This is information freely offered on the web elsewhere?
Corrado Part II
- Thread starter taormina
- Start date
This is information freely offered on the web elsewhere?
With all due respect tom's full retail price is his full retail price but keep in mind full retail is a penny on the dollar for him. He is under contact right now for a network pilot with erick roberts that could possibly turn into a prime time series, I sure hope so, I really like comeback stories. Stay tuned!
I'm really glad to see Adam got his project in the can, I really like the guy and wish him the best however my sources say it's under $2m for his budget. One thing about this biz is if you start posting things that aren't true they will come back haunt you. He should have not even mentioned a budget.
I'm really glad to see Adam got his project in the can, I really like the guy and wish him the best however my sources say it's under $2m for his budget. One thing about this biz is if you start posting things that aren't true they will come back haunt you. He should have not even mentioned a budget.
You can't believe everything you read on IMDB. Especially the budget numbers.
The several times I've asked producers about their budget as posted on IMDB, they either smile like "no comment" or flat out tell me those weren't really their numbers.
Not saying that is or isn't the case here only that a film's publicized budget on IMDB must be taken with a grain of salt, just like a film's writing credits. ; )
Hey, Jeff Lowell here. As I said on DoneDeal, after the comment that was quoted above: "I'm being a little too hard on him - there certainly are some interesting lessons, and he makes a movie (and apparently a second). He talks a good game, and that is half the battle sometimes."
Corrado got him back in the director's chair. Congrats to Adamo. Whatever miscalculations anyone thinks he made, the movie did its job, and no one can argue with that.
Corrado got him back in the director's chair. Congrats to Adamo. Whatever miscalculations anyone thinks he made, the movie did its job, and no one can argue with that.
Ted Spencer
Veteran
FWIW, Dov Simens, in his well known "2-Day Film School":
http://dovsimensfilmschool.com/homepage.html
...advocates describing a film with ~$300K limit for production as having a "million dollar budget" for all purposes outside of the immediate circle of people directly involved with its finances, and for promotional purposes in particular. Just for the sake of discussion, by that math, an "$8.4M Hangar 14" would have a $2.5M production budget, which I think is fairly close to what I (somewhat dimly) recall Adam talking about. Of course I have no knowledge of whether Adam is applying anything like Simens' fuzzy math...
http://dovsimensfilmschool.com/homepage.html
...advocates describing a film with ~$300K limit for production as having a "million dollar budget" for all purposes outside of the immediate circle of people directly involved with its finances, and for promotional purposes in particular. Just for the sake of discussion, by that math, an "$8.4M Hangar 14" would have a $2.5M production budget, which I think is fairly close to what I (somewhat dimly) recall Adam talking about. Of course I have no knowledge of whether Adam is applying anything like Simens' fuzzy math...
Last edited:
Ted Spencer
Veteran
In "Corrado"'s case, I think it's pretty apparent that Adam's path to his current "Hangar 14" stage (as we know, a *much* more fully funded and crewed film), was the result of two primary things: his decision to borrow and spend over $400K on the former, substantially to hire name actors, and (presumably) his well-demonstrated ability to wheel and deal. Without those things, I think it's a safe bet that Adam would likely have had nothing more than a nice little run on the Oblivion Express...
And he probably would have still had to borrow a couple hundred grand for the ticket...
Most people do not have the where-with-all to do that, so it makes Adam's case an exceptional one, not an exemplary one, for general consumption by aspiring micro-budget filmmakers.
I hear ya, I really do, and you're far from being a lone voice on this. There's even a book called "Make your Own Damn Movie" about...well...
But there is a pretty seriously dark side to this idea, with major consequences. Many a young (or not so young) first-time filmmaker, full of innocent but profoundly misplaced belief in his/her film, has put themselves into *serious* financial hell, hocking not just their own futures, but that of their loving families, trusting friends, and willing business associates who threw down on it as well. There are a lot more than a few such stories. Some of these people have done jail time for it. Seriously...
So..."just go ahead and do it"? Hmm...
Ok, I get that, but:
-Our hypothetical "completed bad movie" will remain what it is: a great big steaming heap of bad movie-ness - forever.
