

My advice remains - watch movies and read scripts and analyze and write.

Why not go ahead and find a writer and collaborate? Because there's the danger you'll get sucked in by a very psychologically seductive mirage. You'll think you are going somewhere and keep going and going and going, like chasing that pool of water in the desert that seems to be just about ahead... again, and again, and again. The brain plays tricks on you.

Anyhow, that's my advice. Is it possible? Yes - see James Wan and Leigh Whannell. But it is also possible to win the lottery. When given a choice, I go to work to make my money, rather than invest in a lottery ticket. But hey, maybe you're lucky :)... so I end, with: good luck!

[Ted Spencer]

I've had a 30+ year successful career in the arts, working with extremely famous and not-so-famous actors, film directors, artists and musical performers, among others. I've seen quite a few of them go from complete obscurity to great fame. In my professional opinion, the above advice is disempowering rubbish. Sorry...

[roei z]

OldCorpse,
i perfectly understand your angle, and to prove it:
if Beethoven collaborated with others, most chances he could have been infamous and we could listen to those average compositions today, instead of genius ones, right?
that may be the case when let's say, 2 writers write one story.
but when a director develop a very good script, with his base of a brilliant idea, together with a writer,
the director can elevate the story himself onto his own genius vision while making it. and that's without the writer.
what say you?

[roei z]

The first 8 scriptfests can be seen here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?135-Previous-ScriptFests
.

iv'e been here, but can you show me exactly where i can read them?
i went through all of them, and in the "view" threads, all the links are dead.
any other way of reaching those scripts?

[OldCorpse]

When you collaborate with a writer, more is involved than simply putting your best efforts together. It's a skill, first. You must have the ability to judge what to take and what to leave. How to get the best out of a writer. Not everyone is good at that. There are directors who are great at getting good work out of writers (just as there are directors who are great at eliciting fantastic performances from an actor). It is my opinion that when you are just starting out the situation is very different than when you are an already established director collaborating with a writer. Very different. A director has the ultimate responsibility for the film. That means you sometimes must ask for a lot, because unfortunately that's what it will take to get what you want. When you are an established director, the writer trusts you in a way that s/he may not when you have no credits to your name - and that affects their work and their collaboration. Not even consciously, but subconsciously. And it depends on how much they themselves can accomplish. To give another example from a different field: Apple and Jobs. If you read the recent authorized biography (which I recommend), you'll see plenty of examples of how individual engineers did things they never believed they could accomplish because Steve Jobs asked them to. If it was just any old CEO, they would not have done so, but it was the legend Steve Jobs - the pioneer of personal computers - who had the credibility to ask. They did things for him they themselves didn't know they could. Steve Jobs, because of his credentials was able to get engineers to perform at the very top of their game - something you can't get without those credentials. Which is why you'll see more directors collaborate with writers or direct their material once they are successful, compared to the number who do their first effort trying to establish themselves.

Now again, it's always possible - there are exceptions. Take Polanski, who collaborated with Skolimowski on Knife In The Water - Skolimowski co-wrote it with Polanski (and became a director in his own right) and Polanski directed. They were from the same film school. There are examples of people who worked with close friends or were just starting out together in a special situation - so it's possible, it's just rare. Are you going to work closely like that with someone from Israel, or are you doing it through email?

It is my opinion, that while anything is possible, it's best to pick roads that are most likely to lead to success, without too many detours. But everyone has their own path. We can give advice, based on our understanding of how the world works, but people are different, and there are always exceptions. So, I don't mean to stop you from doing what you believe in. Choose the advice that speaks to you. I just give my point of view (a "rubbish" point of view, according to some), but only you can know if any given advice is right for you and your situation, because only you know yourself and your situation the best. Again: good luck!

[Rolf Silber]

Maybe my English is not good enough to understand, why this discussion became so over-heated: A young director should trust an established writer as much as a young writer should trust an established director. Established director working with established writer - no need to discuss anything (other than they may have a bad idea together).

