Corrado Part II

[Staven]

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!"---?

My take on what Ted was getting at was develop the craft first. Even though Corrado may have spelled success for Adam, he put the cart before the horse. I have no doubt that he is now a better filmmaker from his experience on Corrado, but I believe Ted is trying to dissuade others from diving headfirst into a sometimes life altering experience without building themselves up to that moment beforehand. **Especially when we are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars at stake. I know of a local filmmaker who basically did the same thing as Adam, (except he didn't get the name cast), but he wasn't ready as a filmmaker to take on such a large scale production and it failed miserably. No idea how he is paying back all his friends the tens of thousands each he sold his guaranteed success story to.

 

[Erik Olson]

Studios don't do much better. If producers waited to get the script locked to everyone's satisfaction, most films wouldn't get made. It is the rule that pages come down daily and the resulting shooting script will have fewer and fewer white pages as physical production progresses. This is the reality of scripted narrative production in TV and features. Rainbow shooting scripts and A, B, C page number suffixes are the norm. Corrado went into production precisely when it should have - when the package was ready.

 

[Mickey Munday]

My take on what Ted was getting at was develop the craft first.

Right. I get that and I don't have a problem with that. The thing is, obviously Adam felt as he had developed the craft. I'm not so sure he would have began filming if he thought otherwise. If you've done all you can do with the script, people like it and you feel good about it -- at what point do you pull the trigger? I'm not asking from a standpoint of me not knowing, I'm asking Ted just out of curiosity what he personally would do in regards to his opinion if he had a script he felt great about and actors attached liked. At what point would he pull the trigger. You can collect positive opinions, feedback and coverage on your script for years and it still turn out to flop.

Studios don't do much better. If producers waited to get the script locked to everyone's satisfaction, most films wouldn't get made.

Exactly. I'm all for making sure you have the craft tight, and if you can't get the script to where you want it to be then hire somebody...but too many opinions/feeback on a single project is the reason a lot of films end up all over the place as it is.

 

[bosindy]

My take on what Ted was getting at was develop the craft first. Even though Corrado may have spelled success for Adam, he put the cart before the horse. .

But who here is saying go make a film unprepared and who is anyone to determine who is ready to make a film. Every film is different and every filmmaker is at a different place and no one can be an expert on what someone else should do. I haven't seen Corrado, apparently people think it wasn't an artistic success, but who is anyone to say Adam shouldn't have made his film or that it wasn't a success for him personally in any number of ways beyond whether it made a single dollar. You might not do it that way, I might not either, but thats as far as it should go.

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.

Maybe most don't have the where-with-all I don't know, but the people I know who have been successful making films independently do. Not the same skill sets maybe, not the same types of projects, or artistic talent, but the same where-with-all definitely. What people should take away from this thread is it is damn hard to make a film, and even harder to make a good one and harder still to make a good one that is a "success." But it all begins with doing it and only you can decide if you are ready.

without going into my own gory details, there were always people who said "you shouldn't," and if I had listened to those voices, I wouldn't be doing what I am right now. I don't claim any great success either, but I have had a little, even more failure, still learning new things all the time, but I am a good distance farther along than when I started and it all began with taking several leaps of faith.

 

[Staven]

But who here is saying go make a film unprepared and who is anyone to determine who is ready to make a film. Every film is different and every filmmaker is at a different place and no one can be an expert on what someone else should do. I haven't seen Corrado, apparently people think it wasn't an artistic success, but who is anyone to say Adam shouldn't have made his film or that it wasn't a success for him personally in any number of ways beyond whether it made a single dollar. You might not do it that way, I might not either, but thats as far as it should go.

I'm not sure anyone is saying someone "shouldn't" do what they want, it's more about the cautionary tale for the pie-eyed wannabe filmmaker who thinks that they can repeat Adam's "success".

A couple things someone could do before embarking on the big calling card feature film:

- have some success with short films. Some festival runs, maybe some awards.
- make a proof of concept. Make a fake trailer for your big movie you want to make. Show people, get feedback.
- If everyone tells you your script is awesome chances are it needs work. You need to find people willing to challenge what you wrote. Cuz if it can be broken on the page it will break on the screen.

when it comes time to make the film:

- don't wear too many hats.

