ZazaCast
Major Contributor
Yeah... that's what I thought, I guess I just didn't word it correctly.:lipsrseal
I personally like that style of filmmaking!
Director Katherine Brooks is offering spend a day on set shadowing her...
- Thread starter deevo83
- Start date
Yeah... that's what I thought, I guess I just didn't word it correctly.:lipsrseal
I personally like that style of filmmaking!
dalethompson
Well-known member
Maybe it's just me I guess but how in the heck do you spend a ton of money for a behind the scenes doc or add-on to a DVD when no one really watches it anyway (for a smaller production)? Especially, as I mentioned before about epic films like the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and 300, Sin City etc. where people want to know how things were done through technology.
For a smaller production, I doubt no one would ever bother to notice an extra DVD was added into the package. You have someone sit down for 2+ hours, the last thing they really wanna do is watch more of the same subject. Only diehard fans and people really intrigued with a film will watch the "making of" or "behind the scenes" footage.
Is this just a clever marketing package then for film companies to presume to give you more for the $20+ you are going to spend on a DVD?
P.S. Zak, I do believe you when you say it costs that much, I'm not calling you on that or anything else. I think for Ms. Brook's film, $20,000 may be a stretch for this. Sorry, I'm not trying to be disrespectful either in this response.
For a smaller production, I doubt no one would ever bother to notice an extra DVD was added into the package. You have someone sit down for 2+ hours, the last thing they really wanna do is watch more of the same subject. Only diehard fans and people really intrigued with a film will watch the "making of" or "behind the scenes" footage.
Is this just a clever marketing package then for film companies to presume to give you more for the $20+ you are going to spend on a DVD?
P.S. Zak, I do believe you when you say it costs that much, I'm not calling you on that or anything else. I think for Ms. Brook's film, $20,000 may be a stretch for this. Sorry, I'm not trying to be disrespectful either in this response.
Last edited:
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
Thing is many people do all of this themselves now days. I know your work is the bomb Zak, I've seen it and it's pro (I'd shadow you), but I'm not sold on $20k for a BTS for an indy producer. It's works in Hollywood because they're fat ass bloat machine idiots. That's like all the "work" the distributor put into my first film and amazingly it looked and sounded like the original product. It's all BS cooked up to make sure people who can do the same job cheaper (and for themselves) don't get a fair shake. It's like the C2E2 comic convention here in Chicago, cooked up by the big comic companies because Wizard World was giving smaller companies a fair shake.
Actually if you do a good indie, everyone will look at you BTS, because they'll want to know how you did it.
I agree on this point. I'm sure it cost all kinds of money to do anything in Hollywood. But real people can't throw away good money for BS. They spend all that money to jock the status quo.
-Nate
Last edited:
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
I understand the need to keep costs down on a microbudget to serve a very, very small niche audience (i'm talking about selling a few hundred DVDs), I've done that. But I think for anyone with ambition to do something with more reach (selling units in the tens of thousands), you'd be making a terrible mistake along the lines of not budgeting anything for marketing -- a mistake that many indies make. A behind the scenes strategy is not just being able to toss some b-roll on your DVD, no one cares about that. Used well, and the studios know how to capitalize on this, that footage and interviews from the set can go a long way toward building awareness for your film before the DVD even goes on sale. we all want to sell our films and make a living at it. but ask yourself who is going to buy your movie other than close friends and family? you need to build an audience and awareness that you have this film that will deliver a unique experience. and when it does go on sale, the additional content does work in terms of creating the perception of getting "more bang for the buck".
Know your audience and serve their needs. You aren't selling DVDs, you are selling the promise of an emotional and intellectual experience. Would you rather buy my film for $15 on DVD, or for $20 and get two hours of additional content showing you how I casted it, budgeted it, produced it, edited it, built an audience and distributed it? I think for an extra $5, my core audience (filmmakers and film enthusiasts) would go for that.
Haha, but I agree (if one is happy working in relative obscurity), don't even bother shooting the stuff. if there is no plan to use it appropriately, you are wasting your time. I can't stress it enough: budget for it. Just to deliver the master on HDCAM to your distributer is going to cost $1000. To have someone check that its broadcast legal (which any respected distributor would require) is going to be another $500 per hour of content.
That's my opinion. That's how we do it at Sabi Pictures. I'm of the mind that indie filmmakers need a separate producer specifically in charge of marketing and outreach on their productions to mind all this stuff.
Know your audience and serve their needs. You aren't selling DVDs, you are selling the promise of an emotional and intellectual experience. Would you rather buy my film for $15 on DVD, or for $20 and get two hours of additional content showing you how I casted it, budgeted it, produced it, edited it, built an audience and distributed it? I think for an extra $5, my core audience (filmmakers and film enthusiasts) would go for that.
