Actors -- make your OWN film

'Can't really get better than free labor. Unless your a school you could charge tuition. lol. :happy:"
It can get worse. You could have the actors pay you to be in the movie. A well known indie author/guru/ filmaking/ director did something for awhile that was close to this (a couple grande a piece and you got credit and work and owned a sliver of the film).
What a bargain (I've known actors who've fallen for this with other filmakers and it only led to crappy films imho that went nowhere).

"Hey Michele, you can always sit the camera on a tripod and use the remote. All your shots will be locked down but, hey it's better than nothing. "
Maybe but the quality it sounds like Michele is seeking may have to wait till some of her friends that owe her one are back in town. I would however keep shaking the tree in your area because you don't know who might be looking to help out on a cool project. Good luck.
 
Zblock said:
Can't really get better than free labor. Unless your a school you could charge tuition. lol. :happy:
Click to expand...

It is not free if I have to buy a plane ticket sweetie!

Nathyn said:
Hey Michele, you can always sit the camera on a tripod and use the remote. All your shots will be locked down but, hey it's better than nothing. :)

-Nate
Click to expand...

Nate see below....

lambert said:
"Hey Michele, you can always sit the camera on a tripod and use the remote. All your shots will be locked down but, hey it's better than nothing. "
Maybe but the quality it sounds like Michele is seeking may have to wait till some of her friends that owe her one are back in town. I would however keep shaking the tree in your area because you don't know who might be looking to help out on a cool project. Good luck.
Click to expand...

Exactly....setting up a tri-pod and trying to shoot it by myself will mean lousy quality and that would be no better than sending a taped audition around. I would rather do as lambert suggests....wait a while until the folks who owe me are back in town!

We do have lots of film students but I really don't have the energy these days to micromanage young folks who think they know everything before they have done much of anything. If I was stronger behind camera, maybe I would be prepared for that...but I am an actor first and the rest I have been self teaching!

Guess I am a bit spoiled having gotten to shoot indies with people like Jack Daniel Stanley, Barry Green and David Jimmerson!

spoiled girl walking...lol
 
".setting up a tri-pod and trying to shoot it by myself will mean lousy quality and that would be no better than sending a taped audition around." Lousy quality is pretty subjective Michele. I've watched interesting films shot on flip and go pro hd cameras. For some actors these cheap tools (essentially point and shoot) video may work for their projects. I would much rather watch a good film shot on a flip camera with good sound as opposed to a great looking film with lousy story and sound. I'm sure your project will be dynamite Michele. Good luck
 
2nd that. Good luck with whatever you decide. I'm still sold on the idea of shooting your own films. I wish I would have started years ago. I can look back on all the time spent waiting for other people to put me to work when I could have been doing my own thing.
 
If I had a better working knowledge of lighting, camera angles, sound and so on...I might try the tripod method but those are weak areas for me. And even if a storyline is great...if the quality sucks, it is hard to get in to festivals. I have been a programmer before and often shocked by what did NOT get in based on quality...equally shocked by what got in because it looked good.

But if you are shooting your own projects, the odds are...if the quality sucks, very few people will see it. I should keep myself in check on this because I did make a music video for a friend with my camera and lack of knowledge and it has almost 30,000 views on youtube. But the song in question really lent itself to a home spun type video to begin with.

But f I make one...I want it to get in to festivals so it can be showcased and seen in the circles who might hire down the line.
 
"But if you are shooting your own projects, the odds are...if the quality sucks, very few people will see it" You might want to check out Greta Gerwig and her rise to stardom the last few years in a number of mumblecore films with Joe Swanberg. I believe Joe uses his moms 15 y.o. camcorder and doesn't light at all. She stared opposite Ben stiller in Greenberg/ she has an Ivan Reitman project in the works/ has a number of other projects with major names and all her early features would technically (visual/sound) qualify as sucking (for many).
The technical limitations of those films didn't stop anyone from hiring her.
Actors should know that they can shoot their films with whatever they have available and many many people won't have a problem with it if the story and acting are compelling enough. Good luck with your project.
 
I think that reality TV and, especially YouTube, has really changed a large part of the publics perceptions about what is "Acceptable technical quality" content. I think that setting up a camera on a tripod and shooting COULD be very compelling, if the content was still compelling. Maybe come up with a character and set up a short film where they tell a story like a video diary. I think that if the story and being told and the acting was compelling, I think that could be very good.

