"Corrado" - A production blog

Status
Not open for further replies.
alright once again, you must have celebs in your movie to sell it if it sucks. if it is an original, great movie, no celebs needed. some proof is -

what distributors are looking at buying your film? small time distributors that deal in these staight to dvd tits and ass flicks? or good distributors like columbia, universal, paramount, sony, or even lions gate?

now if your movie is a good original idea then one of these bigger distributors would be interested. just like they were in napolean dynamite, clerks, el maraichi, and blair witch.

perhaps you feel im setting the bar to high with blair witch, napolean, and el mariachi, i dont think i am, im gonna make something that will compete with those films or im gonna admit i aint no film maker and get outa the business.

and common, if you cant make something that will compete with el maraichi with a 300 grand budget, then once again, why are you making a film? el maraichi was made for 7 grand, in poor town mexico, with guys off the street, and dialogue recorded to a frikin tape recorder after the fact. and somebody in here said it wasnt a great movie yesterday. bs, its better than 90 percent of the big budget hollywood flicks ive seen in the last 2 years. why is it good, becuz robert rodrigez is a frikin film maker. plain and simple. he is a film maker.


as for this formula being a good working one, no its not, most of us dont have 75 grand in our bank account, atleast i dont right now. its one thing to come up with 20 grand but 75 is a bit harder.
 
Did you even read what I wrote?

I said that making the "great movie" is the goal. And that you should also have name talent in case as that always helps to sell your movie.

I'm kinda sick of people trotting out the same five films as "proof" that you can make it big with no stars and an original story. These are ANOMALIES, people.

If It was so easy, everyone would have done it.
 
i know, i hate the fact that i only have 5 examples off hand. but thats kinda my point, theres alot of shabby movies out there. why is it that these 5 movies are great but other people cant make a great movie. once again my point, theres only a handful of people that can do this job. everyone simply cant make a feature film, or even a watchable short for that matter.

we will soon see if i can put my money were my mouth is. im working on a feature right now that im confident will compete with these other 5 films. its a story thats never been told before. its completely original and a non stop story with twist around every turn.

but like ive said before, if when it is completed it turns out to look like the crap i see everyone else making. if a good, quality distributor isnt interested in it, if they say well it aint got no celebs in it so it aint good enough. i will admit that it sucks and look for a new profession. im not gonna make half assed movies when theres other people out there making great ones.

anyway, this is just my view. its the way i am, please dont take me for an asshole or a crazy dreamer. i just wanna see people make better flicks. ive ran outa movies to watch, hollywood cant even make good movies anymore. i would sure like to see another, Troy, Kingdom of Heaven, 300, or Die Hard, but they just cant seem to make those lately. its all about Stompin the frikin Yard now.
 
taormina said:
I'm kinda sick of people trotting out the same five films as "proof" that you can make it big with no stars and an original story. These are ANOMALIES, people.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Part of the problem is that aspiring filmmakers *only* ever hear about the Blair Witches, the Big Fat Greek Weddings, etc. What they don't hear about, because they didn't succeed, are the thousands and thousands of movies made by people who thought they could also have Blair Witch-type success who never got out of the gate. Their failure creates a self-concealing demographic.

And nobody cares who *didn't* win the lottery...

Adam has done exactly the right thing in populating his cast with name actors, particularly Sizemore and Johnny. So he has the right answer to the "who's in it" question. And as an action/genre film he's got a good answer to "what's it about" too. Smart man.

What he does by this means is separate himself from those aforementioned thousands, and drastically increase his chances of being taken seriously. If he delivers a good movie, not necessarily even a great one, he'll probably be invited back to try again (evidently he already has).

Those thousands of non-Blair Witch-ers almost certainly won't. Unless they're the next lucky one-in-a-thousand. Don't bet on that...
 
one more thing, almost all the scenes in el maraichi were done in 1 take, robert would even say STOP while shooting and have everyone freeze while he changed angles, then they would pik the scene bak up from were they left off. this is incredible, the performances in el maraichi are frikin great. yet once again, people with expensive equitment, DP's, sound designers, lighting guys, whole crews and as many takes as they need, still cant produce something that i would pay 1 dollar to see.

and ted, do you care who didnt win the lottery?
 
I don't believe this is a black & white, either or situation. There are gates in the process of getting a film to market, one is distribution, and they want bankable A list actors. As previously stated you don't need name A list actors to have a hit, but distributors want them so I guess we need them in order to get proper distribution. I'm sure distributors are reacting to exhibitor demands. These exhibitors stand in the lobby of their theatre and the hear buzz going on with the public. It's supply & demand. A list names are a way of marketing a film. It's marketing that has everyone perplexed. How do you get traction in a crowded market full of ADD life styles? Speilberg's name alone fits the marketing requirement so he can afford to use non A listers [i.e., ET] and turn in a hit. Big Fat Greek Wedding, Blair Witch, Open Water, Napoleon Dynamite, etc... those are mysteries. Each project has to have a unique angle that helps it get attention. The anomolies indicate that there aren't 100% hard and fast rules to this game.

By the Way: El -Marichi wasn't a big hit but it got RR in the door. I admire RR for his talent & determination. Yes, he can shoot well, fast.... but now he needs to write better stories with depth, he's lacking there.

Adam seems to be making the best out of what he has at hand. If I remember correctly he put this together pretty much all by himself...that's a tough work out, and praise worthy.
 