I'm personally all for microbudget filmmakers doing their thing - go bonkers, make that film!! But when it jumps to the next level where there are investors involved and lawyers and contracts... I'd rather see a filmmaker that's worked their way up to that moment rather than someone who just wants to go for it, because more often then not we get films like Corrado rather than Reservoir Dogs. (*I'd also like to see that person hire an established producer so they can actually concentrate on directing)

In regards to Adam's success, this is what he said about his goals for the film:

"This being my first feature, my goals were fairly modest. I wanted a movie that:

1. Would easily get direct to DVD distribution
2. Would fare well at festivals and generate some buzz.

That's it. Only two objectives. Anything else is a bonus. "

So one of two ain't bad, but if he's a human like the rest of us chances are in his dream situation number 2 would be the one that mattered. It's one thing for a studio to hammer out straight to dvd films for profit and not care about them in anyway, but when you write, direct, produce and edit your first baby and 2-3 years later it gets modestly released on dvd without any real advertising(I'm speculating here, maybe there was some I just haven't seen any) and the only buzz generated is either non existent or negative - I'm sure there is some regret.

Lucky for Adam he is getting a second chance to make a film that could create some buzz. And hopefully it continues on to another film after that and the guy gets to make a career out of his passion.

***Damn I just re-read the first couple pages of Corrado Part 1. That's some damn good info he provided. Page 1 Adam is awesome. Page 89....not so much...

 

[Ted Spencer]

Interesting stuff, guys. I'm a bit swamped here, but will get back soon with some thoughts on what's been put forth recently. Enjoying reading it in the meantime.:dankk2:

 

[Ted Spencer]

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!"---?

This is an excellent question, and there certainly isn't a simple answer. For starters, it points to a basic dilemma:

Beginners in any art form are notoriously unaware of what they don't know. Lack of mastery of the art almost always carries along with it a blindness to that very fact. Thus the reason for the existence of a nifty little piece of wisdom called "The Four Stages Of Mastery". They are, in chronological order:

1. Unconscious Incompetence
2. Conscious Incompetence
3. Conscious Competence
4. Unconscious Competence

Stage 1 (Unconscious Incompetence) is as I described above: you don't (yet) know...what you don't know. You may well think however, that you're *really* good at the thing. You *aren't*. But you don't know that yet because you haven't learned enough to recognize your own lack of ability.

Stage 2 (Conscious Incompetence) begins once you do recognize your inability, and it's really the first stage of *actual* mastery (in stage 1, you suck at the thing, whether you know it or not, by definition). Discovering how much you *don't know* (which, as it plays out, comes in an almost endlessly repeating, escalating series of "I can't believe I never realized that until now" moments, forever), is *the key* to getting good at the thing. IMHO you should *not* attempt any professional effort in any art form before you are solidly into this stage. Or beyond:

Stage 3 (Conscious Competence) is where you've learned and applied a great deal of the stuff you gradually realized you needed to know during your long journey through stage 2. This is a perfectly fine place from which to first attempt serious work in the field. You may or may not have much success at it, but you've done a lot of homework, and most importantly you've sat down and scarfed up many a portion of Humble Pie as it dawned on you how ignorant you were. You're deeply aware of, and usually pretty embarrassed about, what you thought you knew when you started out (way back, in Stage 1), but didn't. But now...you're actually pretty knowledgeable, and pretty good at the thing. Many, many full time filmmakers, some of them quite successful, are at this stage. Many will never really progress beyond it, but can have viable careers anyway.

Stage 4 (Unconscious Competence) is when you've done the thing (let's say...filmmaking!) many times through, have continued all along to realize more and more deeply what you needed to know, and have learned to do those things *extremely well* to the point of doing so *intuitively* (thus the "unconscious" aspect). You're like a great musician - the music just flows, with (almost) none of the burden of conscious thought. There is no end to this process though, which is actually a good thing. You can *always* learn more and do something better. Which, as long as you continue to challenge yourself, will keep it interesting for the rest of your life. In filmmaking, these types are the gold standard guys we all know about: Hitchcock, Scorsese, Capra...different folks' lists will differ, but you get the idea.