Young director working with young writer - minefield. But, maybe, worth to try to cross it. At a certain point you have to take chances. But you need people around you to at least help you to find out if you are about to jump onto a ton of dynamite. Especially if you want to be both writer & director. Then it's like crossing a minefield with a barrel of nitroglycerine in your arms. Thrilling. If you survive - good. If not - kaboom.

About the "genius" factor - don't make this part of your calculation. Most directors and writers or writers/directors are extremely good craftsmen first and foremost. Whenever people talk about writing and directing in such an idealistic way I start becoming sceptical. The point in writer / director collaboration is: You never ever win against a badly constructed script. Never. Every thing you may try as a director is only fireworks, helping your movie over the first twenty minutes and then it starts sinking. But, yes: Some people are indeed extremely good story-teller but can not write very good.

So, your only chance is, that

a) you find a writer you trust and like to work with and who has the ability to bring your ideas into a working dramatical construction (or, even better, does what good writers are expected to do - alter an idea way beyond what even you may have imagined first).
b) you yourself are the writer and you have some people helping you to find the weak points in your script (first rule: If you think there are no weak points they most probably are so big, you just don't see them).
c) you really have a Polanski-like ability to "see" things (but are keyboard-averse or whatever) and use a writer as just a crutch.

c is the most unlikely - but: Who knows? In the end it is your personal decision and your personal fate what kind of cinematic animal you want to become and what reality has to say about that. Either way you may become airborne or go down in flames like the "Hindenburg". So: Take both oldcorpse's and Ted's advice, juggle it, make a decision an then off you go and either become a "genial" film-maker or a working professional in the world of the moving picture or minced meat.

But: If you ever underestimate not so much "the writer" but what the process of writing is about - the simulation of a future movie, imho - you will go down. And this not so much thundering and in flames but with a whimper.

[roei z]

thanks tipota for your extra tips.
i still am very confused about all this.
hope some clear thoughts will come up soon.
it's not that i got many talented writes sending me replies...

[Rolf Silber]

it's not that i got many talented writes sending me replies...

There are not many talented writers to begin with. And there never will be.

You have to search for the one that you can make interested in whatever you want to do because most probably you can't really pay him/her. Alternatively: You write yourself and have lot's of people around you who give you friendly criticism and good advice.

Those are the options. I know of none other.

[roei z]

does anyone have any experience with inktip.com?
they look pretty serious.
and they have a free short script section that lets you contact the writers.

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

There are not many talented writers to begin with. And there never will be.

You have to search for the one that you can make interested in whatever you want to do because most probably you can't really pay him/her. Alternatively: You write yourself and have lot's of people around you who give you friendly criticism and good advice.

Those are the options. I know of none other.

There are quite a number of people writing... In this modern world, one is not limited to one's 'local' acquaintances. On this site there are several writers, who write short scripts that others on this site make into movies. The operative word here is 'short'... few people do have the skill at this level to write a feature that is 'worth watching', and by the same token, few filmmakers have the stuff to pull off a feature film either.

This may be an outrageous statement... but at this level, that is 'beginner'... it may not be as important to have a 'quality' script, but just get something done... who knows in the process of making the short film, could benefit the story/script in terms of improvement... which leads me to... one of the most glaring 'defects' that I have seen in the scripts that I have read on various sites from those contributors, is they don't really 'read into film' well... So the learning process of write short, make short, see what works... benefits both the writer and the filmmaker.

[Ted Spencer]

Looks like you're right - the threads are all there, but the links to the scripts themselves appear to be broken. Perhaps a moderator can tell us if there's any way to access them at this point. Sorry for the misdirection.


iv'e been here, but can you show me exactly where i can read them?
i went through all of them, and in the "view" threads, all the links are dead.
any other way of reaching those scripts?

[Ted Spencer]

does anyone have any experience with inktip.com?
they look pretty serious.
and they have a free short script section that lets you contact the writers.