Haha, but I agree (if one is happy working in relative obscurity), don't even bother shooting the stuff. if there is no plan to use it appropriately, you are wasting your time. I can't stress it enough: budget for it. Just to deliver the master on HDCAM to your distributer is going to cost $1000. To have someone check that its broadcast legal (which any respected distributor would require) is going to be another $500 per hour of content.
That's my opinion. That's how we do it at Sabi Pictures. I'm of the mind that indie filmmakers need a separate producer specifically in charge of marketing and outreach on their productions to mind all this stuff.
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
it works in hollywood because market research proves they make more money with the added content. not because they're bloated and just want to have it. do you really think these corporations would spend what they do on marketing and behind the scenes if they hadn't done the research to know it would increase their bottom line?
the studios are idiotic in many respects, but there is plenty we can learn from them too. especially with regard to market research.
Am I alone in thinking that everyones just outright being too hard?
Katherine has a decent list of credits as a young director. It seems like she has a path and a clear vision of how to get there. Check her out on IMDB.
Whats the issue?
Katherine has a decent list of credits as a young director. It seems like she has a path and a clear vision of how to get there. Check her out on IMDB.
Whats the issue?
Luis Caffesse
Admin
No fire. No horses. Those are the rules.
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
not alone, noel. good constructive feedback is always encouraged. but certain comments have not reflected the spirit of this community. I sincerely hope our newer members would take the time to get a feel for DVXUser before jumping in and pissing in the pool. it's not exactly going to get you insta-banned, but it's pretty lame.
filmman
Veteran
Katherine Brooks has decent credits. Funding her project in www.Kickstarter.com starts very low -- I think it's from one dollar, so it's not like you're being asked to invest $20,000.
I encourage you to check this method of funding projects, because you never know you might get funded yourself through it some day.
35mm Short Ends, Long Ends, Factor Sealed @ http://www.releasing.net/rawstock/
I encourage you to check this method of funding projects, because you never know you might get funded yourself through it some day.
35mm Short Ends, Long Ends, Factor Sealed @ http://www.releasing.net/rawstock/
Barry_Green
Moderator
Nathyn, don't take this the wrong way, but -- you criticized the "hollywood" method because, and I quote:
I really don't get this -- you're criticizing them and calling them "idiots" because... they're successful? Because they're a massively profitable "dream factory" where they get to work on whatever projects they want, with whoever they want, and they don't exactly dig ditches... where they get private jets and Ferraris, and the hardest work they have to do is talk to people and go to parties... and for this, they're "idiots"?
Seems to me there's a disconnect here. Seems to me that, rather than being "idiots", they're the ones who have it figured out.
Listen -- we had a young filmmaker on this board, by the name of Brandon Rice, who once advocated as you do. He was clamoring for budgets to be brought down, that now we don't have to spend as much, etc... and I took him to task, trying to understand why he would want to put so many hardworking crewmembers out of work. I was pretty hard on him, but -- too bad, it needed to be said.
And now? A couple of years later, Brandon Rice is no longer making goofy little camcorder films. Instead, he produced a substantial feature film for a very healthy budget (I can't reveal what it was, but I imagine if you knew the number you would probably call him a "bloated idiot") -- yet he's got a career now, and his film is sold in stores worldwide.
(Can I take credit for sparking his imagination for this incredible turnaround? Probably not -- but I'm certainly proud of him, nonetheless.)
So why is it that people who get real budgets, who employ dozens of professionals and pay them excellent wages, who put all these hardworking people to work and provide them with jobs and careers, why are these same people somehow "fat ass bloat machine idiots", whereas the guy who runs around like mad doing ten people's jobs, for free, on an HV20, is somehow "smarter"?
mikkowilson
Steadi-Guru
I love it when Barry makes that post. (This isn't the first time, and unfortunately won't be the last.)
Keeps it all in prospective.
- Mikko
Keeps it all in prospective.
- Mikko
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
Yeah, that could help too. Katherine Brooks isn't even here, it's her friend.
Please understand where I'm coming from. I think people set their sights on being like Hollywood. I understand wanting a professional project and I personally wouldn't mind a bigger budget (give me a few million and I'm fine too), but at the same time it seems that the idea small filmmakers get is "I need money". And I'm not criticizing anyone for being rich or successful, simply that everything doesn't need a million bucks (in this case $20,000) thrown at it.
At the same time those million dollar movies need to make three times the profits and not all of them succeed.
But I wouldn't put anyone out of work. I'd be hiring, simply just not as many.
But that wasn't a million dollar Hollywood budget and Brandon is actually more of an example of what I'm talking about. I have nothing against a big budget that's big out of need. I have everything against a big budget because someone believes they need it to make a film. Just like Robert Rodriguez comes in under budget almost every time and still makes a kick-ass film, why is that? Mind over money.