So, back to your fundamental question:

IMHO, as I said above, you *must* be at least at Stage 2 to even attempt a semi-serious effort at fillmmaking. Stage 1 is fine for pure training - get/borrow a camera, write some scripts, direct some actors - knock yourself out and have fun. But - and this is an absolute imperative IMO - you must be brutally honest with yourself about the results, and you must seek out the most unbiased opinions from others you can find. You can show it to Mom, Dad and your pals, but that will not amount to much unless you have particularly tough critics for friends and family (some of us do, but not usually). Show it to people who almost literally couldn't care less about how you feel. I've actually tricked people into telling me the truth about things I've done by telling them the work was done by "a friend" - not me. Works like a charm - or a polygraph. After a good dose of the truth (99% odds it's going to be some variant on "you pretty much suck"), take a minute, lick your wounds, and *use* what they helped you see (as you open the door to Stage 2) to grow your knowledge.

So, specifically, here's a recipe suggestion for a beginning filmmaker:

1. Get a cheap camera, any kind of cheap lighting (the sun's ok too), some kind of editing environment (iMovie or equivalent is fine) an shoot a zero budget short-anything. A day in the life of your dog. A "Grandma's Teacup Collection Through The Ages" doc. Whatever. Then, sit down watch it over and over, carefully note *all* your mistakes and shortcomings, and set it aside.

2. Read. Everything. About everything. Screenwriting, camerawork, acting, directing, sound, lighting, editing. Watch instructional DVDs. Study DVXuser's many great sub-forums. Take acting classes. Leave no area unresearched. *Thoroughly*. If you're young, particularly of college age, consider a film major. But most importantly *study*. Do *not* 'just keep shooting' without doing so *seriously*.

3. Even if you didn't write them yourself, post your screenplays for criticism (with writers' permission) on sites like zoetrope.com, triggerstreet, etc. Enter them in screenplay contests. Enter short film contests (like the ones here).

THE ABOVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS YOU MUST DO IF YOU EVER HOPE TO GET PAST STAGE 1.

3. Rinse, repeat.

4. When objective, no nonsense types start contacting you all on their own just to tell you that you've really got something going on, you just might. Contest and festival wins count big here. When that starts happening in earnest (see the "Deuce Of Spades" thread in this forum):

5. Consider seeking investors to make a micro-budget feature.

So to answer your question directly, where a feature project at the financial commitment level of "Corrado" would be concerned, I would pull the trigger only after I'd done *all* of the above. I can't speak for Adam, and I will stand corrected if I'm wrong, but it is my strong impression, from reading his comments here (particularly regarding formal training, and seeking feedback/critiques) that he skipped a very large number of the steps I outlined above. "Corrado" as a finished film all but screams it.

So...nice and simple, right?

: )

 

[Ted Spencer]

My take on what Ted was getting at was develop the craft first. Even though Corrado may have spelled success for Adam, he put the cart before the horse. I have no doubt that he is now a better filmmaker from his experience on Corrado, but I believe Ted is trying to dissuade others from diving headfirst into a sometimes life altering experience without building themselves up to that moment beforehand. **Especially when we are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars at stake. I know of a local filmmaker who basically did the same thing as Adam, (except he didn't get the name cast), but he wasn't ready as a filmmaker to take on such a large scale production and it failed miserably. No idea how he is paying back all his friends the tens of thousands each he sold his guaranteed success story to.

You did a fine job of speaking for me. Thanks : )

 

[Ted Spencer]

Studios don't do much better. If producers waited to get the script locked to everyone's satisfaction, most films wouldn't get made.

As Lincoln pointed out, pleasing everyone is impossible, so this argument is a bit of a straw man. I also like to say on this question: "perfect is unavailable". But striving for perfect anyway is an imperative in my book.

It is the rule that pages come down daily and the resulting shooting script will have fewer and fewer white pages as physical production progresses. This is the reality of scripted narrative production in TV and features. Rainbow shooting scripts and A, B, C page number suffixes are the norm. Corrado went into production precisely when it should have - when the package was ready.

But all production teams are not created equally, especially regarding series TV where the director is much lower on the food chain, as compared to features. Moreover, feature writer/directors (Woody Allen, James Cameron, Lucas, Coens) have even tighter control over these considerations, and would likely be much 'cleaner' where 'rewrite hell' is concerned. Not that it doesn't happen, but in any event it all comes from one source.

In "Corrado"'s case Adam was in the latter category...

 

[Ted Spencer]

The thing is, obviously Adam felt as he had developed the craft. I'm not so sure he would have began filming if he thought otherwise.

Certainly not. One would be foolish to do so knowingly. Thing is, (IMO), he *didn't* know...what he didn't know (see "Stage 1" in my post above). Evidently, he does much more so now.

