No Budget Feature Advice

I shot a feature for around five grand, give or take. The trailer is here: http://myspace.com/thetailor

For what we had, we turned out a pretty kick-arse festival bound film. I wont get famous or rich anytime soon, but it can be done with the right planning. Good luck!
 
GREAT WORK ALVERAZ...MORE PROOF THAT GOOD WORK CAN BE ACHIEVED WITHOUT MAJOR FUNDING...EVERYTHING LEADS TO SOMETHING SO YOU GET NOWHERE JUST THINKING OF ALL THE REASONS NOT TO DO A FILM...THINK OF ALL YTHE POSSIBILITIES AND WHO KNOWS WHAT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES WILL SPAWN FROM IT...YOU ARE AN DOER AND NOT A SPECTATOR AND THAT COUNTS FOR PLENTY...i HOPE THIS SNOWBALLS INTO SOMETHING GREAT FOR YOU...

BRAVO,
STAN HARRINGTON
www.xristosproductions.com
 
Good job Alveraz! Best of luck with it.

I'm about to go into production on a feature that has a budget of just $500 and a shooting schedule of just one day. Should be fun! :-)
 
Blaine said:
Regardless of everything else, your production will rise or fall with the level of your acting. People will put up with a lot, but if you have poor acting, you are wasting your time.
Click to expand...

Spot on, Blaine. I think the problem with most of the people that want to do technical AND direct usually have absolutely no acting experience and don't even know what good acting is...
 
I am also in process of making a low-budget feature, so here is what I think...
You have more freedom with low budget films. Look, almost every great director started with lowbudget, from Spilberg to Tarantino... Its great becouse if you make the worst film ever you lose nothing, you get expiriance, and you can call yourself Director. But there are tricks! You need great script, and your idea has to be personal (not big), it has to come from you. Next, remember Dogma (fon Trir, Vinterberg...) - that are low budget films but casting and actors are briliant. In low budget you have more time for your actors and that is great!
Also, you have to write for low budget - no more than few locations (that is very important). Ask yourself = why this scene hapends on this location? You have to think that nothing can f. with you! For sure you will know who you are after that expiriance, are you director or not.
I can recomend as example - "Three Times" by [SIZE=-1]Hou Hsiao Hsien, its briliant as idea and casting and actors and...

Sorry for my tarzan english and
Ciao
[/SIZE]
 
I think that bad sound and light and all those elements are unquestionably distracting, but I have always been a proponent of getting the content right first....if the story or concept, or content are dead, then it doesn't matter how good the rest is...conversely, audiences may notice the technical errors or even be distracted at points, but they will be far more forgiving of that than a boring movie...So many people thought Blair Witch would never sell because of the horrendous picture and sound but look what happenned with great concept and content? Get the story right first...not enough filmmakers spend nearly enough in learning about story, theme, sub-text, the big idea....there are many theater schools in most big cities...I challege those who haven't done so already, to go to a theater school and learn from the masters, Albee, shanley, O'Neil, Lanford Wilson...it's not as radical as you may think...a movie is a story told in pictures...tell a great story and write only what you are capable of shooting...limit the locations and effects....the rest is icing...yes the icing is delicious, but it's still icing...

Stan Harrington
www.xristosproductions.com
www.igfdb.com
 
The most important thing is, once you're in it, don't stop for anything! Keep going! Make it happen. The only way to really get experience is to do it! Regardless of the outcome, you'll learn mountains of information and years from now, you'll look back on the experience as one of those magical moments you wouldn't trade for anything .... well I suppose a few hundred million might take the edge off!:beer:
 
Actors are not furniture.

Actors are not furniture.

stan harrington said:
Get the story right first...not enough filmmakers spend nearly enough in learning about story, theme, sub-text, the big idea....there are many theater schools in most big cities...I challege those who haven't done so already, to go to a theater school and learn from the masters, Albee, shanley, O'Neil, Lanford Wilson...it's not as radical as you may think...a movie is a story told in pictures...tell a great story and write only what you are capable of shooting...limit the locations and effects....the rest is icing...yes the icing is delicious, but it's still icing...