-Our hypothetical "perfect unfilmed script" could *and should* make an excellent film. Even if someone else makes it (and foolish they'd be if they didn't, right? I mean, it's a *great* script). That really *is* something of value...
Yes. At some point. And that time is *when you have something that's really, truly worth doing*. When they started out, Terry Rossio and Ted Elliott (Shrek, Pirates of the Carib franchise) didn't show their scripts to anyone for *five years*. They waited until they felt they really had a handle on the craft. And in time, they did. They *don't* regret that 'waiting' time now. Because it *wasn't*. The truth is that it was time very well spent learning and perfecting their craft.
An analogy: would you advise an aspiring surgeon to bail out even halfway through medical school (wherein, as we all know, a relatively stupendous number of years of training is required before one is permitted to practice)? Would you say "just go ahead and do surgery - the life-clock is ticking!"?
Didn't think so...
Of course, the stakes aren't quite as high for filmmakers.
But they're plenty high enough...
My $.02
Last edited:
I think micro budget filmmakers actually could learn a lot more from Adam's imperfect journey with Corrado than from the guys that made Pirates of the Caribbean and Shek; which were made as corporate tentpole films.
No one says go off unprepared but sooner or later you have to believe in yourself and the project to risk something. The only way any indy film ever got made is that someone put the objects in motion when there was uncertainty about the outcome.
Last edited:
Ted Spencer
Veteran
That's missing the point completely, which is that when they started out, Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio *intentionally* stayed completely off the radar - not even making an attempt at getting a screenplay produced - for five years, while they perfected their craft. That meant writing and shelving any number of scripts, chalking them up to learning experiences until...*they learned enough from them to write a really good one*. THEN, and only then, did they go out into the world and attempt to market their work. They had only very modest success at the beginning, and have published some very amusing/poignant articles about that period on their wordplayer.com site (a truly great resource btw, one not to be missed IMO). "Shrek" came 12 years after their first imdb credit ("Little Monsters", in 1989), and the first "Pirates" film was two years after that. So their "tentpole" level of success grew out of...exactly what I've been advocating - making sure one has the *ability* in place before one makes a serious attempt at doing the thing on a professional level. *This is what they did*. No more, no less...
It should also be noted regarding the 'tentpole' "Shrek" and "Pirates" franchises, that at least in the case of "Pirates", they all but originally invented the whole thing; they are credited not just with story and screenplay, but characters as well. At this point, Jack Sparrow might as well be their very own Mickey Mouse. And IIRC, according to their articles, the Shrek and Princess Fiona characters are all but their personal inventions as well.
So...tentpole? Sure, definitely - literally billions of dollars worth. But who 'pitched' that tent? Well...pardon the mixed metaphors here, but...to a substantial extent, a coupla guys who really knew when to hold 'em... : )
Last edited:
no it's not missing the point actually. There is a great difference in being a paid screenwriter that wants their work consumed by major studios and filmakers who write, direct and produce their own work in a sub 3 million budget. As there is is a great difference as to studying a science to be a surgeon where life and death is involved vs. an artistic pursuit; which was also off point.
again, making a film takes preparation, a ton of it. I'm not saying don't master your craft, in fact it takes mastering more than just screenwriting but every aspect of the creative process. But once the diligence has been done and you feel good enough about the project to move forward, as Voltaire said, perfection becomes the enemy of the good (and a convenient excuse to let fear win the day). Ultimately you need to have the will to overcome the doubts and move forward because no one will make it happen for you. Or you can pile up the screenplays and impress the relatives at Thanksgiving as you dissect The Bicycle Thief.
I have a friend who played Sundance and he told me a story that I think about quite a bit, "We had a script we liked but didn't have the money in place, but we decided was to have a hard shoot date and begin filming no matter what. The budget we had would dictate decisions as they came as to location/crew etc but we were making the film no matter what." Well the act of doing that, putting their intention in the world, ended up getting them $1.5M and a indy star. If they had not proceeded with the certitude the film would not have been made and they would be still reading articles by Elliot and Rossio.
