AVGN - The Movie - $325,000 budget feature film being shot on AF100

A

analog_addict

New member
Not sure if any of you are familiar with the Angry Video Game Nerd but basically it's a very popular web series featuring a character called 'The Nerd' reviewing bad games from yesteryear.

Anyway, they started an Indiegogo and got over $325,000 in donations to shoot a feature film based on the Nerd. http://www.indiegogo.com/Angry-Video-Game-Nerd-The-Movie

Interestingly they are shooting on the AF100 as seen in some pictures here http://cinemassacre.com/2012/04/02/avgn-movie-day-1/

Should be interesting to see how the final product looks. Not sure the AF100 would be my first choice of camera with a $325K budget!
 
analog_addict said:
Not sure the AF100 would be my first choice of camera with a $325K budget!
Click to expand...


$325K is not a big budget for a feature... If you think of the cost of labor, transportation, craft services, and equipment rental for a feature lenght shoot, all costs add up quickly. It is easy to say "they got 325K, why arn't they shooting on whatever", but when you actually sit back and crunch the numbers to make the film, you start realizing how little money that is, especially as that is their WHOLE buget, not just the budget for production (meaning they also have to pay any costs for pre and post production). I am not saying you cannot make a movie on that budget (I have done a couple features with under 50K budgets), but you have to be frugal. People see 325k like it is alot of money (I saw people on the kickstarter page giving them crap over their chinese follow focus, saying for the money spent they should be using better a ff and that they cheaping out, with some people saying that it will be out of focus because of it... come on people.) My point is, producing a movie is ALOT more expensive than it appears (as everyone on here should know), and unless you are privy to their budget breakdown (or are a large investor), we should not be second guessing them about how they are using the budget.
 
Last edited:
Oliver Rush said:
$325K is not a big budget for a feature... If you think of the cost of labor, transportation, craft services, and equipment rental for a feature lenght shoot, all costs add up quickly. It is easy to say "they got 325K, why arn't they shooting on whatever", but when you actually sit back and crunch the numbers to make the film, you start realizing how little money that is, especially as that is their WHOLE buget, not just the budget for production (meaning they also have to pay any costs for pre and post production). I am not saying you cannot make a movie on that budget (I have done a couple features with under 50K budgets), but you have to be frugal. People see 325k like it is alot of money (I saw people on the kickstarter page giving them crap over their chinese follow focus, saying for the money spent they should be using better a ff and that they cheaping out, with some people saying that it will be out of focus because of it... come on people.) My point is, producing a movie is ALOT more expensive than it appears (as everyone on here should know), and unless you are privy to their budget breakdown (or are a large investor), STFU about how they are using the budget.
Click to expand...


FS100 produces a better image for similar money, just sayin'. I think you totally misread my original post. Maybe you need to calm down and not take things to seriously, I fear stress is killing you my friend.
 
I did not mean for the tone of my post to get ugly, and I apologize for that, but I stand by the point of my post. Also it also was not directed at anyone in specific, but to people on a whole who say things like "why are you only spending x on that when you have $325k", which is kinda a pet-peeve of mine. It is not anyone place to criticize the camera choice, the FF choice, or any of the other choices made by the production team at this point. We should be happy ANOTHER feature is being shot on the AF100, and chalk up another mark up for the camera, not be wondering why they did not use a different piece of equipment.
 
Oliver Rush said:
We should be happy ANOTHER feature is being shot on the AF100, and chalk up another mark up for the camera, not be wondering why they did not use a different piece of equipment.
Click to expand...

My post wasn't ridiculing the filmmakers. I posted here because I thought it was interesting. I then said if I had $325K budget I wouldn't have chosen the AF100. I shot with an AF100 for 6 months plus and would choose a different camera given a little more budget. Not sure what the big problem is?

Like I said in the original post, I can't wait to see the final product.
 
analog_addict said:
My post wasn't ridiculing the filmmakers. I posted here because I thought it was interesting. I then said if I had $325K budget I wouldn't have chosen the AF100. I shot with an AF100 for 6 months plus and would choose a different camera given a little more budget. Not sure what the big problem is?

Like I said in the original post, I can't wait to see the final product.
Click to expand...

It is not a big problem and I don't have a problem with you or any other member. Nor did I say you were ridiculing the filmmakers. My point is that we should be supporting a piece made with a camera that we all use, not sitting around talking about how if we had the money we would drop the AF100 and go with another camera, along with noticing when browsing the kickstarter site that people were criticizing their rig and equipment, with the general point being made there being "if I had that kinda budget, I would buy better stuff..." is what prompted my post. And I stand by my point. And I am sorry if I offended anyone and I am sorry people felt the need to report me. Again, I don't have a big problem with anyone; as you pointed out that you would shoot it with a different camera, I am pointing about how it is easy to say "I would do x" until you have to make everything work in the budget. Again, I apologize for coming across a little harsh, but lets not blow this out of proportion and move on. I know we all would like to discuss another feature using this camera.
 
Last edited:
If the movie is good, I don't care if it's shot on a PIMPFLRIEDER 4,1 K X-CAM (water resistant & steam driven) or else, as long as the pictures it produces are transporting the story well. People may decide to shoot on an AG-AF because they have access to it, so they can invest in another field. People may decide to use it, because it gives them more flexibility on set. People may decide to use it, because they are used to it. Interesting though that they use it for a feature. Shows this little thing has some punch for the price. Fine.
 
James chose the AF100 due to familiarity. His older projects were on a DVX100, then he upgraded to the HVX. The jump to the AF100 was just the next logical leap. He's been running with Panasonic cameras for a long time. Besides, it has more features than an FS100, so that's another bonus.
 
analog_addict said:
FS100 produces a better image for similar money, just sayin'. I think you totally misread my original post. Maybe you need to calm down and not take things to seriously, I fear stress is killing you my friend.
Click to expand...

This presupposes that they are buying the camera and not renting. Why not shoot on RED or F3 if they are renting? I don't get how this decision was touted and denigrated in the same breath. If I had 325k, camera would be the least of my concerns! Sound, production design, paying for a better class of talented talent... The list is extensive.
 
tipota said:
If the movie is good, I don't care if it's shot on a PIMPFLRIEDER 4,1 K X-CAM (water resistant & steam driven) or else, as long as the pictures it produces are transporting the story well. People may decide to shoot on an AG-AF because they have access to it, so they can invest in another field. People may decide to use it, because it gives them more flexibility on set. People may decide to use it, because they are used to it. Interesting though that they use it for a feature. Shows this little thing has some punch for the price. Fine.
Click to expand...
This is the ticket!
+1,000,000
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top