Stan Harrington
www.xristosproductions.com
www.igfdb.com
Click to expand...
I believe this to be the single most important piece of advice I've heard here yet pertaining to film. My background is in theater. I've produced and directed a LOT of shows. Lots of original material. No musicals and not community theater. Casting in New York. Equity contracts. Name actors, directors and writers. Now I'm moving into film directing. Yet, I'm seen as a "first time director" by people who have made two student films and nothing more. There lay the problem with most filmmakers now a days. You go to film school, you learn about camera, lights, editing etc. you get out and start to make a film and then you treat the actors like furniture and the writer like an annoyance. When the fact of the matter is the writer is the ONLY true creative artist in the ENTIRE process. He is the only one that creates anything. The only one that starts with nothing. Everybody else is an interpretive artist interpreting the work of the writer. As for actors...Two truly interesting and talented actors working off a good solid script shot with a stagnet one chip camera is infinately more compelling than anything you will ever achieve with all the gear in the world and no good script or performances.

So yes...Do nothing until you have a compelling script in your possesion. Then spend all the time you need to find the right actors...then shot. And if you can't tell the difference between a good script and a bad one...read the works of some great writers. Rabe, Mamet, Foote, Stoppard the list of great playwrights is long. Read screenplays by some of the great screanwriters. Scripts are easily available on Simplyscripts.com download them. Read them. Learn from them. Read Paul Schrader's scripts, Woddy Allen, Robert Towne, once again it's a long list.

As for acting. If you don't know what an actors process is...then learn. There is no one method for all. A director needs to be, in a sense, mulitlingual. There are many approches to the craft of acting (and make no mistake, it is a craft) there is no one way through it and the methods are as vast as the actors themselves. As a director you need to sense how each actor approaces his work and deal with that person in their language. If you're in a place like New York, LA or Chicago, sit in on some classes or audit some workshops just to see how they go about it and what an actor goes through.

Remember, a camera or a light won't take it personally if you don't understand or respect them. An actor or a writer on the otherhand...

Just my two cents worth. Take it or leave it.


Juan.
 
"When the fact of the matter is the writer is the ONLY true creative artist in the ENTIRE process. He is the only one that creates anything."

Well, that's coming from a theatrical director, no doubt. The classical interpretation is that "Bach is with us even unto this day, using the hands and mind of the performer through which to express his original intent." The text is king, all that.

Hmm.. doesn't that make the performer a little like the "actors are sheep" thing?

Me, I'm more for the "films are written three times. Once by the original script, the second time on the set by the rewrites, the cast and the crew, and the third by the post production process" kind of a guy.

I think that most people know that you can change the entire sonority of a major chord in music by adding a single (relative minor) note to it. In the same way, by changing the delivery of a word or two, you can change the entire context of a scene to make it say something completely different from the original.

Is this all re-creation? Merely variations on the theme?
Are all producers, directors, cast and crew then merely puppets of the writer?

How about people who improvise? Are they writers?
If so, then are all the people who suggest a new variation then writers of the script?

Food for thought indeed!
 
JFC said:
When the fact of the matter is the writer is the ONLY true creative artist in the ENTIRE process. He is the only one that creates anything.
Click to expand...
My friend, I have a feeling you are going to get lambasted for this one. By itself, the statement seems rather ignorant and offensive. But I don't think you meant exactly what you said. First of all, the writer is not "the only one who creates anything." Whether you create something from nothing or out of something else, you are a creator nevertheless. Therefore actors, directors, editors, etc all fall into the 'creative' category. This is why we refer to it as a creative process. I think the crux of the point you were attempting to make is simply that the writer is the only member of the process who begins with nothing. Even then, I'd have to disagree with you. What about the production designer? I don't know any writers that write production design into their scripts, so I believe it's safe to say that the production designer draws from other inspiration to create their design.

Overall, I think the message you were trying to get across was accurate; at the center of it all is the script, so make sure it's a damn good one. I'm just not sure you needed to go as far as you did to make that point.