Haven't spent much time there, but it is a reputable site. I'd say go get all you can from it : )

[Rolf Silber]

Okay, I retreat a step or two.... ;-)

The short(er) form clearly allows much more freedom and gives more space to learn. And I do not expect a writer to be born experienced - writing you learn through writing and through the following process of how your writing develops into a film. point taken.

What I meant was that writers who make a living from writing only will be a few - for a lot of different reason.

[Ted Spencer]

There are quite a number of people writing... In this modern world, one is not limited to one's 'local' acquaintances.

Exactly.

The internet has revolutionized the the access-to-a-screenwriter's-work paradigm (not to mention all other types of writers): in seconds, a script for a film can be transmitted as an attachment to an email. Combine that marvelous innovation with screenwriter-oriented sites like zoetrope, triggerstreet, inktip, donedeal, and this one...among many others...and you've practically got a kid-in-a-candy-store situation.

Right now on zoetrope there are 12 short scripts available to read (one of which is mine - and thanks to Roei for the new review!) and 33 features. New ones are added almost every day. They stay on the list for a month before they're rotated out. Are all the scripts good? Of course not. Some are terrible (more so in the features section, where a subset of fame-deluded types tend to gravitate). Are all the writers willing to have you produce one of their scripts? Of course not. But are there good scripts to be found whose writers would be more than happy to have you make theirs into a film, quite possibly with little or no additional effort on their part? You bet there are...

The days of 'asking around town' about writers are all but over (although it certainly still can work in some towns!). A writer doesn't have to be on set after all, and many directors don't want them there even if they're willing and able to do so. So a writer/collaborator can literally be anywhere *in the entire world*.

IMO this is a near-perfect solution for Roei, an aspiring filmmaker who is unequivocal about being highly challenged by scriptwriting. I'll be very much looking forward to hearing about his efforts to find someone to collaborate with him (or even provide him with a good, ready-made script).

I see no reason whatsoever to be anything but encouraging to him about this.

[Ted Spencer]

What I meant was that writers who make a living from writing only will be a few - for a lot of different reason.

It is damn near impossible to make a living as a screenwriter, (almost) no matter how good you are. So there are *lots* of very capable ones looking to get their scripts produced. Even ones that are writers of major award-winning films struggle surprisingly often. I know one personally - wrote an Oscar winning film in the 80s and has never gotten a theatrical feature produced since. He still makes a living at it, but as a writer co/writer of fairly low-profile made-for-TV movies. Take a look sometime at the imdb pages of the writers of some of your favorite films. Some of them will have *only that one film* as a significant credit, and years of 'nothingness' surrounding them (years almost certainly filled with multiple failed efforts to get another script produced). It's a *really, really* tough game, and thus a classic 'buyer's market' if there ever was one.

In other words, there is a massive oversupply of writers competing for a relatively minuscule number of 'greenlit' productions, *at all levels*.

[Ted Spencer]

if Beethoven collaborated with others, most chances he could have been infamous and we could listen to those average compositions today, instead of genius ones, right?

Beethoven, Mozart, Shakespeare, Michaelangelo, Aristotle...these guys are untouchable, historic geniuses whose works will (arguably) never be equalled, so perhaps we should factor them out of a discussion of our present creative environment where collaborations are concerned.

But in the modern era, let's say early 20th century to the present:

Regarding music, many of the greatest and/or most successful works were in fact created by collaborators, usually in pairs (but sometimes more), like:

Gilbert & Sullivan
Rogers & Hammerstein
Rogers & Hart
Lerner & Lowe
George & Ira Gershwin
Bernstein & Sondheim
Andrew Webber & Tim Rice
Lennon/McCartney
Jagger/Richards
Tyler/Perry (Aerosmith)
Becker/Fagen (Steely Dan)
And countless others...