Whatever Carrado was creatively, the process was a success because Adam did something similar (but chose to make a genre film with better foreign market potential). How do we know? Because he is making another film.
again, making a film takes preparation, a ton of it. I'm not saying don't master your craft, in fact it takes mastering more than just screenwriting but every aspect of the creative process. But once the diligence has been done and you feel good enough about the project to move forward, as Voltaire said, perfection becomes the enemy of the good (and a convenient excuse to let fear win the day). Ultimately you need to have the will to overcome the doubts and move forward because no one will make it happen for you. Or you can pile up the screenplays and impress the relatives at Thanksgiving as you dissect The Bicycle Thief.
I have a friend who played Sundance and he told me a story that I think about quite a bit, "We had a script we liked but didn't have the money in place, but we decided was to have a hard shoot date and begin filming no matter what. The budget we had would dictate decisions as they came as to location/crew etc but we were making the film no matter what." Well the act of doing that, putting their intention in the world, ended up getting them $1.5M and a indy star. If they had not proceeded with the certitude the film would not have been made and they would be still reading articles by Elliot and Rossio.
Whatever Carrado was creatively, the process was a success because Adam did something similar (but chose to make a genre film with better foreign market potential). How do we know? Because he is making another film.
Last edited:
Look, this thread is getting majorly derailed, so this will be my last post.
The trouble with saying "wait until your script is great" is basically, that it's a kind of low-content truism. OF COURSE, you want to have the best script possible before shooting. We all get that. You may also want a pony, and that's fine. But life is complicated. You are not telling anybody anything new when you say that - after all, how many filmmakers said to themselves "let me make a film based on a poor script". The problem is not simply with "who says which script is good" (and many successful artists had their initial submissions ignored, or shouted down), but it has to do with learning the craft. Terry and Ted could afford to "wait", because they kept developing their craft. And to do that, all they had to do is write - that's in toto. But a director must direct, and so he must make films, because that's the only way s/he'll learn the craft. There are things you learn writing a script you are going to direct, that you cannot learn by writing scripts to sell. That way, a screenwriter is a bit different from a writer/director. A writer/director doesn't have the option of simply sitting on his behind and polishing a script. A writer does. A writer can learn from writing even a bad script, just as a director can learn from directing even a bad movie. And this is borne out in experience - like I said in my first post in this thread - many great directors started out by making really bad movies. Because if you don't do it, you will never learn.
Scenario: writer/director A takes 5 years to write a perfect script. Writer/director B dashes out a poor script in 3 weeks and shoots it in 1 year, then repeats the process 2 or more times, and by year 5, if he's talented and willing to learn from his mistakes, he can have a good career. Writer/director A is still polishing his perfect script, and if he now manages to finally film it, his film is likely to be poor, because he has no experience directing. Writer/director A will still need a couple more efforts to find his sea legs, pushing him to year 7 or 10.
Ultimately, everyone is different. Some need to learn by "DOING" and making mistakes. Some are perfect out of the gate - and maybe founder later, when they start making mistakes they never LEARNED to avoid through hard experience (Orson Wells comes to mind). Regardless, everyone has their pace.
The point of my post was to issue a call for the NON-OBVIOUS advice - do it, even if your script is not "perfect". Because to say "wait until your script is great" is obvious advice, and really needs no re-iteration. What does need mentioning is what I said: DO IT.
I think Adam's example with Corrado is an illustration of that. And no, I have not seen Corrado, but that's irrelevant to my point - even if it were the worst film ever, my advice would still stand... and the fallout (he gets to make a second movie) speaks for itself. Now it is up to Adam and God/Fate - is Adam smart enough to learn from his mistakes and evolve as a filmmaker and has God/Fate given him talent. But he made the right first move - to go ahead and make this movie. KUDOS!! And it seems that at least he's aware of some weaknesses of Corrado, so maybe he'll be OK.
Regardless, my advice stands: go do it. You learn only by doing.
The trouble with saying "wait until your script is great" is basically, that it's a kind of low-content truism. OF COURSE, you want to have the best script possible before shooting. We all get that. You may also want a pony, and that's fine. But life is complicated. You are not telling anybody anything new when you say that - after all, how many filmmakers said to themselves "let me make a film based on a poor script". The problem is not simply with "who says which script is good" (and many successful artists had their initial submissions ignored, or shouted down), but it has to do with learning the craft. Terry and Ted could afford to "wait", because they kept developing their craft. And to do that, all they had to do is write - that's in toto. But a director must direct, and so he must make films, because that's the only way s/he'll learn the craft. There are things you learn writing a script you are going to direct, that you cannot learn by writing scripts to sell. That way, a screenwriter is a bit different from a writer/director. A writer/director doesn't have the option of simply sitting on his behind and polishing a script. A writer does. A writer can learn from writing even a bad script, just as a director can learn from directing even a bad movie. And this is borne out in experience - like I said in my first post in this thread - many great directors started out by making really bad movies. Because if you don't do it, you will never learn.