E
 
stan harrington said:
I think that bad sound and light and all those elements are unquestionably distracting, but I have always been a proponent of getting the content right first....if the story or concept, or content are dead, then it doesn't matter how good the rest is...conversely, audiences may notice the technical errors or even be distracted at points, but they will be far more forgiving of that than a boring movie...So many people thought Blair Witch would never sell because of the horrendous picture and sound but look what happenned with great concept and content? Get the story right first...not enough filmmakers spend nearly enough in learning about story, theme, sub-text, the big idea....there are many theater schools in most big cities...I challege those who haven't done so already, to go to a theater school and learn from the masters, Albee, shanley, O'Neil, Lanford Wilson...it's not as radical as you may think...a movie is a story told in pictures...tell a great story and write only what you are capable of shooting...limit the locations and effects....the rest is icing...yes the icing is delicious, but it's still icing...
Click to expand...

Best advice yet. Everyone should listen to this man. Another example of material outweighing technical "flaws" would be Clerks. It doesn't look or sound great, but the writing is so good, as well as the acting, and the charactes, that it doesn't matter. The film did pretty well at the box office for what it is, and it has that cult status. But that's one example of a film like that that was successful. Cassavetes' films weren't all successful financially, but artistically they were more than successful. Brilliant writing, acting, and directing is still brillaint, regardless of the quality of the sound, or the little bits of grain in the picture. A contrived, cliche, poorly-written, poorly-aced, and poorly-directed film is still a contrived, cliche, poorly-written, poorly-acted, poorly-directed film...but with good sound and nice lighting. You can both if you and your cast and crew are skilled and know what you're doing, but I feel the most emphasis should be placed on the writing and acting.
 
JFC said:
When the fact of the matter is the writer is the ONLY true creative artist in the ENTIRE process. He is the only one that creates anything. The only one that starts with nothing. Everybody else is an interpretive artist interpreting the work of the writer.
Click to expand...
If that's what you truly believe, than you're full of it. You obviously have no respect for any other person in the creative process... what does an actor do? He CREATES a character. What does a set designer do? He CREATES a layout of the environment. What does a cinematographer do? He CREATES the look of the environment through lighting and other means. Please leave these types of comments to yourself...
 
Last edited:
Take due note of the limitations imposed upon you by budgetary concerns and then approach them as if they were aesthetic choices. This approach will give you the best results with what you actually have availiable to you rather than what you wish you had.
 
Micro Budget Filmmaking IMHO and Experience

Micro Budget Filmmaking IMHO and Experience

1. The budget is the aesthetic. Period. If you haven't made at least three shorts, start there.
2. Know or get to know your actors and write for their personalities and talents, but don't expect non-actors to play themselves. Nice idea that rarely works.
3. Minimize locations even if free.
4. If using amateur/non-actors, don't give them a script. Give them situations and a few lines as the scenes are being shot. Structured improvisation helps to give more natural performances. Remind the actors not to act but to listen to each other and respond.
5. Be organized. Do walk-throughs with a camera and be realistic about coverage and time. Don't tell yourself you can shoot it both ways.
6. Have a Plan B for each scene. Will a master work? Or an over that you won't have to turn around on?
7. Sound is important. A decent boom, no less than an ME-66, on a stand as close to the actors as possible will get you audible sound for DVD, internet, or regional festival screening. (For theatrical release, forget it. Acceptable sound ain't gonna happen on no budget.)
8. Tell the cast up front that you have no money and they should bring their own lunches, coffee, water. Feed your crew healthy meals and provide bottled of water.
9. Keep your crew small even if you have a lot of people willing to work for free. Choose three people that are competent at three things over ten that know one thing at best.
10. Remember it won't be the only film you'll make. Be prepared to fail and learn from your mistakes. Have fun and treat everyone, including yourself, with respect.

Here's a link to the blog for my first no budget feature shot on two cameras, an HVX and a DVX.
http://madecrooked.blogspot.com/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top