I think back to a section of David Lynch's film "Inland Empire" where Laura Dern sets across a table from a guy and just tells stories about her life. There is an extended version on the bonus disc. The camera just focuses on Laura Dern, with an occasional cut away to a shot of the guy she is talking to. It is amazing simple set up, and Laura Dern kick ass in it.

Of course doing a film more in the style of coventional fictional narrative would be cool, but don't be afraid to think simply.
 
There are things that can be done with a camera on 'sticks'. Do multiple takes at different positions, to allow a lot of intercutting in editing. You can also add some small amount of motion in editing, to keep it from looking so static.

Heck, I've got a whole feature film -- "Tangled Web" -- where the camera is locked on a tripod for the whole movie. It can work.
 
I've done five of these projects - and will never work with "Actor/Writer/Director" types - esp if the bulk of their work includes doing SAG/AFTRA background and they're looking to have me film a "fake trailer" or "reel shots" for them during the production.

This is a perilous proposition. This is my opinion, don't flame me for it. Most don't have set experience, (more like "in-holding" experience) and most forget about the BLOCK then LIGHT then REHEARSE then SHOOT sequence, violate 180deg rule, ask for shots that are not possible on budget constraints, actually know nothing about blocking period, most of their blocking was done for them (though they can land on a mark perfectly through stand-in experience), and expect the set to be ready and lit before any of their actor buddies they got to do the project on a deferral or free, step on the set. Lack of any UPM skills, any Pre-Production experience, nor realising that Post production needs to be worked out before the project starts shooting is also a minus. I don't blame them for it, but its not the segment of the production most actors are ever exposed to, maybe the did ADR once or twice, that's about it.

God forbid they poney-up any money for the project, then they micromanage the DP, Grips, Lighting Guys etc... Creating a crap work atmosphere, while OVERCOMPENSATING and pandering the needs of other actors they were able to get. Shudder over everything, don't listen to experienced advice, forget to feed people, fail to get adequate insurance, they tend give complete preference to the talent (as they identify with them), and don't know how to speak with a crew and usually have no respect for the crew. - All of this is an after effect of working many background projects and chattering in holding with other background actors in holding. So on a set to get them to be quiet for a shot is sometimes harder than you think.

On those projects I was called the "Camera Guy" or the "Video Guy" or whatever - never again am I going near this as it is filled with PERIL. If I'm asked to do a lighting setup (and hurry it up) before an actress is sent to wardrobe for change that takes her an hour, the director is an idiot, as wardrobe has to come before lighting - but this is done since most of the work they have done in the field involved stand-ins, so they were not on set, when stand-ins in same wardrobe were used to set up the lighting.

During a sit-in edit, one "Actor/Director" asked me to remove a very good take, since he did not care about his performance, he said he looked somewhat unflattering in that take, mind you this is 10 seconds (important 10 seconds of the story)
in a medium format project (30 minutes) - that is Vanity. Most want to get "something" out there, not something good, just "something" they skip on everything in post, including color correction, dialogue editing, scoring, music, foley, sfx and just about everything else, so they can meet some sad deadline for a contest or a festival, in order to nail up IMDB credits.

On one project 2 actors demanded that I produce them with a DVD for their reel, while the project itself is not release or finished in post yet in any way, their Actor/Director made deals with them, not with me though, and this is before the project even finished filming.

Some when directing a 2 person dialogue scene, yell out "background-action" when there is no background, since they're so used to hearing that.

One time, when shooting in a tight space, I put the video assist out for the director who was far away, together with headphone monitoring, when I asked if he likes the take and we're moving on - he did not hear me via the boom mic - I walked over to where he was, he said he did not watch it (He was too busy chatting up a female actress who he found attractive.... Telling her how he was a regular on some HBO show and all his other credentials) Seriously? - DITTO.

Sorry to speak negatively of this, but any time I'm approached by someone to help on an Indie, I ask them if they've directed and acted in it, or god forbid wrote it on top. If so, I run like hell in an opposite direction, away from their SAG deffered agreements, and their i-owe-you notes of their "Masterpiece" that does not even get to play on Netfilx instant for a cent a play.

With that said, I did 2 projects where an Actor directed the thing, but the only reason why I did it, is since that actor was not in the frame, and was not building a faux reel for themselves.