Um, because they are fat ass bloat machine idiots. Serious, the whole Hwood system is based on protectionism and keeping smaller guys (and gals) locked out. Also keep in mind Brandon markets to a specific group that feels Hollywood is ignoring them. But he's still an indy guy. While what he's done is awesome and I give him all the credit in the world, and to my knowledge he's still not a bloat machine, but neither is he directing MI4 (not that he wants to, but maybe he does, I don't know).
And I think you make my point more clear when you say a "real" budget. I work hard and put my own money into this, my budgets and those like mine are more "real" than anyone in Holly doing it with someone else's money, believe me. I don't have $20,000 and I run numbers all the time because I don't have huge cash I have to know where money is going. I know $20,000 is unneeded to do a behind the scenes, even with pros working it. It's just ridiculous. Raise funds for the project you care about!
Hey tell Katherine to give me $10,000 and I'll shoot and edit her BTS. Then get my boy to professionally score it in Protools with his four keyboard set-up, then pay my rent and shoot my own flick with BTS, sizzle reel, then do the after party with open bar and bottle service! And I bet I can get at least two hottie scream queens to show up and one playboy model and at least one Bacardi girl. I'm all about the numbers on this ish and I know bloat when I see it.
Honestly my anger isn't toward this Katherine Brooks, I don't even know the lady, but there's a lot of pint up frustration as I see more and more big companies finding ways to shut out the little guy. And when the little guy does make it, they come clamoring. Right now may anger is at C2E2, considering what Marvel did to the indy comic industry and now this. Now these jerks (Marvel and whoever else) get to judge who's worthy of showing. You think a company that Marvel really sees as a threat will get to show? No freaking way. With Wizard World, you paid your cash and you were in. THE FANS/BUYERS judged what they wanted.
There's more democracy in printing a comic now (print on demand), but less distribution (thanks Marvel and Diamond). The same is happening with film. We don't have to fear freedom of speech being eaten up by the government, the corporations are doing it just fine. (The buy out of Youtube is one thing I can think of off the top of my head).
So whenever I see someone throwing around a ridiculously high budget for something that can be done on a stupidly lower budget (as I've seen done many time right here on DVX), just because "that's how they do it in Holly" I get pissed. Also the title of the thread is "Director Katherine Brooks is offering spend a day on set shadowing her..." so I took it as okay that's cool I guess let me check it out. But I get into it and it's not really an offer in that way, it's a tactic to get some money from you. First question that comes to mind: Why is she so great someone should pay to shadow her? So she has some credits IMDB and a few indie films under her belt. I think that describes the majority of DVXUsers. Big whoop. If that's the case Barry, you or Brandon (hell you and Brandon) should be making this offer. What about the many here who work wedding and events, you never see their "credits". And don't even let me start with PETA and her horse! I'd be more likely to jump on this if she said a portion would go to pay her rent. Okay, I admit maybe I'm just in a bad mood.
-Nate
Last edited:
ChaseBecraft
Member
Hollywood's done a good job of defining how a movie gets made. So many cogs in the wheel, so many people involved. Big name actors, directors, writers that cost huge money. Proprietary equipment that would send you to the poor house if you had to buy them yourselves.
Do you even know why hollywood is even like this? It's because of the UNION. This is why movies cost the prices that end up totalling into the millions. You've got one person to hold a light and the other person to supervise him. I say STOP dividing the jobs and get more talented people that really want to MAKE MOVIES instead of just being int he hollywood game. One person with pure passion is equal to a small army of union workers in my book.
People, we are entering a wonderful and new untapped age. No longer do you need truckloads of money and 500 people cogs to make a movie. There's things like After Effects, electronic video cameras that produce top notch images (video dslrs etc), internet marketing, pro audio suites that don't cost your grandma's wedding ring. There is no longer one way to make a movie and we have a lot of advantages over the big hollywood studios.
Chances. We can take chances my friends. Play a different game and see how things unfold. You don't have some old rich guy breathing down your neck telling you "that isn't marketable". You can truly take chances and bring a beautiful creative light to this dullness that is hollywood movies. I see all these "Indy" films and they're all the same, you guys aren't taking chances, you're following Hollywood structure. People are bored! Make something new, it's been done again and again. As long as your story is interesting and the pace is on que people will enjoy and watch your movie. Don't be afraid to be different and stop listening and looking at what hollywood does.
I'm tired of seeing the same old drab. We gotta start making purple cows here. You think people care about your romantic comedy that hollywood has perfected a billion times. I say stop being predictable, stop following criteria, stop being marketable, stop writing about romantic comedies and really SURPRISE people! CHANGE THIS GAME. People want to see new ideas! Why compete with hollywood when you can use the right side of your brain?????
Be inspirational and creative and your audience will be there. Make something you're really proud of instead of just a money basket.
