Anyone Here do business with Maverick Entertainment?

[GrahamRobbins]

Adam,

You are awesome its official I am starting an Adam fan club who is joining? haha but you definitely make a great point I hadn't considered. I do have a question though, does that mean there really are no lists other than say the A list? because thats something filmmakers throw around a lot and I really think it just confuses everyone. I really do believe we should base what actors we use not off wether they have a name, but off talent and there ability to play a role. I dont ever plan to write an extra little role into my scripts just so it can be filled by some "name". I think if you push it right a good movie will get distributed regardless of some small name roles.

Graham Robbins

 

[Mickey Munday]

Well, maybe. I just didn't want to be missing anything. A "name" to me is someone who, if I go and ask 100 people on the street in the demographic that the person is in, 80 to 90 of them will know who I'm talking about.

Names to me are:
Taraji P. Henson (new, but is in Benjamin Button, Hustle and Flow, and numerous Black Films)
Michelle Lynn Monaghan (MI3, Eagle Eye) Again they she's easy to miss, but she's been with some heavy hitters - I know I didn't recognize her in Eagle Eye.

But in the B-movie world maybe these people Nate is talking with are importaint, and that's what I'm trying to figure out. Many of my actors I've worked with have been involved in larger projects, my lead was just in Soul Men with Bernie Mac. But I also didn't know who "The Rock" was for a long time since I don't watch wrestling. And if someone pulled a baseball player for their film - again I would be like "who?"

i got you, i wasn't referring to anything you said, i'm just commenting on some of these "name actors" mentioned i've never heard of...i know the names like Taraji Henson, etc. but to be honest i would have to be reminded of her credits to know who she is right off the bat.

i've never heard of the names Nate pointed out.

i guess to me a name actor is somebody more than an actor that has a bunch of random IMDB credits and is someone who can contribute to the sell of the film based on their name alone.

stuff like "the big guy in the pizza shop on Sopranos" isn't a name actor to me when you have to drill into somebody's head what they played in and why you should know them.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Yep taormina makes good points - especially the fact that any name actor - lets say 'real' name actor, not somebody of mild celebrity value say, won't want to risk being seen to be involved in a micro.

I mean the only exceptions i would think of where that might happen is if they know the director personally and stuff like that - but otherwise no, (i even said it before in this thread) their agents would just freak out. So its ridiculous to say oh on my 5k movie im gonna spend 2k getting a 'name' actor for a day... not unless the whole package is swinging and credible for their careers.

Of course for the discerning producer having actors with celebrity connections / reknown or D list etc etc can be useful for impressing (or bemusing) some folk of the business community ie. for money etc. It could be enticing as it lets them get a peek at the world of celebrity - not to overplay that point, as most businessman would expect something valid in return (more than say a handshake with the 'star')

For my feature im interested in the most talented actors i can get (name or not) however, i should add also my feature won't be seeking to tap into the normal genre vein either. (Plus im British so that just about kills my gangster urban vampire movie wtih black rappers dead anyway!)

 

[GregWilliams2175]

A good friend of mine has a movie that was distributed by Maverick.
He say their deal was $20,000.

Paid in 3rds

1/3 at product delivery.

1/3 at release date.

1/3 60 days after release date.

He says they got the 1st 1/3 about 6 months after the release date. Another 1/3 about 5 months later. And the last 1/3 they have yet to receive.
He tells me that they give him all of the excuses in the world why they are not paying him on time for his movie. And he has just given up on the last of it.

 

[Nathyn]

stuff like "the big guy in the pizza shop on Sopranos" isn't a name actor to me when you have to drill into somebody's head what they played in and why you should know them.

If "the big guy in the pizza shop on Sopranos" was a reoccurring character and everyone liked him and thought he was funny or bad ass or whatever, then he's a name. People will know him that much more because they'll make an effort to find out who he is like Larry Thomas who played the Soup Nazi on and recently played Osama Bin Laden in Postal.

I will disagree with Adam on this one point, if it's a chick on a sci-fi or action show, then grab her. Horror, action and sci-fi geeks love our heroes and definitely we love our heroines and babes. Julia Ling was on one episode of Buffy and people still remember her as a "Potential". Also shows that play overseas as well as in America grab those actors too.

Plus genre is important too. David Karridene will always be able to pop up in low budget martial arts films and B-movies. He was in a bunch in 2008 and is slated for some this year. Kill Bill also upped his value a lot. It's simply about if people like the actor or not. Sci-Fi actors can jump from show to show like Christopher Eccleston went from Dr. Who to Heroes. It's all about the fan base and horror, action and sci-fi seem to have the strongest bases so Sci-Fi TV actors can translate into Sci-Fi B-movie and sometimes A - movie actors if done right.