This model is so common, 1/2 of NYC SAG/AFTRA members are doing it here, all for YouTube releases or other, or just to show it to their friends or send it to their agent, sad part is, that 1/2 is also drawing unemployment, so they cannot pay for much, if anything at all. But somehow all manage to buy iPhone 4 and Prada shoes, when their residual checks of their "5 lines or under" from years back come in.


IT IS PERILOUS unless you actually know what you are doing, willing to do your homework, and also can jugle directing and acting, wearing a UPM and Producer hat all at once. Otherwise my advice is just buy/rent a camera and read a monologue,
like that dude on YouTube did with his re-enactments.

My 2 Cents/Opinion Only. - Not trying to shoot down your overly optimistic thread, but trying to give knowledge from hard knocks and experience of exactly these types of en-devours, which don't end well B.T.W. and leave long-term animosity for the talent, who once in a while will meet each other on the set of this-or-that in NYC.

But in my humble opinion only a small percentage of "working" actors who work mostly BG or 5 lines or commercials on bigger projects have a very skewed vision of thier actual knowle of the craft (and I mean production and directing, not acting), and what experience they do have, comes from PA's and AD's so they'll start trying to do "crosses" "bananas" and other while the scene does not warrant it, also having this "well backed" exposure on high-end project gives them no insight as to what other work goes into a completed project, having zero visiblity into pre-production or post-production cycles also hurts. Very few, who have started up directing and then happen to earn a wage acting can pull it of, only a few. Any small production or post guy puts themselves in serious peril when dealing with this type of setup.

Any DP, Operator or other needs to know this, as basically the easier way to go about it, is to rent your camera to the Actor/Director in question instead of investing time in to what in all likelihood will be a guaranteed dead-end/reel-padding, that may also cost money - Actor/Directors tend to not hire you, but hire your gear only.


Let me re-iterate, I'm not here to ablate hope, however some sobriety needs to be brought to this topic (or at least I feel that way), the other side of the coin of these projects is not as up-beat as you might think.
 
Last edited:
I am not going to flame you DJ, as I believe that this does happen...I just want to encourage everyone to MAKE your own films...if you can. My opinion. My first film was fraught with many of these problems too...you cant know everything but you can be sensible and try your best to do whatever you can to study up on the areas you are weak on.
For the Production and Post people that feel they get into perilous territory in these projects I would say, in my opinion, that you can smell these projects a mile away. Not always, but often. I also see countless production and post production people, on this site too, that try to make movies without knowing anything (although some actually think they do) about the acting or writing process yet think they can make a great movie because of their great camera technique and post production skills. I wouldn't suggest to them not to make films. I would do the same as with actors and encourage them to learn about the process that they are weakest in.

There's alot to be gained by making something...anything...in a world where people spend most of their time either waiting for a call or criticizing those that are actually in the arena and busting their balls to at least be pro active in their careers...I admit there are more bad films than good ones, but you'll never get anywhere doing nothing or merely sitting around. You have to take chances. You have to take risks. And try to learn as you go.
 
Last edited:
Damn, DJ, that is a very nice reality check, and a good primer on filmmaking and set politics/functioning. I just wanted to add, that a**holes are a**holes, in this business, and in every other. I have had, albeit at the bottom feeder/guerilla level, more positive experiences shooting then negative, but have had to deal with my share of a**holes. I continue to hone my bullsh*t/a**hole detector, but realize that it is not perfect.

I still assert that an actor should be pro-active in their advancement, and consider making their own films, as Chapelgrovefilms stated. However, your advice is great. If an actor is going to take this route, and seek the help of others (as they will have to), then they should not be an a**hole, and learn to treat people well. Of course, isn't that the secret to success in all of life's endeavors?
 
Last edited:
I have a friend who really wants to be a gaffer, so he wrote a short film script, raised the money, hired a director and UPM, and then put together a $25,000 short film that looks completely killer so he could get his first gaffer credit to put on the ol' resume. He's working on his second short like this now before moving on to a feature that he is also funding so he has that coveted feature gaffer credit, which is pretty tough to get just going about it yourself trying to get hired for that.