While he's got "Hangar 14" to make it all better (or so I hope we'll see), "Corrado", made (AFAIK) on a $400K+ personal loan, was one mighty expensive lesson.

You can collect positive opinions, feedback and coverage on your script for years and it still turn out to flop.

Absolutely. Every single great filmmaker has had flops. And the greatest baseball hitters strike out more often than not. But great 'players' get it right a *lot*. You want to be one of those guys. And those guys, almost without exception, are *skillful*. And talented, which should never be underrated. I know of any number of folks who attempted success in various artistic endeavors but simply didn't have the right stuff talent-wise, and no amount of effort (which was immense in some cases) could overcome it. It's sad, but only a very few really have what it takes.

...too many opinions/feeback on a single project is the reason a lot of films end up all over the place as it is.

Yep, it's tough to figure out who to listen to and who to shut out, and it's never gonna get easy. Again, knowledge is the best defense - it will do more than anything else to help you distinguish the crap from the gold. Expect to keep learning forever, embrace the fact, and (as long as you've got enough talent to go along with it) you'll get there...

 

[Ted Spencer]

But who here is saying go make a film unprepared and who is anyone to determine who is ready to make a film.

People who made films with outcomes like "Corrado" will usually say after the fact themselves that they were unprepared and unready, as Adam basically has by now. And to put it bluntly, the film itself is (evidently) a flop commercially, and IMHO, artistically. And Adam almost certainly has/had to personally repay a very big chunk of a near half-million dollar loan...

Regarding "Hangar 14", it looks like a super-impressive accomplishment right now, but (and I hate to say this) what if it tanks, and millions of investor dollars are lost? I've worked with filmmakers whose careers went that way (not naming names) and I'll tell you what usually happens: career over, dude.

So did Adam learn (enough) from his "Corrado" mistakes? I sincerely hope so, but only time will tell.

...no one can be an expert on what someone else should do.

Of course they can! Doctors, for example. Or tennis pros : )

The above is a worn-out rationale I've heard way too many times, almost always from would-be artists attempting to justify their failed efforts when it's clear that it was largely the result of a major lack of skill (and/or talent). Any effort - literally anything - can be 'rationalized' by this means, no matter the level of artistic cluelessness. So for my buck-three-ninety-eight it's a waste of breath. What's the solution? Yet again - knowledge.

I haven't seen Corrado, apparently people think it wasn't an artistic success, but who is anyone to say Adam shouldn't have made his film or that it wasn't a success for him personally in any number of ways beyond whether it made a single dollar. You might not do it that way, I might not either, but thats as far as it should go.

Would you say that to an amateur gambler? It often has the same outcome...

Maybe most don't have the where-with-all I don't know, but the people I know who have been successful making films independently do.

Nothing succeeds like success, right? But what about the failures? There are reportedly about 99 of those for every one of the other, and most of them cost (but lost) just as much.

But it all begins with doing it and only you can decide if you are ready.

No argument there, but there's also being delusional, which has proven to be *way* too easy to not realize that one is...until it's too late....

without going into my own gory details, there were always people who said "you shouldn't," and if I had listened to those voices, I wouldn't be doing what I am right now.

Me neither! But I was pretty freakin' methodical in my preparation for it, and it's ended up serving me well, for decades now. Sadly, most of the guys who said not to do it (build my own small recording studio business) have themselves failed in that field. A living in the arts is a tough road. There's that pesky 99% thing...

I don't claim any great success either, but I have had a little, even more failure, still learning new things all the time, but I am a good distance farther along than when I started and it all began with taking several leaps of faith.

Then good on you! Seriously. As long as you act responsibly rather than foolishly, have talent and work *really hard* to master your craft you'll do well. I know quite a few of those '1 percenters' and that would describe all of them...

Peace : )

 

[Ted Spencer]

I'm not sure anyone is saying someone "shouldn't" do what they want, it's more about the cautionary tale for the pie-eyed wannabe filmmaker who thinks that they can repeat Adam's "success".

A couple things someone could do before embarking on the big calling card feature film:

- have some success with short films. Some festival runs, maybe some awards.
- make a proof of concept. Make a fake trailer for your big movie you want to make. Show people, get feedback.
- If everyone tells you your script is awesome chances are it needs work. You need to find people willing to challenge what you wrote. Cuz if it can be broken on the page it will break on the screen.

when it comes time to make the film:

- don't wear too many hats.