Likewise, many if not most hollywood scripts these days are collaborations, sometimes of several writers. Even what we think of as pretty hardcore big-league writer/director types do it pretty often, like:

Christopher Nolan, who collaborated with/on:

David Goyer/Batman Begins
Jonathan Nolan/Memento, The Prestige
David Goyer & Jonathan Nolan/The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises

George Lucas, who collaborated with/on:

Leigh Brackett, Lawrence Kasdan/The Empire Strikes Back
Lawrence Kasdan/Return Of The Jedi
Jonathan Hales/Attack Of The Clones

James Cameron, who collaborated with/on:

Walter Hill, David Giler/Aliens
Claude Zidi, Simon Michael, Didier Kaminka/True Lies
Jay Cocks/Strange Days

And everything ever done by the Coen or Wachowski brothers.

Even Alfred Hitchcock, almost inarguably one of the greatest storytellers in cinema history, was involved as a writer in relatively few of his films, and *none of his classics*.

Not true at an 'indie level' you might say? Sure it is. Many of the above did more collaborations early on (when they were much less successful or even completely unknown) than later. And in general, collaborations are very common in every written form except novels and poetry.

So...no...collaborating with a writer, or having someone else write for you, is neither inadvisable, inherently dysfunctional, or any other pejorative you might throw at it...

[roei z]

There are quite a number of people writing... In this modern world, one is not limited to one's 'local' acquaintances. On this site there are several writers, who write short scripts that others on this site make into movies. The operative word here is 'short'... few people do have the skill at this level to write a feature that is 'worth watching', and by the same token, few filmmakers have the stuff to pull off a feature film either.

This may be an outrageous statement... but at this level, that is 'beginner'... it may not be as important to have a 'quality' script, but just get something done... who knows in the process of making the short film, could benefit the story/script in terms of improvement... which leads me to... one of the most glaring 'defects' that I have seen in the scripts that I have read on various sites from those contributors, is they don't really 'read into film' well... So the learning process of write short, make short, see what works... benefits both the writer and the filmmaker.

thanks Clark, i mostly agree with your words. it's as if all i need to do is connect to a soul of a script and then i will even feel more free to let myself go and direct it as best as i can. i feel that when the whole idea is mine, it's actually kind of a burden on my back.

[roei z]

thanks for writing this stuff, Ted, the thread got very interesting to read.

[Ted Spencer]

thanks for writing this stuff, Ted, the thread got very interesting to read.

You're welcome! I hope It's been encouraging too...

[roei z]

btw i'm trying to contact your colleague alex.
waiting for his response.
(his site looks pretty nice. tons of scripts to check and discuss with him).

i sure hope to find someone who presents a very different style of "worlds" within the scripts.
it doesn't mean it has to be "crazy". "lost highway" is the first that comes to mind.
darker, deeper, perhaps twisted sides of reality, inner turmoils of the human souls- those are hard to come by. (but which i like best ;) )
that's what i sort of tried in my screenplay, but couldn't quite grasp the core itself in some way. well i thought i did, but now i don't.

[Searcher]

very well said, thanks.
may i add some thoughts-
it's definitely not a "Trailer" !! it's just a bunch of shots i chose to represent some kind of footage that came out well.
if it was a trailer, it would of course tell a story, put in some dialog, keep the viewer want more, and so in..
i didn't even been able to reach the "trailer" stage because my carriage in front of horses situation.
what i meant about the advantage of being alone (i forgot to mention hiring a very efficient on set producer),
is that i had the chance to direct some on set promos, and i simply HATE a big functioning set vibe.
i must must must create an intimate workplace for most of the shooting process.
if it means writing a script that will take it under extreme consideration, then that's the price.
i hope you understand what i mean.
in this day and age i think there's a small place for those kind of productions.
am i wrong?

No you are not wrong. And this kind of "intimate" filmmaking will become more and more common as people start to believe in themselves and what is possible with a small crew and cast. Monsters has to be a touchstone for keeping things simple. Also I think people are starting to really appreciate a "natural" look in films where the use of lighting is less of a necessity- and the newer more sensitive cameras really help in this regard.