The scripts are pretty terrible, but the lighting is killer I have to say on that first short. Good stuff!

haha, just joking ;)
 
Michele Seidman said:
If I had a better working knowledge of lighting, camera angles, sound and so on...I might try the tripod method but those are weak areas for me. And even if a storyline is great...if the quality sucks, it is hard to get in to festivals. I have been a programmer before and often shocked by what did NOT get in based on quality...equally shocked by what got in because it looked good.
Click to expand...

chapelgrovefilms said:
There are things that can be done with a camera on 'sticks'. Do multiple takes at different positions, to allow a lot of intercutting in editing. You can also add some small amount of motion in editing, to keep it from looking so static.
Click to expand...

The whole scene of me in the final safe house scene in "Wages of Sin" was all on sticks. I set up the lights and tripod, got the focus right and used the remote, then sat down and did my thing. It's all locked down and I zoomed in a bit for some shots and out for the next then in editing I did a cross fade between the two. Would I want to do that for a whole feature? I don't know. I'm sure you guys all have a copy of my book "Action Filmmaking" right? Riiiight? :)

DJDecay said:
My 2 Cents/Opinion Only. - Not trying to shoot down your overly optimistic thread, but trying to give knowledge from hard knocks and experience of exactly these types of en-devours, which don't end well B.T.W. and leave long-term animosity for the talent, who once in a while will meet each other on the set of this-or-that in NYC.
Click to expand...

Sorry you had to go through that. I've written, directed and acted in two projects and am doing my third. I never had a problem with my crew and most work with me for the credit and the food. (They're usually students who want to work on a project). I will say this, not getting fed leaves a sour taste in one's mouth. I worked on a project recently for free and I was not fed. If I'm called to do a project with them again without being paid I will decline.

I'm not financially rich by any stretch of the imagination, if I can't pay you, you'll get fed at least. So if I'm doing a freebie, I expect to get some kind of food. Not that I'm starving, it's simply how things are done. If you see a homeless guy and you have no money, but you have some extra food most of the times they're glad to get it. Food will almost always work as enticement if you don't have money. You have any idea how far Pizza and Chinese food will stretch on a set. If you won't/can't get me a burger, drink and fries from the dollar menu ($3.30 I believe it would cost), maybe you should rethink shooting. Hey, burger and fries at least? ($2.15 or so, you know). Seriously, how many people talk smack about "Little Caesar's", but I've never seen anyone turn it down. Pizza Pizza.

-Nate
 
Last edited:
DJDecay said:
God forbid they poney-up any money for the project, then they micromanage the DP, Grips, Lighting Guys etc... Creating a crap work atmosphere, .
Click to expand...

THAT is exactly my fear. I don't know enough about all sides and could do more harm than good. I have produced industrial and commercials but I hired people who knew what they were doing and could fill in the parts I am weak on. I am smart enough to know what I don't know and hire people who can guide me on what works. If I got all newbies for a short...my fear is I would micromanage and the whole thing would turn out crappy!

You get it!

Nathyn said:
I'm sure you guys all have a copy of my book "Action Filmmaking" right? Riiiight? :)-Nate
Click to expand...

Nathyn, you do know I have done lead work in a Martial Arts film and done stunt work as well as worked with some of the best stunt and action actors already...right?
 
With that in mind Michele, my suggestion is pray real hard that I get rich and once I do, move to Chicago. :happy:

-Nate
 
Last edited:
Michele Seidman said:
THAT is exactly my fear. I don't know enough about all sides and could do more harm than good. I have produced industrial and commercials but I hired people who knew what they were doing and could fill in the parts I am weak on. I am smart enough to know what I don't know and hire people who can guide me on what works. If I got all newbies for a short...my fear is I would micromanage and the whole thing would turn out crappy!

You get it!
Click to expand...

Well point being is that it depends on the arrogance of the crew you hire, if you're a in the "director" seat, any crew worth their salt knows that the director is the final boss on the set, aside from his bosses who fund the project. So what director says goes. Director tells me to pan right, I'll pan right... that's basically it.

However the scary bits I described, earlier come out when the working Actor ("Director") wants to farm out the clue about blocking, framing etc... to someone else, and only worry about the "Acting" part of the thing..

And it would be like "Is this what you want"... "Yeah that's fine..." - and that's not entirely how it works, for video production you can hire a crew, that will shoot something that will look passable, but will it represent the directors vision. Usu when an experienced crew knows this, the DP or someone else shoots it for "safety" since clearly the director does not care what it looks like, nor what it sounds like or etc....