Scenario: writer/director A takes 5 years to write a perfect script. Writer/director B dashes out a poor script in 3 weeks and shoots it in 1 year, then repeats the process 2 or more times, and by year 5, if he's talented and willing to learn from his mistakes, he can have a good career. Writer/director A is still polishing his perfect script, and if he now manages to finally film it, his film is likely to be poor, because he has no experience directing. Writer/director A will still need a couple more efforts to find his sea legs, pushing him to year 7 or 10.
Ultimately, everyone is different. Some need to learn by "DOING" and making mistakes. Some are perfect out of the gate - and maybe founder later, when they start making mistakes they never LEARNED to avoid through hard experience (Orson Wells comes to mind). Regardless, everyone has their pace.
The point of my post was to issue a call for the NON-OBVIOUS advice - do it, even if your script is not "perfect". Because to say "wait until your script is great" is obvious advice, and really needs no re-iteration. What does need mentioning is what I said: DO IT.
I think Adam's example with Corrado is an illustration of that. And no, I have not seen Corrado, but that's irrelevant to my point - even if it were the worst film ever, my advice would still stand... and the fallout (he gets to make a second movie) speaks for itself. Now it is up to Adam and God/Fate - is Adam smart enough to learn from his mistakes and evolve as a filmmaker and has God/Fate given him talent. But he made the right first move - to go ahead and make this movie. KUDOS!! And it seems that at least he's aware of some weaknesses of Corrado, so maybe he'll be OK.
Regardless, my advice stands: go do it. You learn only by doing.
lawriejaffa
Veteran
Its a tricky one eh guys! I think regarding Adam, the nature of film profitability and the reality of his productions and rewards are not ones we can really determine, understand or appreciate without knowing the facts. We're never going to know those facts. Yes he is making a second feature, but that doesnt mean anything either. Whether his first film bombed or hit he would always have claimed (any producer surely would) that it was a success anyway, or that the next film will be an even greater success and command an even greater budget etc.
I mean there is so much smoke in mirrors really that there are no definatives by which you or me can really garner, to know whether a filmmaker is being succesful commercially/financially.
I think the advice about perfecting ones craft sounds more impressive in the form of a charming anecdote - but its no more credible than the equally charming anecdote about an indie producing a hit feature with $5 and a jam jar.
What your told is BS obviously, but what you experience first hand, what you as an artist and professional feels from working in or around the industry - that is real, judge by those experiences and screw the interviews, stories, rumours or yep... even multi paged threads.
I mean there is so much smoke in mirrors really that there are no definatives by which you or me can really garner, to know whether a filmmaker is being succesful commercially/financially.
I think the advice about perfecting ones craft sounds more impressive in the form of a charming anecdote - but its no more credible than the equally charming anecdote about an indie producing a hit feature with $5 and a jam jar.
What your told is BS obviously, but what you experience first hand, what you as an artist and professional feels from working in or around the industry - that is real, judge by those experiences and screw the interviews, stories, rumours or yep... even multi paged threads.
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Well gang, I guess in the end we'll all have to agree to disagree to the extent that we do, and raise a glass to that about which we don't, right?
It's not a black and white issue by any stretch...
And yes, bosindy, it was on the point in both cases, although I should have made it clearer that I meant *my* point, not some sort of an absolute...
My position is taken from long, long experience as a professional in the entertainment business, both film and music, where I've seen literally hundreds of people make the same mistake, often over and over, until they've finally succeeded in utterly defeating themselves. That mistake is a very high overeagerness to underpreparation ratio. It's an epidemic from my vantage point, and IMO goes a long way in explaining the much quoted (and quite correct) 99% failure rate, which applies equally well to almost all art forms.
Unfortunately, the public at large rarely hears about these countless cases since failure in the arts is self-camouflaging; bad art is almost instantly buried...forever.