Don't get me wrong. I love big productions but there's room for all sorts.

And just because you think you are not a great writer does not mean you should necessarily give up. You shot a film. That's awesome. I agree with the person who suggested getting a new pair of fresh eyes to do a new edit.

Or it might be complete crap and you shouldn't waste any more time on it? I guess you have to work that out. Sounds like you got some poor reactions to the rough cut but people have been wrong before -> http://susiesmith13.tripod.com/id12.html

How about posting the first ten minutes of the rough cut on Vimeo with a password and letting us see it? Or just me ;-)

And honestly it might not be the best film but have you watched many films made lately with zero budget? It might be that "finishing" the film and scoring it etc and submitting it to a film festival or three it will find an audience? And a film is made three times right? Once in the writing, once in the shooting and once in the editing.

I guess I just feel like there's enough in those rushes you posted on vimeo to make me want to see a more polished version.

[Rolf Silber]

It is damn near impossible to make a living as a screenwriter, (almost) no matter how good you are. ...... there is a massive oversupply of writers competing for a relatively minuscule number of 'greenlit' productions, *at all levels*.

Now - the situation in the states and in some "other countries" (for instance here where I am) may be slightly different. In Germany we have about 200 to 300 scriptwriters who somehow make a living by writing for the moving picture industry - films for theatrical release, TV-Movies, TV-Serials. While the industry on your side of the pond seems to be able to surf on a tsunami of scripts written "on spec", in Europe you more often have the situation that a writer is asked to develop something and that script writing itself is seen as an craft & art that needs a lot of experience.

This is changing too and not to the better, I presume, because we have many universities by now who found it "chic" to have a film department too. Which is a mixed blessing: Now the place get's swamped with sometimes rather well written but empty "me too" scripts - but sometimes a writer appears from an unexpected "source" who really has some originality. So, my mistake, I referred to a writer who - under the European conditions - makes a decision to try and make his living with a keyboard. It still happens here to some.

[roei z]

Making a living from scriptwriting can invole writing
For tv, which in most cases end up being too controlled by producers. Same in hollywood.
I guess most of those writers keep writing their 'real'
scripts, and this is the real area i am lookin for.
It's somewhat the same as me, working a day job in editing
All sorts of garbage promo stuff, and trying to create
'by night'. You are talking about 2 different worlds here.
Only a Very small precentage get to creat exactly what they want In their day jobs.

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Now - the situation in the states and in some "other countries" (for instance here where I am) may be slightly different. In Germany we have about 200 to 300 scriptwriters who somehow make a living by writing for the moving picture industry - films for theatrical release, TV-Movies, TV-Serials. While the industry on your side of the pond seems to be able to surf on a tsunami of scripts written "on spec", in Europe you more often have the situation that a writer is asked to develop something and that script writing itself is seen as an craft & art that needs a lot of experience.

The 'problem' in Germany is a bit more complex than that... When ever I go to Germany I always head for some place to buy DVDs (and now BD) of 'german' films... what I'm usually confronted with is rows up upon rows of dubbed (Germans seem to hate 'subtitles' as much as Americans it would seem...) Hollywood productions, and a sparse showing of 'german' productions...

TV is similar... while "Kommisar Rex" may be seen in other places in the world... it is not seen in the US... Occasionally a 'german' film will escape, and be a 'hit', such as "Lola Rennt"(1998) and Tom Tykwer has had a few director opportunities in the US (or at least English language films...), but I personally like his 'german' films better...

Ok, there is one 'translation' I prefer... I prefer "The Parent Trap"(1960) over the "Das dopplte Lottchen"(1950)... what can I say... but I would prefer "Die Wilden Hühner"(2006) over anything 'for children' that I've seen from Disney of late...