I'm personally all for microbudget filmmakers doing their thing - go bonkers, make that film!! But when it jumps to the next level where there are investors involved and lawyers and contracts... I'd rather see a filmmaker that's worked their way up to that moment rather than someone who just wants to go for it, because more often then not we get films like Corrado rather than Reservoir Dogs. (*I'd also like to see that person hire an established producer so they can actually concentrate on directing)

In regards to Adam's success, this is what he said about his goals for the film:

"This being my first feature, my goals were fairly modest. I wanted a movie that:

1. Would easily get direct to DVD distribution
2. Would fare well at festivals and generate some buzz.

That's it. Only two objectives. Anything else is a bonus. "

So one of two ain't bad, but if he's a human like the rest of us chances are in his dream situation number 2 would be the one that mattered. It's one thing for a studio to hammer out straight to dvd films for profit and not care about them in anyway, but when you write, direct, produce and edit your first baby and 2-3 years later it gets modestly released on dvd without any real advertising(I'm speculating here, maybe there was some I just haven't seen any) and the only buzz generated is either non existent or negative - I'm sure there is some regret.

Lucky for Adam he is getting a second chance to make a film that could create some buzz. And hopefully it continues on to another film after that and the guy gets to make a career out of his passion.

***Damn I just re-read the first couple pages of Corrado Part 1. That's some damn good info he provided. Page 1 Adam is awesome. Page 89....not so much...

Right on the money (again) Staven.

And yeah...page 89 of the original thread...whew....and there's quite a bit more from where that came from. The thread itself was arguably a better 'movie' than the movie itself turned out to be... : )

 

[Ted Spencer]

Ok....think I'm caught up with this now... : )

...and apologies if my posts above contains too many redundant points...

 

[bosindy]

Of course they can! Doctors, for example. Or tennis pros : )

The above is a worn-out rationale I've heard way too many times, almost always from would-be artists attempting to justify their failed efforts when it's clear that it was largely the result of a major lack of skill (and/or talent).

But how do we know who the tennis pro is, especially if no one is wearing the white shorts?:beer:

 

[taormina]

Well, if nothing else, it looks like I can elicit healthy debate. I have a bit of a break, so ask away and I will answer all I can - except specifics on current projects. You'll have to forgive me for being a little vague for now.

Ted,

It seems you're quite the commentator. I haven't had a chance to read all that you've written, mind you. Most of it is accurate, some if it is plain wrong. As I said in earlier posts, the film must stand on it's own two feet. I won't defend it's quality, story, whether you liked or hated it, etc. Those are your personal prerogatives.

It's when you lapse into the things that you clearly have no idea what you're talking about that irks me.

How do you know Corrado is a commercial flop? Do you receive the quarterly statements? What gives you that impression - a casual glance at even IMDb shows how many territories it's been distributed in, and those aren't even all of it - Corrado has received nigh on worldwide distribution.

You can say what you want about the film, story, lighting, whatever - and you're right. All of you are right because the film will be different things to different people. But to say something like the film is a commercial flop is just plain wrong.

Corrado got me Hangar 14 (which had no investors, by the way. The film was presold extensively long before a single frame of footage was shot). Hangar 14 got me my next feature, which I (can't talk about) am going to go shoot in June.

Corrado was $315K budget, Hangar 14 was $3.2M, and the next one is $22M so what exactly is your point, Ted?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not singling you out here. I like you and your posts. Just be careful of making blanket statements since you know only a tiny fraction of what actually goes on behind the scenes of a studio and what it takes to get movies going and what's important to people who buy them.

Yes, this is a very different discussion than what viewer might find important, which is what you're on about.

Ask away.

 

[Kholi]

Adam. First off-- mad props. Three features in under two years... I'm trying to start my second in June as well, sadly there's no budget in place so I'm not at your level yet. No matter what's said, there's tangible evidence in the form of material to attest to establishing yourself and a career, no matter how others or myself may view it.

That's real deal.

Questions since you're there now:

1. Is it becoming a truth that named actors are no longer as important as prolific directors? Are studios and distributors beginning to sell on genre and director more now versus the old diatrabe "get some names." I've heard it more than twice, recently, and I wonder if you have any idea or have gotten a whiff of the info.

2. Is pre-selling in a healthy state now for no-namers? With the financial climate beginning to clear (apparently it cleared a year ago, but media would say otherwise), are brokers and money-men(and women) beginning to drop fair portions on "we"? 3.2 Million, or even half of that, is a grip in pre-sales. If one were to get even an advance of 250K off of that to shoot with, that would be amazing... you can do a lot with two-hundred and fifty thousand these days.