You cannot outsource your vision to a "video guy" or a film guy, or have the editor save it in the post....

Film is telling a story, visually more so than dialogue, but execution of this story telling is extremely important, each shot should make sense, then you'll need to shoot less angles and coverage to save bad story or performance in editing, And save money on the set..

So if you want to do it, you should get someone who knows what they are doing, but still know what it is that you want. So if you need a medium pair, then CU on actor 1 and actor 2, you and the DP should come up with that in pre-production, not the day of, storyboards, artwork and all other help. Only with video-bits for the web, could you make it up on the day of..

What I was specifically referring to, is that some folks in NYC here who are working actors, walked away from big budget sets, with big budget attitudes, and with little to no exposure to the "whole thing" so for them a certain things are indicative of professionalism, vs. the important things for the picture.

Not having the ability to draw or write a shooting script to communicate to rest what it is the "actor/director" wants, when all they want is their own performance upstaging rest is the number one killer. If you avoid that, and don't skimp out on pre-production, reading about the entire craft and are willing to settle for what you can get away with or afford for the piece, and use technology, lighting or (lack of lighting) to service the story, then you're set. - If you end up just watching the clock thinking about all the "differed pay" staff that took their weekend to do this, you'll drive yourself and the rest of the set crazy.

Things I should say if you attempt at directing, whether you get a compentent crew, or someone who has a snazzy reel but does not care for your story since it's just another gig or someone who just picked up an HD cam and light kit.


- BLOCK then LIGHT then REHEARSE then SHOOT. (Never outside that sequence)
- NEVER EVER EVER skip on sound, get a better sound crew than DP if you can, film is like sound with pictures, inaudible dialogue is not acceptable ever ever ever...
- Know what your post production will look like during pre-production, and not just who's editing it, but what they want based on what you're filming it onto, (Since a colorist might have some ideas about shooting flat, instead of all high contrast)

- Spend at least 5 times the time in preproduction as you plan to spend in production and post-production.
- Edit the script, Edit the script, edit the script again - not the final shot footage.
- Plan for a shooting ratio (stuff you filmed vs. usable stuff you'll end up with)

- Never have your tallent speak at once. Acceptable in real life, not really a thing to do in film. Confusing.
- Don't skip on close-ups, if your actor is not recognizable, they'll only be able to follow your "protagonist" if they've seen his face (the audience that is)

- Limit yourself to scenes where only 2 or 3 people are speaking at any time, filming a thanksgiving family dinner table with Mom, Dad, Aunt, cousin uncle etc... is one of the most difficult things in film takes 2-3 days for a scene sometimes, due to the amount of PAIRS and OTS shots you have to do to get adequate coverage and CU singles for everyone. <--- How does this happen, well Actors, know a lot of other actors, so they say, hey I'll just get 7 of my buddies and dole them out some lines, and then they could also help me with the project...... NO. don't do this.

- Never ever throw anyone a bone, if they're background, that's it, no reason to give them a line out of pity, you'll end up developing another character (yes I've seen people do this, and then ending up having to shoot another and another scene with that person... till they leave the state or the country.) Leaving your audience thinking, who was that person? - Everything in a film is for a reason - as the famous saying goes "If there is a shotgun hanging on the wall in the beginning of a play, by act 3 someone is going to get shot..."

- Peoples lives change, people move away, and loose interest quickly - try to get the principle photography and any ADR you might need done stat, don't films something weekend after weekend after weekend, for months, it will turn into a never ending story - have a shooting schedule and stick to it. I saw a film that took 3 years to finish shooting, where I know if planned correctly would have been 12 shooting days, 12 days, that's a no brainier. Also your weekends only project will loose momentum, as people switch hats ever week or other week.

So the recommendation is to stick to shorts you can finish in under 3 days first. (Production time) that means 15 days of pre-production.
 
Last edited:
Actually, with proper planning and scheduling you can do a feature generally quickly. I had to do weekends because of the situation I was in, but then again we were done in about three months.

-Nate
 
Got ya beat Nathyn -- got my feature in the can in three DAYS! :)

Michele, best advice is to do what producers do -- always hire the best, most talented, most experienced person you can afford for every job. That includes directing. Remember, your focus in this should be the acting. Hire a good director, then let him or her do their job. Do what you would do as an actor on any other production -- follow your director. If you've hired the right person, that won't be hard to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top