Bernd Eichinger and the Neue Contantin Film did do more 'international' films... but unfortunately (as seen from 'german' film writers...) there were a large number of English language productions... heck, "Das Parfum"(2006) was cast with English speaking actors... and dubbed into German... (who ever dubbed Dustin Hoffman did not really get his 'vocializations'... but I digress...).

Then there's Uwe Boll...

[Rolf Silber]

The 'problem' in Germany is a bit more complex than that...
Then there's Uwe Boll...

We would derail this thread even more, if we would be going to discuss "The German Situation"..... ;-)

Language barriers but much more cultural barriers and traditions made (and to a certain extend still makes) German script writers(-ing) a bit too "introspective" for my taste and for an international audience. About Eichinger: He made much more money than most people realize with German comedies - comedies that would for a lot reasons reasons "not travel" that well.

"Das Leben der Anderen" or strange quirky comedies like "Wer früher stirbt ist länger tot" ... there is some potential.... but we suffer from not being able to really get across the hurdles that international audiences either expect us to bombard them with films that pretend to be intellectually "deep" and very "germanoid" ... or they expect something like "The Downfall".

Back to topic: Writers can make a living here and be in the business for a long time but clearly they have to be professionals in the sense that they realize not everything they will be writing for a living will be what they really love...... but maybe only what they may like.

[Rolf Silber]

You are talking about 2 different worlds here.
Only a Very small precentage get to creat exactly what they want In their day jobs.

I beg to disagree a bit - apart from the handful of real giants in the business like Kubrick for instance was, absolutely nobody who enters the world of film will under any circumstances ever get "exactly what they want". I think we all get - at best - something that is similar to what we want. And it's not even a bad thing, imho.

[roei z]

I beg to disagree a bit - apart from the handful of real giants in the business like Kubrick for instance was, absolutely nobody who enters the world of film will under any circumstances ever get "exactly what they want". I think we all get - at best - something that is similar to what we want. And it's not even a bad thing, imho.

you're right, i didn't mean it this "exact" way..
i mean that, most of the creative people I know, here in Israel,
either work their day jobs at shooting crappy commercials or "hired" directorial badly written stuff,
OR- the ones that do make what they want WITHIN the industry, mostly make crap. that's why they can do it.
and the more Indy, exceptional, different directors are almost not to be found, or making stuff on a very low basis.
once every couple of years or so. forget about seeing money from it.
i don't know how it goes in Europe.
that's why i see it as the best bet- completing stuff mostly on my own (especially now with the GH2 power)-
except the writing part ;)

[Rolf Silber]

i don't know how it goes in Europe.


For the time being I would not call what I do professionally "crap" - I can make a distinction between the things I like to do and the ones where I am the "lance for hire". But it is becoming harder by the day. But I still am in a somewhat privileged situation

Weekend a group of comedians & writers will meet at my flat and we will see what we may do in February to find a bit more "breathing"-space with short clips outside the pro-world. In this sense you are perfectly right: Digital video gives this freedom. In Germany (as in France and some other EU countries) funding for arthouse movies is a bit easier as elsewhere because of funding by state and certain institutions. It's only a bureaucratic nightmare....

[roei z]

sorry, didn't mean to call what YOU do crap,
it's just what i call the regular commercial and TV editing that has nothing to do with my personal driven artistic desires.
it DOES pay for my equipment, that's for sure.

[Rolf Silber]

No problemo. Hope you find your writer and good luck with your feature.... ;-)

[john threat]

this was a good thread. i learned a lot. I will probably not follow one shred of advice here = but it was very helpful with a lot of solutions for him.

Its a tough decision - i feel like its better to plunge ahead and complete things - but sometimes you have to let stalled projects go and move on to the next and learn from the mistakes. either path is good - unless it takes you five/ten years to complete - which I have seen someone do before.

[roei z]

this was a good thread. i learned a lot. I will probably not follow one shred of advice here = but it was very helpful with a lot of solutions for him.