-Nate

 

[taormina]

Actually it goes further. Some "name actors" are so diluted that they have barely any value at all to a distributor. David Carradine and Michael Madsen are two prime examples. Way, way too diluted.

You need to ask yourself why you're paying extra for these celebrities if they don't add return to the bottom line.

Trust my experience here. I'm going to tell you positively that the following people added nothing to the selling potential of Corrado:

Joe Gannascoli - 40+ episodes of the Sopranos
Edoardo Ballerini - 4 episodesof the Sopranos
Michael Bailey Smith - The creature guy from the"Hills have eyes" movies
Frank Stallone - well, you know - Sly's bro.
Ken Kercheval - 300+ Episodes of Dallas as a MAIN CHARACTER!!
John Fiore - 11 Episodes of the Sopranos, abunch of Brotherhood Episodes.

See, we had hardly any UNKNOWN actors. They were all somebody. Now I love those above guys on that list. They were awesome, dude. They made Corrado what it is.

But believe me when I say they added nothing, zlich, zippo to the sales value of Corrado as far as the distributors I spoke to.

Harsh, harsh reality people. You need to pick your name actors well. They had better be a name if you're going to spend money on them.

 

[Nathyn]

Frank Stallone - well, you know - Sly's bro.

LOL.

Harsh, harsh reality people. You need to pick your name actors well. They had better be a name if you're going to spend money on them.

It also depends on the genre and whose buying and how much the actor wants. Some actors can bring your film attention if nothing else. (Maybe not Frank but surely Joe Gannascoli). Pair the right actor with the right film and if nothing else it can get a lot of attention.

-Nate

 

[Mickey Munday]

If "the big guy in the pizza shop on Sopranos" was a reoccurring character and everyone liked him and thought he was funny or bad ass or whatever, then he's a name.

not if people don't actually "know" his name, lol. i get what you're saying though, but in my opinion a character like that helps have a more recognizable cast, not the sale of the actually film to a distributor....but why pay extra for a guy like that when you can put that towards getting an even bigger "name actor" as the lead or one of the leads? somebody that will actually HELP sell the film without somebody having to go to imdb, look them up, go through 10 of their photos and then say "oh...i know him!"

Actually it goes further. Some "name actors" are so diluted that they have barely any value at all to a distributor. David Carradine and Michael Madsen are two prime examples. Way, way too diluted.

Harsh, harsh reality people. You need to pick your name actors well. They had better be a name if you're going to spend money on them.

my point exactly.

 

[taormina]

I do have a question though, does that mean there really are no lists other than say the A list?

For some people, yes.

In my case, Sizemore, a C lister (in my opinion) is the reason for my distribution, and a guy can make movies filled with people like him and sell them all day long.

 

[taormina]

I also want to point out in Nate's defense that I'd much rather make a film with Joe Estevez rather than some nobody actor. These guys are pros on set and as long as you don't overpay you are good.

Publicity wise, here's another example.

Justin's film had two name actors in them for one day each. All the rest were nobodies. He then went on to win an award, get free commericals, free newspaper ads, all kinds of free publicity. His IMDB movie meter score is ALWAYS an order of magnitude HIGHER (worse) than Corrado's.

I've had comparatively less publicity for my film, at least in post, than he has. My cast is comprised of name actors of some sort...98% of them. And my film is much, much more well known than his, at least by the moviemeter metric.

So if he has had so much more recent high end publicity, why is this so:

Simple answer: Cast. I've got a dozen name people in my cast that are searched by people daily. He has two.

Pack in as many names as you can afford, nuff said.

 

[Jim2000]

I proposed a film with Z'Dar, Estevez and Landon in it. My film was rated something like 7,000 or something on IMDB so people were paying attention to it.

As a member of the film viewing public, I'd like to say that if I see a DVD with Robert Z'dar and Joe Estevez on the cover, there is no way in hell I would buy or rent that DVD.

It is better to cast your movie with unknowns than to fill it with people who are known for being in horrible movies.

 

[Nathyn]

But also there are many people who would buy the film and that's why they keep getting cast. Plus once the martial arts scenes and "sizzle reel" (I like that term) start to leak out people will be more than interested.

not if people don't actually "know" his name, lol. i get what you're saying though, but in my opinion a character like that helps have a more recognizable cast, not the sale of the actually film to a distributor....but why pay extra for a guy like that when you can put that towards getting an even bigger "name actor" as the lead or one of the leads? somebody that will actually HELP sell the film without somebody having to go to imdb, look them up, go through 10 of their photos and then say "oh...i know him!"