Do you even know why hollywood is even like this? It's because of the UNION. This is why movies cost the prices that end up totalling into the millions. You've got one person to hold a light and the other person to supervise him. I say STOP dividing the jobs and get more talented people that really want to MAKE MOVIES instead of just being int he hollywood game. One person with pure passion is equal to a small army of union workers in my book.
People, we are entering a wonderful and new untapped age. No longer do you need truckloads of money and 500 people cogs to make a movie. There's things like After Effects, electronic video cameras that produce top notch images (video dslrs etc), internet marketing, pro audio suites that don't cost your grandma's wedding ring. There is no longer one way to make a movie and we have a lot of advantages over the big hollywood studios.
Chances. We can take chances my friends. Play a different game and see how things unfold. You don't have some old rich guy breathing down your neck telling you "that isn't marketable". You can truly take chances and bring a beautiful creative light to this dullness that is hollywood movies. I see all these "Indy" films and they're all the same, you guys aren't taking chances, you're following Hollywood structure. People are bored! Make something new, it's been done again and again. As long as your story is interesting and the pace is on que people will enjoy and watch your movie. Don't be afraid to be different and stop listening and looking at what hollywood does.
I'm tired of seeing the same old drab. We gotta start making purple cows here. You think people care about your romantic comedy that hollywood has perfected a billion times. I say stop being predictable, stop following criteria, stop being marketable, stop writing about romantic comedies and really SURPRISE people! CHANGE THIS GAME. People want to see new ideas! Why compete with hollywood when you can use the right side of your brain?????
Be inspirational and creative and your audience will be there. Make something you're really proud of instead of just a money basket.
Great, and the number of people screwed over by know-nothings or pricks will become even more substantial.
Elmer_Lang
Well-known member
I'm with nathyn and cheesebecraft: Testify, gentlemen! Add st paul to the list too: fight the good fight n all. Hollywood and rocknroll are the twin whores of babylon. I'm not in this to get cocaine and chest-inflated babes (sad victims, really), I wanna say what I wanna say, how I wanna say it. And you never know, in poetry all those academics pooped on Bukowski, but who's selling all the books now, who will get his place in history and be read for generations. I wouldn't be surprised if in 100 years Cassavettes will be more famous than Spielberg. Then again I could be wrong, but I don't think I'm wrong that making films isn't all about getting that 3-picture deal in Hollywood. jaguars--bore me, hot tubs--snore. The zing of creating something with passion, purpose and truth is way more exciting.--hey, wait a second, that's my bowl of cheerios you're chompin' on!
Jon Starr
Veteran
I'm sorry, but what sort of sets have you been on Chase?
When you have large crews it's not like people stand around doing nothing, like you imply. Do you think when large companies grow larger and hire more people these people just stand around? No, they're there to make sure things get done faster and more efficiently by dividing up the jobs, or if the jobs get bigger they're there to help carry the weight.
As an indy filmmaker, I've only seen sets suffer due to lack of man power (and lack of knowledge of how to allocate that man power). Most of the time smaller indy sets tend to take a long time to get things done, mainly because they have 1 guy doing the job of 5 or 10. If it doesn't take long then it tends to suffer in quality because of lack of... well, manpower. Mind you the biggest set I've ever been on was a crew of 50 people or so, but that was a very efficient set and even as a PA I wasn't just standing around, I can assure you that.
I can't imagine how it would be in Hollywood, where they have entire departments, huge sets, stunts, and several units shooting at the same time. They have it right because they know how to efficiently divide these jobs, and make set ups and take downs quick.
A lot of people come into this filmmaking world wondering why this costs so much, and why that takes so much money, etc. They are either clueless or call it useless spending. I have a saying, the more you know, the more you realize you don't know.
When you have large crews it's not like people stand around doing nothing, like you imply. Do you think when large companies grow larger and hire more people these people just stand around? No, they're there to make sure things get done faster and more efficiently by dividing up the jobs, or if the jobs get bigger they're there to help carry the weight.
As an indy filmmaker, I've only seen sets suffer due to lack of man power (and lack of knowledge of how to allocate that man power). Most of the time smaller indy sets tend to take a long time to get things done, mainly because they have 1 guy doing the job of 5 or 10. If it doesn't take long then it tends to suffer in quality because of lack of... well, manpower. Mind you the biggest set I've ever been on was a crew of 50 people or so, but that was a very efficient set and even as a PA I wasn't just standing around, I can assure you that.
I can't imagine how it would be in Hollywood, where they have entire departments, huge sets, stunts, and several units shooting at the same time. They have it right because they know how to efficiently divide these jobs, and make set ups and take downs quick.
A lot of people come into this filmmaking world wondering why this costs so much, and why that takes so much money, etc. They are either clueless or call it useless spending. I have a saying, the more you know, the more you realize you don't know.