3. You've said already that you know Bad Ass (Corrado) is not a good feature film and, in the beginning, you were hoping that it would be. Now that you've come away with that knowledge, do you feel like you wish you would have done a better job on Corrado or is it a lesson learned experience, and never look back? This is more of a psychological question with no right or wrong answer. As a new director with only one [mostly] finished feature under my belt, it's important because I have certain feelings about my first time out and I am curious if it'll really affect me in the long run.

4. Can I have some money? (Kidding)

This thread rocks.

 

[taormina]

Adam. First off-- mad props. Three features in under two years... I'm trying to start my second in June as well, sadly there's no budget in place so I'm not at your level yet. No matter what's said, there's tangible evidence in the form of material to attest to establishing yourself and a career, no matter how others or myself may view it.

Thanks bro, much appreciated!

1. Is it becoming a truth that named actors are no longer as important as prolific directors? Are studios and distributors beginning to sell on genre and director more now versus the old diatrabe "get some names." I've heard it more than twice, recently, and I wonder if you have any idea or have gotten a whiff of the info.

If anything, Kholi, It's worse now. This is because the names you need to get in order to make the movie fly are WAY bigger than they used to be. If I had made Corrado with say, Sizemore, Madsen, and let's say Vinnie Jones, I would have killed it. A year after that, if I had made the show with Val Kilmer and Christian Slater, it would have sold well.

Now, none of those names are what they used to be. Oh, some of them will still get your movie off the ground....some of them won't (Sizemore and company)....but you should see the names I have to use in order to make my movies fly now.

It will SHOCK you. I'm talking A-listers. Not because I CAN use them, because if I DON'T use them there is no film. Sad but true.

My reputation as a director revolves solely around the fact that I make people money and am reliable about distribution - period end. I am a "safe bet" on a commercial picture, is all. Nothing more, nothing less (for now).

2. Is pre-selling in a healthy state now for no-namers? With the financial climate beginning to clear (apparently it cleared a year ago, but media would say otherwise), are brokers and money-men(and women) beginning to drop fair portions on "we"? 3.2 Million, or even half of that, is a grip in pre-sales. If one were to get even an advance of 250K off of that to shoot with, that would be amazing... you can do a lot with two-hundred and fifty thousand these days.

Yes, pre-selling is still way on....if you have cast. It doesn't really matter who brings it. Kholi if you whipped up a couple good names and got hooked up with a decent distributor (or studio) you'd be off directing a $3M pic. It's that simple. Pre-sales are alive and well for those competent enough to get them.

I am out of the presales game. I'm at the studio level now, which is not a boast by the way. It's just the next step is all.

3. You've said already that you know Bad Ass (Corrado) is not a good feature film and, in the beginning, you were hoping that it would be. Now that you've come away with that knowledge, do you feel like you wish you would have done a better job on Corrado or is it a lesson learned experience, and never look back? This is more of a psychological question with no right or wrong answer. As a new director with only one [mostly] finished feature under my belt, it's important because I have certain feelings about my first time out and I am curious if it'll really affect me in the long run.

Of course I wish I had done a better job. It's easy for people to rip it to shreds because they don't really know what I had to endure, and it's not all in the blog either.

I failed spectacularly in many areas of Corrado. This is purely my fault. I had many items that were beyond my control....the lead actor getting a DUI during the shoot, and not being able to shoot exactly half of the driving scenes....the plot holes I had to fill because of that screwed me to no end. The other actor refusing to shoot another pivotal scene and us having to plug that hole. It goes on and on man.

It's a wonder the movie is even watchable.

At the end of the day, the examples above are MY FAULT for not being a stronger director, for not asserting myself. For not kicking the sound guy's ass on the horrid mix he did. For compromising left and right.

You're damned rights I wish I did a better job. But in the end, I got to redeem myself on Hangar 14 - and yes, there are things in there that I will need to redeem myself from. Until I have unlimited time and funds (i.e. never), I will never be entirely satisfied.

Vindication came with the smiling distributors and the pats on the back when hangar was complete.

Still, I've got two directing credits on features and two for writing, with another one each upcoming.

Sure I wish Corrado was a film fest winner but them's the breaks. I cannot complain.