Its a tough decision - i feel like its better to plunge ahead and complete things - but sometimes you have to let stalled projects go and move on to the next and learn from the mistakes. either path is good - unless it takes you five/ten years to complete - which I have seen someone do before.

i don't think this footage is useless and shouldn't be used and completed as some kind of a film. perhaps even a decently good one.
it's just that the "feature" will have to become something else. the script definitely doesn't hold more than 30 minutes at the moment.
my feeling towards it at is the other factor. if i'll be able to at least translate it and let some of you guys to read it, it might inspire me to do something about it.

* please share some of your personal experience, if you like to.

[Zblock]

Sorry I don't have time to read all the posts on this thread but I wanted to come in and add my 2 cents to the discussion.
My story seemed very similar. 2 years ago I bought a bunch of filmmaking gear and couldn't wait to jump in and shoot my 2nd film. I found another producer/director/actor/writer lol with a very decent and shootable script. I put my goals of shooting a full length on hold and we began a 3 month shoot for the short film "One Man's Goal"

A story about a soccer hooligan getting himself into trouble and the last line of the film is the main character sitting in a jail cell being asked what he's in for. His reply ..."for England." I was hooked.

We made a few mistakes (although I think we did pretty consistent work) and we had to reshoot a couple scenes and take out a few weren't happy with. The end result was an award winning short film that was highly ambitious. But I look back and remember fighting a lot with the director and generally having a tough time working because it was such a learning experience. BUT film number 2 was in the can.

This was nothing compared to my first run at a feature. Months later we had finished the short and had slammed a 65 page feature length crime movie "Fathoms Deep" into production.... Day One, people got fired (our director, 1st AD and our Lead Actor) Terrible day. We had to put the production on hold for 2 weeks to re-cast and re-structure. Within the next 3 weeks we finished shooting the movie and I worked tirelessly on it for a 14 months. The film just had it's world premiere in LA on OCT 13th 2011. www.fathomsdeepmovie.com (http://www.fathomsdeepmovie.com)

What a job it is making a movie. My attitude was similar to a few others on this thread. I said to myself "As long as I can make a movie that sits on the 65-100% percentile I'll be happy. I don't want to wait until things are perfect because yeah... "you'll be 400 years old and still not shooting." Overall you have to do what you want to do. Shoot, edit, distribute, repeat. This is how you get to be a working professional. No guts No glory... BUT No brain, No gain.

I'm now working on a webseries and in development on my 4th feature length.

[roei z]

thanks for sharing your thoughts.
i'll have a look on your stuff.
i just didn't get what was your role in those works, cause you mentioned other directors involved..

*watched the trailer.
looks like a lot is happening, which is good. i hardly had the time to criticize it ;)
do people buy the DVD? did you manage to get some money out of it?
btw- i have to say i wish you put more into outputting better audio, at least for the trailer.
it's a bit of a downside cause some of the lines sound almost as on camera recorded.
(i don't mean to be rough, sorry, but trailer audio is a must- especially after this well constructed site).

[Zblock]

I wrote/directed/acted in "Fathoms Deep." I produced and Dp'ed "One Man's Goal"

So far since Oct 2011 I've sold almost one hundred copies of the movie and I've given away another 50 as screeners and gifts. I have to sell 500 dvd's to get back my budget. Right now the plan is to tour a few cities in the spring and get rid of the last of the dvd's. Some of our audio was pretty rough but the only parts I hear that are off are the lines spoken by the detective in the blue room. Nothing was on-camera audio we just had an inexperienced boom op. We spent almost 8 months in sound design.
Maybe I exported with too much gain. I'll go give a listen.

Oh yeah if you're looking on the website you're seeing an older trailer. Check this out for our release. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRDtltpDozc

[Jordan Scott Price]

i don't think this footage is useless and shouldn't be used and completed as some kind of a film. perhaps even a decently good one.
it's just that the "feature" will have to become something else. the script definitely doesn't hold more than 30 minutes at the moment.
my feeling towards it at is the other factor. if i'll be able to at least translate it and let some of you guys to read it, it might inspire me to do something about it.

