Short Film: What to do with it?

J

JP Films

Active member
Hi,
So I have this short film that was completed 2 years ago. It got into a few festivals and was generally received in both private and group screenings. It also has a few recognizable people. I keep asking myself, so what now? I ask you kind people because I've noticed that people on here generally like to help each other out.

I've come up with a few options
1 Put it up on my website- what i failed to mention was that it's a short film that came out of a feature film idea the we're still trying to "shop" around.
2 Put it up on a more public site for the world to see. For example youtube or vimeo.
3 Get a couple of other shorts together and submit to netflix.

That's about all I can come up with. Any other ideas would be greatly appreciated.

:dankk2:
JP
 
what do u mean, get some other shorts together and submit to netflix? netflix is interested in buying short films? let me know, ive never heard of this. i never heard of them being in the business of buying films at all.
 
Netflix absolutely has short films! Check out "Spacemen, Go-Go Girls, and the Real Meaning of Christmas".

I wouldn't even try to package it with other films -- submit it on its own and see if Netflix picks it up. What do you have to lose?
 
Netflix is also absolutely, positively in the business of buying films. I went to an exhibition and indie film seminar last year in Santa Monica, with my business partner, and two of the people there were from Netflix, talking about feature films they buy the rights to and distribute through their network, basically. From what I understand the prices they pay are pretty weak, but for some people... probably a good option.
 
Here's what the netflix site says. The film has to be over 60 minutes or part of some compilation. Currently the short is at 25min. So I would need 35 min of additional work.
 
"Spacemen, Go-Go Girls, and the Real Meaning of Christmas" is only 33 minutes long.

"Spacemen, Go-Go Girls, and the Great Easter Hunt" is only 18 minutes long.

Both are on Netflix. In fact, they're available for instant viewing, so you can watch 'em online right now.
 
I guess it wouldn't hurt to try. If that doesn't work maybe some on here would be interested in putting something together....
 
Shorts don't generate revenue, doing a quality short is a waste of money unless...

You are using it to sell a feature film (which you actually noted). Put the feature film's package together:
  • Write the full script
  • Break down the script
  • Create the budget
  • Use the short to try to land actors
  • Use the short to find the money
The short is a tool, use it. It won't generate significant revenue by itself, but it could lead to a project that will.

Bob
 
Bob Gruen said:
Shorts don't generate revenue, doing a quality short is a waste of money...
Click to expand...

At least 90% of the time, that's true. But let me tell you a story that I find rather inspirational....

A guy here in Charlotte, NC was a struggling screenwriter. His wife, who was a model, aspired to be an actress. But neither of them was getting anywhere. So they decided to make their own film.

He wrote a script for a short (about 30 mins, I think) called 'Despair'. It had only 2 characters -- played by his wife and himself. One location -- their apartment.

He had a VHS-C camcorder. No external mic. No lights. No crew. Just him and his wife. Every night after work they'd come home and shoot. Because they had no crew, they couldn't both be on-camera at the same time.

Once the film was shot, he had to edited it. He had no non-linear editing gear, so he edited by connecting the camcorder to a VCR and doing it the hard way. He spent $80 on a cheap titler from Best Buy (I think) to make the titles and credits.

He composed and performed all the music. He also created all the box cover art, etc.

From start to finish -- including writing the script -- it took them two weeks. Total cost? Probably about $100.

He peddled it around and got reviews from people like Joe Bob Briggs, who reviewed it on his website -- he actually liked it!

Sold some copies. Then it got bought and distributed on a DVD with some other shorts. He recovered his $100 several times over. They even got invited to some horror convention as 'celebrity guests'.

Since then, they've made a number of other movies, getting better and better -- and even had some B-movie 'name' actresses (scream queens, I think) involved.

But the point is he DID make money from his original short film. It's rare, to be sure -- but it is possible.

The guy's name is Mark Baranowski. Here's his IMDB listing: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1075955/
 
I appreciate all the feedback. What i would really like is for more people to see my short film. Don't get me wrong, money would be great. I wouldn't really care if Netflix bought the thing just as long as people could download it or rent it from them.

Now my one concern is that if i put it up on a website for folks to see could it potentially hurt me when it comes to selling the feature. Maybe i should have stated this concern earlier.
Any thoughts?
Thanks again folks
 
chapelgrovefilms said:
At least 90% of the time, that's true. But let me tell you a story that I find rather inspirational....

A guy here in Charlotte, NC was a struggling screenwriter. His wife, who was a model, aspired to be an actress. But neither of them was getting anywhere. So they decided to make their own film.

He wrote a script for a short (about 30 mins, I think) called 'Despair'. It had only 2 characters -- played by his wife and himself. One location -- their apartment.

He had a VHS-C camcorder. No external mic. No lights. No crew. Just him and his wife. Every night after work they'd come home and shoot. Because they had no crew, they couldn't both be on-camera at the same time.

Once the film was shot, he had to edited it. He had no non-linear editing gear, so he edited by connecting the camcorder to a VCR and doing it the hard way. He spent $80 on a cheap titler from Best Buy (I think) to make the titles and credits.

He composed and performed all the music. He also created all the box cover art, etc.

From start to finish -- including writing the script -- it took them two weeks. Total cost? Probably about $100.

He peddled it around and got reviews from people like Joe Bob Briggs, who reviewed it on his website -- he actually liked it!

Sold some copies. Then it got bought and distributed on a DVD with some other shorts. He recovered his $100 several times over. They even got invited to some horror convention as 'celebrity guests'.

Since then, they've made a number of other movies, getting better and better -- and even had some B-movie 'name' actresses (scream queens, I think) involved.

But the point is he DID make money from his original short film. It's rare, to be sure -- but it is possible.

The guy's name is Mark Baranowski. Here's his IMDB listing: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1075955/
Click to expand...

I never understand how total amateurs making horrible, amateur work with no crew is inspirational. I've noticed on DVXUser there are a high number of complete amateurs who think that stuff is inspirational, though I just think it's... amateur. I like to hear about people being ambitious and doing pro work on a low budget, not people being tools and making lousy work because they don't have any money. Get the money, make pro work, or don't bother wasting anyone's time.
 
JonathanLB said:
I never understand how total amateurs making horrible, amateur work with no crew is inspirational. I've noticed on DVXUser there are a high number of complete amateurs who think that stuff is inspirational, though I just think it's... amateur. I like to hear about people being ambitious and doing pro work on a low budget, not people being tools and making lousy work because they don't have any money. Get the money, make pro work, or don't bother wasting anyone's time.
Click to expand...

It's inspirational because if a guy who has no idea how to make a film can still make a profit and get distribution on a short, then there's hope for those of us who are trying to do it right.

At least, I find that inspiring.
 
JonathanLB said:
I never understand how total amateurs making horrible, amateur work with no crew is inspirational. I've noticed on DVXUser there are a high number of complete amateurs who think that stuff is inspirational, though I just think it's... amateur. I like to hear about people being ambitious and doing pro work on a low budget, not people being tools and making lousy work because they don't have any money. Get the money, make pro work, or don't bother wasting anyone's time.
Click to expand...

And by the way, how do you know he did 'horrible, amateur work'? Just because he used existing lighting and a consumer-level camcorder?

His story was simple but good. The imagery he created was surprisingly interesting and compelling. He is a good composer, so the music score was good. Granted, the audio could have been better -- but there was very little dialogue. Yes, it would've been nice if he'd been able to use better equipment. Even so, he created a LONG (by most standards) short film that succeeded in spite of its shortcomings. Joe Bob Briggs gave it a good review. People liked the film. All things considered, I'd say he accomplished more with his 'amateur' short film than many of us here have managed with our superior equipment and crews.

How many of us have made a short that has been (a) reviewed favorably by a nationally-known film critic, (b) made a profit of several times its cost, and (c) been sold into distribution? For those who can say "I have!", then answer me this -- did you accomplish all three of these things with your FIRST short film?

I don't tend to be elitist. I don't tend to be condescending to people who start from humble beginnings. I like to see sparks of talent and potential in even the most humble offerings. But that's just me. :)
 
Well I agree it's great to have high aspirations and not let things hold you back, but I'm a perfectionist and I made a lot of awful short films back in the day when I was an amateur, I wouldn't have wanted anyone to see them. That's how I am, though, I want to be very well prepared for something before I tackle it, and while I'm very ambitious I also am realistic about what it requires to make professional work, which is a professional crew and professional equipment combined with a great story or a great idea.
 
I agree with Chapel. I've made several shorts and a feature both with a 25 person crew all the way down to a four man crew. What matters I believe is the story and quite honestly the love for doing it. Sure I may not always have the most money or best equipment but that doesn't mean I don't think about what I'm doing or try and plan it so my project doesn't hurt from the lack of craftsmen or money.
It's all a learning process. In the end I don't think it's nice to trash the work folks do because you never know.

I want people to see my work and if it's crap I want them to decide after they've watched it not before.
JP
 
Well don't get me wrong -- I think the guy lucked out. He did everything wrong. But apparently he has some talent for making compelling images and story, and that overrode (in this one case) the technical shortcomings. It certainly wasn't Citizen Kane, but it was a successful first effort.

I've always wondered what he could accomplish if he had great equipment, a skilled and experienced crew, and did proper planning and execution. I certainly don't aspire to make any kind of movie using inferior equipment or talent, and I don't suggest anyone should.

I guess my main point was that if you have an interesting and compelling story, it IS possible to make money from a short, although it's rare. If you want to make money, the best way is with a feature.
 
I think shorts are great for practice. I don't mean to offend anyone with that, as in I don't think shorts are by any means unworthy of recognition or praise. A great short is a fantastic achievement, I really want to have a short I'm proud of on my reel. But I think it's most healthy to look at them as a learning experience where you can get a handle of working with actors, writing dialogue that works (if you're writing too), figuring out blocking more, maybe perfecting technical skills, etc. Shorts seem like a fertile training ground for building your skills as a filmmaker. I just don't think they should be looked at as money-makers because most of the time that will result in disappointment.
 
I agree, nobody should expect to make money off of a short. Profiting from a short is rare. But it can happen.

By and large, though, shorts serve two main purposes -- honing your skills and getting your work recognized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top