 

[Kholi]

If anything, Kholi, It's worse now. This is because the names you need to get in order to make the movie fly are WAY bigger than they used to be. If I had made Corrado with say, Sizemore, Madsen, and let's say Vinnie Jones, I would have killed it. A year after that, if I had made the show with Val Kilmer and Christian Slater, it would have sold well.

Now, none of those names are what they used to be. Oh, some of them will still get your movie off the ground....some of them won't (Sizemore and company)....but you should see the names I have to use in order to make my movies fly now.

It will SHOCK you. I'm talking A-listers. Not because I CAN use them, because if I DON'T use them there is no film. Sad but true.

My reputation as a director revolves solely around the fact that I make people money and am reliable about distribution - period end. I am a "safe bet" on a commercial picture, is all. Nothing more, nothing less (for now).

Good stuff. I like to here conflicting statements, keeps everything balanced/leveled, which keeps my eyes and ears wide open for any hints, tips, and tricks. I've worked with Sizemore now, and sadly his reputation is just about dead. I can see why you say it's worse now, makes sense.

So, what would be your advice to people who can't roll with 100K+ budgets? In scenarios where you can't even get names? Current Track Record I look at now consists of:

Tiny Furniture
Monsters
Like Crazy (4Mil Sundance Sale)
Another Earth (7D shot, cheaply done, no big names)

They've all got theatrical distro deals, foreign, etc.

What's your take, as a working director (and producer) on this kind of thing?

Yes, pre-selling is still way on....if you have cast. It doesn't really matter who brings it. Kholi if you whipped up a couple good names and got hooked up with a decent distributor (or studio) you'd be off directing a $3M pic. It's that simple. Pre-sales are alive and well for those competent enough to get them.

I am out of the presales game. I'm at the studio level now, which is not a boast by the way. It's just the next step is all.

Not a boast at all, just the way it works. Rock it.

And, glad to hear big number pre-sales are rolling. For Hangar 14, what were your A-lister names? Or, was it mostly a niche based deal when you bring Steve AUstin and MJW to the table? Does Niche old any weight rigt now?

Of course I wish I had done a better job. It's easy for people to rip it to shreds because they don't really know what I had to endure, and it's not all in the blog either.

I failed spectacularly in many areas of Corrado. This is purely my fault. I had many items that were beyond my control....the lead actor getting a DUI during the shoot, and not being able to shoot exactly half of the driving scenes....the plot holes I had to fill because of that screwed me to no end. The other actor refusing to shoot another pivotal scene and us having to plug that hole. It goes on and on man.

It's a wonder the movie is even watchable.

At the end of the day, the examples above are MY FAULT for not being a stronger director, for not asserting myself. For not kicking the sound guy's ass on the horrid mix he did. For compromising left and right.

You're damned rights I wish I did a better job. But in the end, I got to redeem myself on Hangar 14 - and yes, there are things in there that I will need to redeem myself from. Until I have unlimited time and funds (i.e. never), I will never be entirely satisfied.

Vindication came with the smiling distributors and the pats on the back when hangar was complete.

Still, I've got two directing credits on features and two for writing, with another one each upcoming.

Sure I wish Corrado was a film fest winner but them's the breaks. I cannot complain.

Can't argue with that! No one really knows how hard it is to produce a feature of any caliber until they've done it themselves. Those who do know immediately sympathize and connect. I can imagine the hell you went through to just FINISH the damned thing out.

How about those re-scheduled days, aye?

Blarg.

Thanks for entertaining my questions on your off-time, man. Living recently on the other side of the fence, I can see where others are coming from. But, there's also the other perspective that can't be quantified or qualified with text.

 

[taormina]

You just have to leverage all your connections and experiences to get that one big name that it takes to make the show fly, no more and no less. This is actually more important than honing your skills, because without the talent who brings the distro and money, there is no movie.

When i said A lister I meant on the nect project - Steve is no A lister, but he DOES sell millions of units on DVD thanks to the WWE thing. He has a massive following and instantly made the movie go. There are others like him that you can get. He outsells the Val Kilmers of the world even though he is not an actor by trade. He's a pretty decent actor, surprisingly. Niche definitely holds weight. MJW is a prime example of that.

 

[Kholi]

Niche definitely holds weight. MJW is a prime example of that.

McSick. Alright, I'll keep an eye out on the thread but time to go Set Dec for pick-ups.

Thanks, man.

Can't wait to step up to where you're at!