* please share some of your personal experience, if you like to.

Forgive me if it's already been suggested, as I haven't stayed entirely up to speed with this thread...

You could always take the footage you have, rewrite some things, add a few scenes, and cut it all down to a nice 10-minute short. Shorts are a lot easier to screen at festivals than features, and the shorter the better; longer shorts discourage festivals from adding them to the show because they want to show as many good shorts as they can.

You would be much better off with a solid, 8- to 12-minute short film than a sloppy, shaky feature that barely makes 70 minutes.

[roei z]

Forgive me if it's already been suggested, as I haven't stayed entirely up to speed with this thread...

You could always take the footage you have, rewrite some things, add a few scenes, and cut it all down to a nice 10-minute short. Shorts are a lot easier to screen at festivals than features, and the shorter the better; longer shorts discourage festivals from adding them to the show because they want to show as many good shorts as they can.

You would be much better off with a solid, 8- to 12-minute short film than a sloppy, shaky feature that barely makes 70 minutes.

thanks for the idea. most chances this is what will happen. that's the time for a good editor to step in and scramble all the pieces.

[john threat]

I would go with the short idea - most peoples first features are really solid shorts stretched out way too long.
Distilling it will be good and it helps one learn to trim the fat. A lot of first features, including my own first scripts didnt know how to get to point a to b without a lot of uninteresting fluff.

Learning to craft scenes and connecting scenes that are interesting and keep building the momentum and telling the story is skillful work!

[roei z]

if some of you here have time to lend me a hand...
i'll try to translate the script in the weekend and let you read it..
will not be easy to confront it again now but i think it's the right time.

who'll be willing to read it?

thanks.

[Jordan Scott Price]

I love reading scripts, so...

:)

[roei z]

ok, finally finished...
sorry for maybe a bit of "noob scriptwriting", but it flows.

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?ga7zk9co2eaepqo (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?ga7zk9co2eaepqo)


so, anyone who manages to read it, feel VERY free to be as strict as possible.
the worse is behind me ;)

thanks.

[mail4joeg]

Learn the format. Use it. Break that stuff up into readable chunks.

"1. OPENING AND CREDITS.

Black screen. We start to hear dark musical soundtrack that
slowly evolves into a bigger emotional score. In the
background we see blurred spots of colors, rapidly changing.
Still images starting to appear withing the background, and
tell a story of YONI and DANIELLE (aged around 30, both good
looking) who have a romantic relationship. The still images
are accompanied with sound bites that correspond to the
event. The first picture is the couple hugging, happy,
enjoying themselves with laughter heard in the background.
Next picture we see the couple in a more intimate moment, in
bed, feel closer and warmer.We hear intimate bits of a talk.
Next picture shows Danielle in a kitchen, cooking, but
looking less happy. Some sound of crying is heard. Last
picture is Danielle very frustrated and angry, looking at
the camera, screaming. Sounds of screams and vocal fighting
is heard. The opening sequence ends with a black screen and
sound of a door slamming."

Your slugline is supposed to tell us where we are. Where is the camera crew going? What the hell are we filming?

Half way through this dense, off-putting paragraph we get a hint that these are photographs. By that time, a lot of readers would have tossed it already, or be ready to.

This is one approach...

FADE IN:

BLACK

Slowly dissolving in a series of blurred colors like Christmas lights into:

SERIES OF STILL IMAGES

1. YONI (30s) and DANIELLE (30s), deeply in love kissing on the sofa. A KISS
2. Holding hands at the beach. WAVES CRASHING.
3. etc. blah blah.

[roei z]

thanks. i guessed that some of you might find the "script language" a bit sluggish.


the opening scene is more complicated so i think the rest is more fluid.

[john threat]

gonna read it tonight and see whats going on in this thing!

[roei z]

Wow, thanks :)
Hope you'll manage to fully read it.

[vision_filmz]

You need to learn the script writing format, it's to messy like this.