I'm open to feedback, it's also for another purpose. You're welcome to participate. I've got two others so far.
Do you think it's possible to shoot an AMAZING feature for under $10,000?
- Thread starter filmmakerguy
- Start date
I'm open to feedback, it's also for another purpose. You're welcome to participate. I've got two others so far.
Vimeo is converting the scene now. It's about 2:20.
If you're interested, we're doing a Skype Chat Room (not voice chat). I'm trying to gauge reactions from people who are not involved on a few things, so feedback is definitely welcomed.
My Skype name is: KHOLIKHOLIKHOLI (how obvious?)
So far, Zak Forsman, Marlon Ladd, Gary Huff are joining in. It's a good chance to see some footage in a more humble state, produced by DVXusers on a thin budget.
If you're interested, we're doing a Skype Chat Room (not voice chat). I'm trying to gauge reactions from people who are not involved on a few things, so feedback is definitely welcomed.
My Skype name is: KHOLIKHOLIKHOLI (how obvious?)
So far, Zak Forsman, Marlon Ladd, Gary Huff are joining in. It's a good chance to see some footage in a more humble state, produced by DVXusers on a thin budget.
Chris Adler
Veteran
I assume part of the $10K budget is setting up a legal production entity?
Make sure its clear to your crew and cast that not only are they working for free during the shoot, but if they are injured they have will have no protection offered by you for medical costs, lost wages, etc. If you want to provide workman's comp for a small cast/crew (say 10 people total including actors) for a 2 week shoot @ six days a week you're looking at having to pay $10,440 in wages at minimum wage rates ($7.25/hr). You'll also have to withhold taxes, etc. If you use a service like PayReel you tack on a fixed percentage of the total billing for their fees, which includes the Workman's comp. There goes your full $10K budget. I've read where numerous producers have 1099'd crew for their productions only to have their states come after them for unemployment claims, etc years later. Using someone like PayReel eliminates this risk because they are the employer when you use them.
Anyone making a feature in this price range better understand the personal liability they are exposing themselves and their entire cast and crew to before proceeding. What happens when a c-stand falls over and smacks the DP's DSLR and he looks at you for a replacement? A professional grip slips off a ladder and breaks their leg, causing them to not work for the next month. Who pays for those lost wages? You can bet their insurance company will come after you for the medical costs, and any claims they file with the state for unemployment will come back to haunt you personally.
Of course, I'm no lawyer, but insurance and protection for everyone involved should NEVER be ignored.
Make sure its clear to your crew and cast that not only are they working for free during the shoot, but if they are injured they have will have no protection offered by you for medical costs, lost wages, etc. If you want to provide workman's comp for a small cast/crew (say 10 people total including actors) for a 2 week shoot @ six days a week you're looking at having to pay $10,440 in wages at minimum wage rates ($7.25/hr). You'll also have to withhold taxes, etc. If you use a service like PayReel you tack on a fixed percentage of the total billing for their fees, which includes the Workman's comp. There goes your full $10K budget. I've read where numerous producers have 1099'd crew for their productions only to have their states come after them for unemployment claims, etc years later. Using someone like PayReel eliminates this risk because they are the employer when you use them.
Anyone making a feature in this price range better understand the personal liability they are exposing themselves and their entire cast and crew to before proceeding. What happens when a c-stand falls over and smacks the DP's DSLR and he looks at you for a replacement? A professional grip slips off a ladder and breaks their leg, causing them to not work for the next month. Who pays for those lost wages? You can bet their insurance company will come after you for the medical costs, and any claims they file with the state for unemployment will come back to haunt you personally.
Of course, I'm no lawyer, but insurance and protection for everyone involved should NEVER be ignored.
ugafan
Looking for a woman
i don't have skype, but i'm interested in seeing a scene. if you put anything up as a private video, please let me know.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Primer - Friends and family
Clerks - Friends and family
Blair Witch - Friends and townspeople (who played roles)
Pather Panchali - Friends and family
The Following - Friends and friends of friends (everyone involved had day jobs) Locations were provided by friends and family.
El Mariachi - No crew (actors were the crew) townspeople and local teenagers played roles, a local exterminator wrote the song....the town warden played the town warden.
Pi - Darren Aronofsky called his entire cast and crew - "a socialist collective". His mother was craft services.
These films don't utilize PROS of the industry....just people they knew who were creative and liked the idea of helping out on a film. I'd say it IS the our gang approach.
One of our members just finished a low budget feature made by - guess what? A group of friends.
ullanta
Veteran
So this indicates you have some source of money completely independent of what you earn... meaning, how did you make a living "investing" without a pretty large pot to start with?
A. This goes back to the film financing argument, and thus back to relativity to the thread. "Living off someone" is basically having that much more income... not paid in cash but paid in food, clothing, shelter, who knows what else you're counting. Your income in such a situation is not the 30k... it's that plus whatever someone else is paying for you to live a childlike life.
B. Don't take this the wrong way, but it sounds like you're coming from a fairly privileged upbringing. Most people don't have the opportunity to "live off someone". The reason I asked you for the rough budget info (just rough yearly amounts, I bet you could estimate if you tried.. or even provide feasible minimums) is that I THINK (and may be wrong) that you are hearing people say their income is 30k, when their income is maybe 30k from a job, and some financial help from Mom and Dad, and all loans paid off (maybe even a credit card usable but billed to Mom and Dad), a nice nest egg when first "going out into the world", gifts of cameras and cars, and maybe help with payments from Mom and Dad, and associations with well-off folks who might let you "live off them" so you can pursue your art, and maybe arrange cushy jobs for you, and maybe help fund your films, etc. I don't think you are accurately assessing the real finances of the people around you. You certainly have not led a life that gives you a grasp of what most people's lives are like. Look back at the posts here, with statistics of what the situation is for most people. Spend 30 seconds googling average income and average household expenses.
ullanta
Veteran
Anyway, this is a long thread! I tried to search and found no mention of Eraserhead, and interesting related case. Reportedly made for under 10k, over five years, with Lynch and family and other cast/crew members living on the set for substantial amounts of time, and all participants (and their families) filling many roles (e.g., Sissy Spacek [Jack Nance's future wife] filling various crew positions). Yet, also having some additional support in resources from AFI, which is hard to quantify. But... I'd say "an AMAZING film", on a very small budget, with some very interesting stories floating around about how it all worked...
pulpfiction007
Veteran
It was mentioned about 30 pages back! How could you not find it?......kidding of course. It's actually a great example, because theoretically it could be done a lot cheaper with modern tech. If Lynch had the stuff available to him then that we have now, maybe it wouldn't have taken him so long to finish.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
This is great to hear. Can't wait to see the finished product.....and I guess then we'll have our definitive example!
and ullanta....Yeah it's a big maybe....but I'm envisioning a younger poorer version of him figuring out how to make Eraserhead today. He might have just shot it with an HVX and/or 5DMK2.
That Inland Empire crack was funny!....I have to say I don't remember much about it.
Last edited:
ullanta, see my post #701, I brought out the example of "Eraserhead".
On the insurance issue: well, duh, it's highly unlikely that you'll be hiring pros when your budget is $10K. You'll be calling in favors, and resorting to family + friends. Are there downsides? You bet. But you don't really have a choice, it's that, or nothing. And plenty of films were made with mostly family + friends.
In the end, you do what you can. If you only have $10K do you go and try to raise $1 million+, or do you do your feature for the $10K? That's just a difference in philosophy. I know one guy who has been trying to set up his film and get financing for the past 10 years. That's right - 10. You may say what you wish - his script stinks, whatever. Fact is, he's got nothing to show for it. Had he done what I told him years ago, he'd have made his feature (and lost the $10K). What is better? Do nothing, or do your feature, even if you lose your $10K? I think it's better to do it - because even if you lose that money, at least you learn some valuable lessons, gain experience and have a better shot next time. I'd say even more - if you are doing a feature, you have more chance to raise the money, because you can continue to try raising it while shooting - say, you now have a reel, or a scene, or a couple of scenes, stuff to sell your pitch, show your abilities, show your vision, show your dedication. More than one feature has been set up because someone had shot a scene or a few scenes.
The worst you can do is sit and do nothing. So don't listen to the debbie downers.
On the insurance issue: well, duh, it's highly unlikely that you'll be hiring pros when your budget is $10K. You'll be calling in favors, and resorting to family + friends. Are there downsides? You bet. But you don't really have a choice, it's that, or nothing. And plenty of films were made with mostly family + friends.
In the end, you do what you can. If you only have $10K do you go and try to raise $1 million+, or do you do your feature for the $10K? That's just a difference in philosophy. I know one guy who has been trying to set up his film and get financing for the past 10 years. That's right - 10. You may say what you wish - his script stinks, whatever. Fact is, he's got nothing to show for it. Had he done what I told him years ago, he'd have made his feature (and lost the $10K). What is better? Do nothing, or do your feature, even if you lose your $10K? I think it's better to do it - because even if you lose that money, at least you learn some valuable lessons, gain experience and have a better shot next time. I'd say even more - if you are doing a feature, you have more chance to raise the money, because you can continue to try raising it while shooting - say, you now have a reel, or a scene, or a couple of scenes, stuff to sell your pitch, show your abilities, show your vision, show your dedication. More than one feature has been set up because someone had shot a scene or a few scenes.
The worst you can do is sit and do nothing. So don't listen to the debbie downers.
Chris Adler
Veteran
Actually its not all on them if they get hurt. The first thing insurance does on a claim is find out WHERE the accident happened, and if they find out it was during the making a movie you are technically their employer and they come after you. Sad puppy dog faces won't change that fact.
But hey, cross your fingers and hope nothing happens to anyone or anything. Hakuna Matata!
But hey, cross your fingers and hope nothing happens to anyone or anything. Hakuna Matata!
Last edited:
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Holy Cow, TWO sensible things said in this 100 page thread!
But hey, you can cross your fingers and hope nothing happens to anyone or anything, and no property damage occurs. Hakuna Matata!
Cracks me up. I mean, we're guerilla filmmakers. This is not about what you wish you had, but what's available. Taking risks is part of it. I mean, sure, you can be like one of those guerilla filmmakers who have $200 million budget and insurance up the wazoo, and won't walk into the swimming pool because they just had lunch, and gosh golly, what are we gonna do about the mosquitos and don't you know that you're freaking out the star because the faucets in their hotel aren't gold-plated. But that's what being guerilla on $10K means - you do what you can, you shoot wild, you take chances, it's all a huge hail-mary pass, and you are going to take risks, and mommy isn't there with the hot milk.
If you want to talk about insurance and this and that - why stop there? There's a million things that would be useful. And two million that are sensible to do. And you wouldn't be making films, because that's a risk in and of itself - it's not a sensible career to pursue, if you have a insurance agent's sensibility, by all means stay home with a warm blanket and don't lift a finger unless they hand you government bonds.
That's not how the West was won. You want to make a feature for $10K? You're gonna be hustlin', son. There ain't no guarantees in guerilla filmmaking and there's a ton of risk of all kinds - hope nobody's monocle drops out once they find that, shock, horror, there's RISK!
Cracks me up. I mean, we're guerilla filmmakers. This is not about what you wish you had, but what's available. Taking risks is part of it. I mean, sure, you can be like one of those guerilla filmmakers who have $200 million budget and insurance up the wazoo, and won't walk into the swimming pool because they just had lunch, and gosh golly, what are we gonna do about the mosquitos and don't you know that you're freaking out the star because the faucets in their hotel aren't gold-plated. But that's what being guerilla on $10K means - you do what you can, you shoot wild, you take chances, it's all a huge hail-mary pass, and you are going to take risks, and mommy isn't there with the hot milk.
If you want to talk about insurance and this and that - why stop there? There's a million things that would be useful. And two million that are sensible to do. And you wouldn't be making films, because that's a risk in and of itself - it's not a sensible career to pursue, if you have a insurance agent's sensibility, by all means stay home with a warm blanket and don't lift a finger unless they hand you government bonds.
That's not how the West was won. You want to make a feature for $10K? You're gonna be hustlin', son. There ain't no guarantees in guerilla filmmaking and there's a ton of risk of all kinds - hope nobody's monocle drops out once they find that, shock, horror, there's RISK!
ullanta
Veteran
The important thing is that he filmed it with Sony MiniDV cams, and fully embraced the grainy low light, the out-of-focus, the blowouts, the ability to toss a handheld camera around willy-nilly, and the ability to shoot with a shooting ratio of about 7500:1 (well, maybe 20:1, considering the final length of the film). He said he loves working with the little video cameras and will likely do all his future work the same way... 'twould be kinda sad if Eraserhead were made like that! But, I know what you mean... and think that young Davie Lynch woulda cranked out something great with what we've got now...
That's why somebody invented the Waiver / Release Form!
I love how the conversation has turned into being about screwing people over (who aren't being paid in the first place) if they happen to get hurt while working on your film. Gotta love the attitude.
?
Wha? I mean, does anybody imagine that you don't do a full 100% disclosure of working conditions and the project prospects for any volunteer? I certainly would. Only those who are totally aware of all the risks, and sign up fully aware, get to work on the project. After that, it's their choice. Sheesh!
?
Wha? I mean, does anybody imagine that you don't do a full 100% disclosure of working conditions and the project prospects for any volunteer? I certainly would. Only those who are totally aware of all the risks, and sign up fully aware, get to work on the project. After that, it's their choice. Sheesh!