The reason you get small players is because of your budget. Remember we're talking about small low-budget movies. You learn to shoot cheap and move up. If a character is so endearing the public will find out who that person is. I watched a film called "Last Night". I was so caught up in with the Asian girl in the movie I was like "who is she. She's great!" Her name was Sandra Oh and suddenly I started seeing her in movies and shows and then Grey Anatomy. My point being I saw a person I thought was so good on screen I went to find out who they were.

I also want to point out in Nate's defense that I'd much rather make a film with Joe Estevez rather than some nobody actor. These guys are pros on set and as long as you don't overpay you are good.

Publicity wise, here's another example.

Justin's film had two name actors in them for one day each. All the rest were nobodies. He then went on to win an award, get free commericals, free newspaper ads, all kinds of free publicity. His IMDB movie meter score is ALWAYS an order of magnitude HIGHER (worse) than Corrado's.

And to me the key here is fanbase. The fans of the actor will at least know your film exist. If it's worth their time they'll keep an eye out for your flick. Like Victoria has gotten us a lot of press in the horror community almost immediately, Joe and Julia got a lot of press on SGS (before it fell through). These are indeed the people you want to see your stuff, the fans. My film is Action, Sci-Fi and Horror. The three genres fans are mostly likely to support.

-Nate

 

[Mickey Munday]

The reason you get small players is because of your budget. Remember we're talking about small low-budget movies. You learn to shoot cheap and move up.

oh see we're on two different pages then, i think you're talking about micro-budget film budgets as opposed to low budget (under 5 mill)...correct?

 

[Nathyn]

Yes, but a lot of these terms get thrown around without any real meaning attached. A micro-budget film can be my $800 "Wages of Sin" or a $200,000 film. SAG considers $200,000 the cut off point. I would say $200,000 is low budget.

The term Low Budget seems to cover a lot of ground but it really depends on whose talking. When you hear Hollywood execs talk about "under" five million bucks is low budget I ignore it. It's BS. Who here can say four mill is low budget.

Low Budget is really about $250,000 - $500,000 the average cost of a good low budget film with maybe a good B - C cast. Then you have studio films made for five to ten million, these aren't "low budget" either. Look at the names in them, Seagal, Snipes, Van Damme. Former A list actors that do millions in sales overseas. These names command money, even today. Snipes still got a few million a role. You may get these people to do supporting or cameo roles for cheap but to get them to star you'll pay good money. "Indy" covers all of these if they're not studio backed.

-Nate

 

[Mickey Munday]

The term Low Budget seems to cover a lot of ground but it really depends on whose talking. When you hear Hollywood execs talk about "under" five million bucks is low budget I ignore it. It's BS. Who here can say four mill is low budget.

yes, but in the big scheme of things, $5 million is small money for a studio compared to the hundreds of studio films that are out ($25-100+ million films, etc). at that level it's not a matter of who here on the internet forum has that type of a budget, but what it competes with in the market. a $5 million dollar is not competing with an $800 film or a $200k film unless they're being distributed equally.

so to rephrase my question and be more specific: i think you're talking about indie micro- budgets ($800-$200k as in your example) as opposed to low budget (studio pic under 5 mill)

a lot of terms get thrown around just like you said now and as i said when i first entered the post about "name actors." it's all on who's talking and how you interpret it. this could go on and on.

 

[Nathyn]

Yes, it's all in the perception to a point.

-Nate

 

[lawriejaffa]

I don't think anyone is under the illusion here that micro budget refers to a budget under 6 figures at least - in fact the whole term was invented for more or less as video filmmakers operating under 5 figures.

 

[jls4]

yes, but in the big scheme of things, $5 million is small money for a studio compared to the hundreds of studio films that are out ($25-100+ million films, etc). at that level it's not a matter of who here on the internet forum has that type of a budget, but what it competes with in the market. a $5 million dollar is not competing with an $800 film or a $200k film unless they're being distributed equally.

so to rephrase my question and be more specific: i think you're talking about indie micro- budgets ($800-$200k as in your example) as opposed to low budget (studio pic under 5 mill)

a lot of terms get thrown around just like you said now and as i said when i first entered the post about "name actors." it's all on who's talking and how you interpret it. this could go on and on.

I don't think anyone is under the illusion here that micro budget refers to a budget under 6 figures at least - in fact the whole term was invented for more or less as video filmmakers operating under 5 figures.