Last edited:
10s said:
The Sixth Sense was a hit because of the ending. We're not use to being lied to by the story teller, but we were lied to all the way through the story until the end when we found out the truth. It was refreshing to be lied to and tricked by the storyteller, not many are willing to do that to us. This is another example of the power of story. It was a decent traditional story structure until the end when we found out we've been had. And that was a huge surprise!.
Click to expand...

Have you never seen Usual Suspects?
 
taormina said:
If you went off and made a movie and no one recognizable was in it, it can still be a good movie. Even a great one, but in today's "model" it will probably not get seen or will be bought for peanuts.

Disagree? Tell me why I am wrong. Please.
Click to expand...

Sorry, have to play the Devil's Advocate

THE SIGNAL, Canon XL H1, think it had less than your budget and Magnolia scooped it up for what was the number? 1.5 Million.

No named talent anywhere.

Just being Devli's Advocate. I'm sure you'll get Corrado distributed and I'm sure we'll see for how much in the press releases thanks to Tom Sizemore's name being on it which will prove your point.
 
Well, he said "probably"... there are always a few exceptions like THE SIGNAL. But the chance of being this exception is pretty low, so better get name talent.
 
more than a "few", there are hundreds of examples from the last decade... The Puffy Chair - no stars - $15,000 budget - $190,000 theatrical gross - i don't have the numbers for DVD but they made a deal with Netflix.

now we're not talking millions, but either is Adam with regard to Corrado. he has graciously displayed for us how a dvxuser takes the next step into the tried and true model of STV distribution. but keep your eye on my feature, Heart of Now. i'm putting my money where my mouth is. We should have a locked cut around thanksgiving, then you'll see exactly how an alternative means of distribution works. "don't bet against me" - adam c. :)
 
Last edited:
I really have no idea what I'm talking about but there are two totally different types of movie being described here, right? The "B-movie" which usually sucks, frankly, and relies on the strength of a recognizable name and a well designed DVD cover. Almost always D2DVD.

The other kind of movie that people have been throwing around is what gets idolized as the archetypal indie - the movies that people make with their friends, on the weekends, with their personal savings and by borrowing/stealing equipment. Eraserhead, El Mariachi, Clerks, Blair Witch, Open Water, Primer, The Puffy Chair, The Signal, Once, Bella, Baghead. Yes, these hits are rare. It's hard to beat the system and make a movie that Hollywood can't/won't make and that people will pay to see on the big screen.

None of these have names, all of them exhibit masterful storytelling and unique cinematic technique. Pretty sure these are all from first timers, and pretty sure they all made money. And if I'm not mistaken, all of these got (or will get) theatrical releases. But yeah, incredibly hard to pull off.

So your odds of making money are much higher with the first kind. The direct to DVD route is relatively solid. There are obviously a lot of distribs who are confident they can sell crap as long as there's a name on the DVD jacket. But obviously, even if there's a name, if it never rises above B movie territory, it's not gonna make it to a theater.

Not saying it's as black and white as that, but I wonder if having a name is maybe not as important as it once was. If there's a choice between selling a movie on the strength of a name or on the strength of the story, well... It's the unique stories that we haven't seen before that do well on the festival circuit, get picked up, make it to the theater and make a name for the creator. Nobody cares that there are no stars, it actually makes them better.

The B level movies, name or no, just keep getting pumped into the shelves at blockbuster. But the guys behind 'em are probably much more likely to be making steady money.

Maybe that's just oversimplification. It just seems odd to me that there aren't more cases where the great indie no budget script meets the B level actor who falls in love with the project. Money, meet story. It seems like it's one or the other.
 
Last edited:
Ooh, I love Primer still to this day. Funny that you refer to them as "hits", Jared. They really are just that.
 
if you dig a little deeper, perhaps looking at the mumblecore movement, you'll find filmmakers sustaining themselves from film to film without theatrical distribution. doesn't have to be a hit, it just has to be marketed intelligently to their own niche audience.
 
I don't mean to be sarcastic. However, I'd like to keep my end of the conversation very narrowly focused. I don't believe in putting one name actor in a movie just to get a distributor to pick it up, because I want to make movies that I believe in. I don't think the money is big enough if I did a small movie with a B-name. To me it's frustrating to work like this and spend decades of my life pursuing such dreams.

Corrado is a different matter. Adam had the money and the desire to be a movie maker. He studied the situation and in a very short time determined that Corrado could be a success. He got the actors and the distributors and proceeded to make a commercially viable movie.

If Adam succeeds I'll do the same. I'll get one name actor and take one of my best stories and make a movie for one or more distributors that I will contact before I begin production. In fact I'll attempt to secure a distribution agreement of sorts before I even begin. I have to do that because that's the only way I can borrow the money to make the movie.

So I'm not being sarcastic, just cautiously optimistic. I can't afford to stick my neck out and make a $600,000 movie based on interest from distributors. I think it's a big chance to take.

To me this is the appeal of this thread. When I say good luck, I'm sincere.
 
Oh yeah, another general lesson on Hype is illustrated in this thread - 69,000 views - amazing.

Hype is alive and well. Or buzz, or whatever they call it.
 
69,000 views? How many DVDs of Corrado would sell if you had that many views when the movie is finished? What's the percentage on the Internet? One sale per 1,000? You'd sell 6,900 DVDs at, say $20 profit per DVD, that would make $138,000.

Wow, that would be pretty good. If you could sell 69,000 DVDs, that would $1,380,000!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top