So...should we just cut to the :beer: now?
: )
It's not a black and white issue by any stretch...
And yes, bosindy, it was on the point in both cases, although I should have made it clearer that I meant *my* point, not some sort of an absolute...
My position is taken from long, long experience as a professional in the entertainment business, both film and music, where I've seen literally hundreds of people make the same mistake, often over and over, until they've finally succeeded in utterly defeating themselves. That mistake is a very high overeagerness to underpreparation ratio. It's an epidemic from my vantage point, and IMO goes a long way in explaining the much quoted (and quite correct) 99% failure rate, which applies equally well to almost all art forms.
Unfortunately, the public at large rarely hears about these countless cases since failure in the arts is self-camouflaging; bad art is almost instantly buried...forever.
So...should we just cut to the :beer: now?
: )
Last edited:
I wish there was a clear cut way to tell when you're underprepared. Sometimes, even having no budget doesn't mean underprepared for certain content, it just means that you have to work harder to achieve the end result, which will probably vary from the initial vision.
As someone who's walked the feature walk and am heading into the "somewhat" final stages, I can agree with both sides... and, that is difficult. Either way of thinking and behaving, acting, is valid. You do not have to choose and be wed to one, either, there's a balance in there somewhere... it's just difficult to find.
I am hoping to become guilty of the over-eagerness category come this May. But, I can't seem to sit still without becoming a social wreck these days. Haha.
Great thread, guys. Don't think the thread got Derailed at all, as this is all part of the real conversation that needs to happen to inspire, or reign in, filmmakers that are looking for advice or even a verse to read from different sides of the fence.
User rocks!
Staven
Well-known member
One thing to keep in mind, usually when people refer to filmmakers throwing caution to the wind and going for it, it's generally about the success stories that stem out of true artistry and talent. Usually these success stories also include festival runs and loads of press and acknowledgment of these filmmakers and they go onto remarkable careers whether monetarily or artistically. It's normally the story telling and style that sets these people apart from the rest and a lot of these first efforts were made for peanuts.
This thread and part 1 are great, with loads of information that could help out an aspiring filmmaker, especially one looking to make indie films in LA. But the movie Corrado is unfortunately really really really poorly made.
Adam himself is a success story, and I do not want to take anything away from him, but the message that if you spend X amount on Name Stars it will get you distribution isn't one I would want to impart on anyone wanting to break into the business. I'd rather tell them stories of Shane Carruth, Rian Johnson, Kevin Smith and such. But the message of buy stars and your movie will get released just makes watching movies less of an allure.
I'm all for the "f" it lets go for it attitude", but I do not like the idea of this particular movie being an example of that attitude being a success, because we either get worse movies or people find out they are the rule, not the exception.
This thread and part 1 are great, with loads of information that could help out an aspiring filmmaker, especially one looking to make indie films in LA. But the movie Corrado is unfortunately really really really poorly made.
Adam himself is a success story, and I do not want to take anything away from him, but the message that if you spend X amount on Name Stars it will get you distribution isn't one I would want to impart on anyone wanting to break into the business. I'd rather tell them stories of Shane Carruth, Rian Johnson, Kevin Smith and such. But the message of buy stars and your movie will get released just makes watching movies less of an allure.
I'm all for the "f" it lets go for it attitude", but I do not like the idea of this particular movie being an example of that attitude being a success, because we either get worse movies or people find out they are the rule, not the exception.
Mickey Munday
Well-known member
just out of curiosity -- at what point would you pull the trigger if you had a script you wrote, has been through drafts and rewrites that you felt good about and you also had an investor as well as Tom Seizmore attached to your project? I'm not trying to be flippant or anything. Just asking, because I'm sure Adam felt confident in his script before filming. The only real test to know if the story was actually ready or not is to ultimately shoot it and put it out to the public. You can get all the opinions in the world, but if the audience doesn't accept it then it wasn't as ready as you thought. I'm sure the tons of movies in Hollywood like Jonah Hex (biggest box office flop of the decade literally) that's been through several writers, drafts and everything under the sun to make the filming great all thought their script was ready at some point. At what point would you personally say to yourself "okay, this script is LOCKED and ready to go!"---?