What determines a budget is something we all on this board throw around. Even for $200K what one person can do and what another can do will be two totaly different things. I mean if you know Stalone and he's willing to be in your $200K movie for free, you're $200K movie may be worth $1 million, just by his presence. It's like when AMD chips were fighting Intel in the early 2000s, AMD's chips ran faster so a AMD 1.5Ghz was faster than a Intel 1.5Ghz. I think it's about understanding the value of a film, not looking so much at it's direct price tag.

 

[jls4]

Moving from B to A? You want that big screen appeal do you? You have to start somewhere. First think about this: in some places B films are indeed A films. In Asia the DVD is probably more popular than going to the movies. Bootlegging is huge and films get around.

just trying to undertsand. My goal has always been to reach for the top. I learned quickly only to study what you want to immulate, otherwise you'll create it unconsciencly (sp?) . I stopped watching "B" films or at least what I thought were B films years ago. B-films all looked the same, with bad lighting, bad cinematography, acting, direction, etc. So why study them, or watch them? Sorry I like to be entertained. I can't make it though many "B-C" films because to put it plainly - they aren't that good. So why bother? Sorry to sound like a snob, but truly. Either set out to make a good film and give it your best effort - or give it over to people that are better than you.

I mean I liked Bowfinger - but I'm not making "Chubby Rain" LOL

Then ask what a "name" is, I'll give you and example. Anyone remotely famous is a name. Have you ever seen Maniac Cop 1,2, or 3? Neither have I. But I know of it and know for a fact it was always in heavy rotation on either Showtime or Cinemax (one of those). Robert Z'Dar played the maniac cop. He's loved by all those people who saw the film back in the day, so is Laurene Landon and Bruce Campbell goes without say from his Evil Dead films. (Don't even tell me you don't know Bruce Campbell, LOL).

LOL Oh you make me laugh - nope, never heard of 'em. My wife has though, so that's good. She more of a Sci-fi buff than me. I'm not a TV watcher. She told me I would recognize him if I saw him though - so that's one in your court.

I proposed a film with Z'Dar, Estevez and Landon in it. My film was rated something like 7,000 or something on IMDB so people were paying attention to it. What the name does is guide people who buy films based on names to your movie. They will ask upfront to see a copy of your film when it's done and in some cases continue to check on it.

This is why I'm trying to learn, because of avenues like this that I may be overlooking.

Or maybe even the film you saw advertised on the other DVD from the same distributor. ...
Black guy/chick walks into a video store and see a vampire film/horror film with a black cast, that's a sale. Hispanic guy/chick sees an action film with an all Hispanic cast, that's a sale.

Damn I'm weird. LOL I never do this. I actually only started renting Black Striaght to DVD films just to check out my competition when I try to go for distribution. Most of these movies suck and I don't spend time watching bad movies. Sorry. I know there is a market because my sister, Bro-in-law, family, etc they actually do RENT/BUY these movies. They'll ask me all the time - "You're the movie buff, what dod you think of xyz movie?" And I'm like "I didn't watch it - it looked like crap and the trailer just was uninspiring - so how was it?" and then they say "it sucked." and I'm like "yeah..." LOL

I do need to learn more about the B-C-D film world though - so this discussion is very good to me. I'm SOOOOO Thankful to you guys! :dankk2:

 

[jls4]

Cromwell didn't cost that much to my knowledge. I'd say half of that. You can't afford a couple A list whatevers for 30K even for one day.

A and B listers who find themselves out of work will not risk their careers on ultra micro mini budget stuff for fear of sinking lower.

Thanks for responding. Bu if you say that $9K will get a person like Cromwell, why not be able to get someone with a little name for $5K a day. Shoot we had a girl that was in 3 of Tyler Perry's last moves, plus had her own TV show and I'm not going to give away her price, but I paid her for one day and shot 4 scenes, much more than a quick cameo. We got 4 scenes shot, plus photoshoot done in less than 9 hours! And it was quality shots. We were just prepared. So I'm saying - say you have an actor maybe C-list. That is $3K a day for 5 days, then another for $2.5K for 4 days, then a few others under $2K for a couple of days. You now have some people throughout your movie. 7 scenes is enough for an actor to appear to "be in" the movie.

But I understand. I called an agent about a few people and he told me none of his actors would even come to my set for less than $5K a day! And these were people who haddn't worked in years! I was upset then laughed when I thought "I guess they won't be working for a few more years." I'm being sarcastic, but I understand where you're coming from.
:dankk2::beer: