Matt Sconce
Veteran
Oh, I see. That makes sense. -Matt
Corrado Part II
- Thread starter taormina
- Start date
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
adam, just wanted to thank you for your insights. taking all of this to heart and putting a plan into motion.
taormina
Hates to Rent
Staven
Well-known member
Yeah, that's a little too much to ask of you. For your one sheet, is there a specific company you used to make up the mock poster or was it a contact you already had?
It's weird, a lot of the stuff you are telling us is stuff a lot of us kind of already know, just from being movie fans. It's almost like we need the reassurance that this is how easy it could be if we just applied ourselves. I too am taking a lot of the pertinent info to heart. Hopefully in time there will be a lot of filmmakers with a special thanks to you attached to their films.
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
Shawn Philip Nelson
Veteran
That list is weird. Not sure if it can be trusted? I heard Val Kilmer was distribution poison like Tom Sizemore. That list has him up higher than Danny Glover, 50 Cent, Joseph Fiennes, John Goodman, Carrie-Ann Moss, bill Paxton, Emmy Rossum, etc
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
treat it like a guide, not gospel.
Martay
Veteran
No, I don't mind and sorry for the delay. Feel like I'm in the dark ages lately by not being available to post until late at night.
What shook me...my confidence at least was the sheer volume of movies trying to get out there. I mean, I am generally (and have been) confident that I can make decent movies and get them out into distribution. At that time I'd even had 3 features that had gotten out into the world in a fairly decent manner (albeit through fairly small distributors like MTI, Echelon, etc.) relatively speaking.
However, I went to the 2008 AFM (my first visit) with 4 completed features and knowing that there had to be deals ready to be made.
Well, when I saw how many movies that were competing with me...movies with names that I envied...movies as professionally packaged (or in many cases MORE professionally) than the ones I was repping. It made me feel smaller than I'd ever felt in this business. And I guess some of that can be blamed on me being from ATL and not L.A. and just knowing how many movies were in the same boat and seeking those deals that I was seeking.
And maybe I ran across some wrong people who rubbed me the wrong way...rude, arrogant, etc.
It was just pretty daunting for me personally. Also, I went to many panels and I think 2008 was even worse for a gloom and doom outlook for the movie business. So, that atmosphere kind of got to me too. Here were Producers who'd had titles in release, at Sundance, you name it talking about how they can't get their films made, etc.
So, it was just a perfect storm of negativity hitting me at once in an environment I thought I'd find inspiring (based on my love of going to festivals and conferences etc.).
-Martin
However, since then I've done pretty decently and even made large steps up in the world in terms of who've I've been able to deal with on my more recent features.
Last edited:
I paid Don Cheadle $1,200 to blow balloons at my nieces b day party in south beach. He was fun, I should of gotten Siezmore with an AK47 to shoot them for an additional $84. You guys would be surprised how cheap actors are if they like you.
CiPO
Well-known member
I saw it as soon as I got the DVD and to be honest I was bit disappointed. Overall looked good and some scenes were really amazing. But some parts were amateurish for me. My gf (who doesn't know anything about how Faith accomplished it) got the same feeling.
I would like to hear more comments about it from other fellows members but this is not the right thread
Last edited:
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Very interesting to run down the whole list. I did it in increments of 100 after the first few pages. The calculus for who actually belongs where on the list, esp after the first few pages, is one I'd like to know more about. It seems pretty off to me in many cases, but then I'm not the insider on all of that for sure...
The last few pages are pretty poignant actually...
Otherwise it looks like a good place to hunt for one's very own 'Tarantino re-discovers Travolta' situation... : )
Kevin Bacon, huh? : )
Mickey Munday
Well-known member
yea it's not all that accurate, but a good way to use it is as a guide like Zak mention in other words it's a good way to see a lot of actors at a glance that you may not have been aware of then maybe cross check them on imdb and further from there.
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Adam, I imagine you're very busy these days, so whenever you have a chance, here's another question for you:
In the dealmaking/marketing world you lived in through "Corrado" and "Hangar 14" (which as I understand it is not the world of your next film), it seems we're talking about direct-to-DVD releases that make money by doing so in a primarily overseas marketplace. As you've indicated, it appears to be largely fueled by such markets' interest in American action and action-oriented films (including horror and thrillers) and the Hollywood stars (or former stars) that are featured in them. It's a well known fact that movies (and music) are among the most highly internationally marketable products currently made in America, and there is major fascination with them particularly in places with highly different cultural climates (than ours) like Japan and other Asian countries, not to mention the rest of the world, so all of that makes perfect sense to me.
Conversely, here in the USA it seems we (and the media) are much more oriented toward theatrical feature releases. To be sure, we buy plenty of DVDs of everything from concert videos and instructional titles to ultra low-volume, ultra-narrowly targeted ones. But it appears (to me at least) that the market here is proportionately smaller (to the overall population) for the kinds of direct-to-DVD features that "Corrado" and "Hangar 14" represent. That again, they are more internationally oriented market-wise than domestically, or at least the international component is a much more vital part of the distribution picture than with a typical theatrical release (where it's quite important as well of course); one without which you basically can't support the business model at all.
At least that's how it looks to me. Please feel free to correct me based on your experiences if you find the above to be substantially off the mark.
So, my question is:
Within this (internationally biased, D-T-DVD) marketing premise, at least to the extent that I described it accurately, what potential do you see for 'cross-pollination' if you will, into the mainstream American theatrical marketplace? How many of these films manage to 'jump the track' over to theatrical and find larger acceptance (and profit) there? I have a feeling the answer is "almost none", but I bet you know what it is in any case.
Perhaps you could elaborate a bit on how these marketing/distribution tracks/premises exist separately, or potentially overlap, cross over etc., to whatever extent they might. I think it's safe to say that (almost) every aspiring filmmaker here's fantasy is a wide American theatrical release, with at least its consequent financial lubrication of future projects (aka a career), not to mention potential fame and fortune. But is there any reasonable expectation that it can be accomplished though the means you've employed thus far with your first two films? To be be clear, I mean *directly through these channels* - not as you have done by now - parlaying it into a springboard for a *departure* from this approach on your next film(s). Is it conversely all but a pipe-dream to imagine it could?
Your insights will be greatly appreciated.
In the dealmaking/marketing world you lived in through "Corrado" and "Hangar 14" (which as I understand it is not the world of your next film), it seems we're talking about direct-to-DVD releases that make money by doing so in a primarily overseas marketplace. As you've indicated, it appears to be largely fueled by such markets' interest in American action and action-oriented films (including horror and thrillers) and the Hollywood stars (or former stars) that are featured in them. It's a well known fact that movies (and music) are among the most highly internationally marketable products currently made in America, and there is major fascination with them particularly in places with highly different cultural climates (than ours) like Japan and other Asian countries, not to mention the rest of the world, so all of that makes perfect sense to me.
Conversely, here in the USA it seems we (and the media) are much more oriented toward theatrical feature releases. To be sure, we buy plenty of DVDs of everything from concert videos and instructional titles to ultra low-volume, ultra-narrowly targeted ones. But it appears (to me at least) that the market here is proportionately smaller (to the overall population) for the kinds of direct-to-DVD features that "Corrado" and "Hangar 14" represent. That again, they are more internationally oriented market-wise than domestically, or at least the international component is a much more vital part of the distribution picture than with a typical theatrical release (where it's quite important as well of course); one without which you basically can't support the business model at all.
At least that's how it looks to me. Please feel free to correct me based on your experiences if you find the above to be substantially off the mark.
So, my question is:
Within this (internationally biased, D-T-DVD) marketing premise, at least to the extent that I described it accurately, what potential do you see for 'cross-pollination' if you will, into the mainstream American theatrical marketplace? How many of these films manage to 'jump the track' over to theatrical and find larger acceptance (and profit) there? I have a feeling the answer is "almost none", but I bet you know what it is in any case.
Perhaps you could elaborate a bit on how these marketing/distribution tracks/premises exist separately, or potentially overlap, cross over etc., to whatever extent they might. I think it's safe to say that (almost) every aspiring filmmaker here's fantasy is a wide American theatrical release, with at least its consequent financial lubrication of future projects (aka a career), not to mention potential fame and fortune. But is there any reasonable expectation that it can be accomplished though the means you've employed thus far with your first two films? To be be clear, I mean *directly through these channels* - not as you have done by now - parlaying it into a springboard for a *departure* from this approach on your next film(s). Is it conversely all but a pipe-dream to imagine it could?
Your insights will be greatly appreciated.
Last edited:
taormina
Hates to Rent
I think the question is "Can you get into making theatrical features after making DTV pictures"...or more like "how do you get there from here".
Let me start by stating the obvious (to me).
1. No one wants to make low budget, non paying wear-fifteen-different-hats type movies.
2. No one wants to make directo to DVD pictures their whole careers.
3. Most everyone who makes movies wants to some day see their movie playing on the big screen (and not for a one time deal....for a big release!).
You guys may not agree, but the above three points are the way I feel. I really, really want to someday have my films in theaters, period, end. I think most of us share that goal.
To that end, the same rules apply per my previous posts:
1. You can get there via critical acclaim
2. You can get there via commercial success
I challenge anyone to tell me otherwise.
The path I am proceeding down is one of commercialism. It's all I know. I know nothing about fests, awards, and gala events. I know about packaging, casting, ans getting distribution.
So keep in mind that there are more ways than my way, and I know nothing about way #1.
Having said all of that, you will start finding that as your films get larger (like my next one), you start seeing verbiage like "to be considered for theatrical release" in the contracts.
What this means is that if you make a good enough film, they will put it in theaters! You won't find this in the smaller movies, and even on a picture of substantial size, you have MUCH working against you as far as theatrical release.
DTV is a huge proift center that costs the studios and distributors next to nothing besides the strike price of the film. They make movies with big stars, you see the film, rent it or download it, and bang, profit is made. There is no buzz. There is no hype. There does not need to be.
Countries all over the world will buy the film and play it on their TV stations and stream it in their languages. The cost for them to do so is minimal, apart from what they pay to acquire rights in that territory. They don't advertise this stuff.
Switch gears to theatrical...
Even the smallest limited release (couple hundred theaters) comes with a massive p&a budget for posters, commercials, radio ads, marketing, merchandise, etc. It costs MORE to market a $5M film than the film costs (much more) and the profits could be huge or non existent. No one knows!
This is why you will seldom see films in theaters that cost less than $25M to make. The P&A budget is just not worth the risk to a studio.
They like to spend money on the $50M+ films and get them out there. You can spend $50M to market a $50M movie easily!!!!!!
How does this relate to me directing theatrical pics????????
You have to be a reliable and proven profit earner to even be considered to get your film released theatrically. I may not EVER see my movies in theaters. Harsh, but true. I am fortunate to see them in stores and on netflix even.....
My plan is to make larger and larger films with bigger cast.....to the point they will HAVE to take them theatrical.....of course they don't HAVE to do anything...but that is my hope.
Only problem is this.....you get ONE chance in the beginning to do well in theaters. Your film must look good and screen test well. Audiences must like it and numbers have to be good. Bomb it out of the gate and you're done.
Yes, I know a dozen directors who have done just that and now can't even get a $2M DTV gig.
Hope that answers.
Rippie
Veteran
Adam, I'm curious when looking at the budget for a DTV style film where do you think the top end figure lands
where distributors start to think its too risky to make their money back and they'll pass on your film?
If a filmmaker wants to sell a film they made for $100 grand with a decent name in it I would think a product like that would be a pretty easy sale.
Put a 10 million dollar figure even with a bigger name(s) and I would think thats a much easier deal for a distribution company to pass on.
In your experience do you think there is a sweet spot money wise where you can get enough production value in the film
but also not price yourself out of easier distro? (assuming raising the funds isn't an issue)
I'm sure when building the budget for H14 even if you had access to more funds I'm sure there is a point
where you say to yourself its just not worth putting more money into the project.
I realize this question isn't cut and dry, just interested in your opinion.
where distributors start to think its too risky to make their money back and they'll pass on your film?
If a filmmaker wants to sell a film they made for $100 grand with a decent name in it I would think a product like that would be a pretty easy sale.
Put a 10 million dollar figure even with a bigger name(s) and I would think thats a much easier deal for a distribution company to pass on.
In your experience do you think there is a sweet spot money wise where you can get enough production value in the film
but also not price yourself out of easier distro? (assuming raising the funds isn't an issue)
I'm sure when building the budget for H14 even if you had access to more funds I'm sure there is a point
where you say to yourself its just not worth putting more money into the project.
I realize this question isn't cut and dry, just interested in your opinion.
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Right - so I'll take that to infer that the 'direct path' through DTV distro to theatrical I was asking about pretty much doesn't exist, as I had surmised...
I think I can safely say that we all appreciate your frankness here. There are many different paths to success, and you've quite brilliantly found one of them. In record time, I might add...
Really nice to hear about that : )
Got it. Whole 'nother business model...
Right, although I've worked on a few of 'em, and one won at Sundance and got an Oscar nom ("American Splendor"). It cost under $2M to make, and grossed $8M worldwide, plus DVD sales, HBO, etc. Nobody bought a mansion off it, but the writer/directors (Bob Pulcini and Shari Springer-Berman, who are married) profited quite nicely as I understand it.
There are actually a few other similar stories from films I worked on, but your point is valid nonetheless - these cases are pretty rare.
Which is why (as I understand it) it's advisable to get a studio/investor to spend *as much money as possible* on production so they'll feel *obligated* to do so in promoting it as well. A micro-budget film is thereby *much* easier for wealthy backer-types to blow off quickly. Get them to spend $25M+ on production, as you suggest, and they will give up a *lot* less readily. To paraphrase the old TV commercial:
"Sorry Charlie, Star-Kist doesn't want ultra-low-budget productions..."
: )
I've worked with filmmakers (no names this time, and I'm not talking about Bob & Shari) where that happened as well, even ones who had previous (but very early) successes, including Oscar noms. Subsequent films got higher production and marketing budgets on the strength of that, then did poorly. In most cases that pretty much meant lights out for them...
It's a tough business...
Great thanks once again Adam, for your frankness and insights.
Last edited: