vcassel
Veteran
I agree with this lately. In fact, if I had 10K I wouldn't even want to do a feature at this point. I'd rather do a comedic or sketch show pilot or an entire season of a web series.
Do you think it's possible to shoot an AMAZING feature for under $10,000?
- Thread starter filmmakerguy
- Start date
I agree with this lately. In fact, if I had 10K I wouldn't even want to do a feature at this point. I'd rather do a comedic or sketch show pilot or an entire season of a web series.
keylight
Veteran
I'd seriously recommend you invest $8.50 (Kindle edition) and a few hours of time to read "How Not to Make a Short Film: Secrets from a Sundance Programmer". It might just change your mind about shorts, and what's possible with a $10K budget.
This sounds like an approach to failure. If you want to make a pilot, then all of your work (script, structure, look/feel, cut, who you network with, how you network, how you market...) should be geared towards what it takes for a pilot to succeed. Same thing if you're doing a web series, or a short.
By the way, there are people who make shorts that get shown at HUNDREDS of festivals around the world. That's a ton of exposure that sometimes leads to feature work.
Sounds like you've probably watched very few festival quality shorts. If you've got Netflix, add some collections of shorts to your queue.
Last edited:
keylight
Veteran
A few of the better known directors who got their start making short films (and I don't mean school project films):
Paul Thomas Anderson
Steven Spielberg
Martin Scorsese
Stanley Kubrick
Wes Anderson
Robert Rogriguez
Spike Lee
David Lynch
Hal Hartley
Believe me, it's not a short list of directors. It could go on and on....
Paul Thomas Anderson
Steven Spielberg
Martin Scorsese
Stanley Kubrick
Wes Anderson
Robert Rogriguez
Spike Lee
David Lynch
Hal Hartley
Believe me, it's not a short list of directors. It could go on and on....
Brian_Rice
Carbonite Member
I completely agree with you -- that's why I said that shorts once were prevelant and of the utmost importance in the 16mm age where all these directors cut their teeth. Personally I just don't think they're that important anymore.
And I love short films. Many great directors still make short films as purely artistic efforts. I watch and sometimes enjoy them.
But in the age of web series and manageable feature production costs...again, unless you're doing a high quality, big budget short that's intended to be a larger piece, I just don't see much relevance in it (the original shorts of Shane Acker and Neill Blomkamp are, to me, what short films should be made of today -- speaking strictly in a business sense).
Like I said, though in the other thread on this (where we should continue the discussion), everyone is entitled to go down whatever path they feel compelled to tread. I'm much more inclined to do self-produce creator-owned stuff rather than *get a job* with a studio. For filmmakers just trying to get a job, I may be completely off the mark in my observations.
So, whatever floats your boat!
Futchibon
Well-known member
Hopefully this will stop the Monster rumours once and for all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvFAdgi7SoA&feature=related
David G. Smith
Steak Knife Member
Well, he said that you could, "...probably buy a small house..." for the cost of his movie. in the US for 2010, the median cost for a house was $221,900. Of course the calculation of a median means that there are as many number of houses that cost less than that as there are houses that cost more than that.
That being said, an effects laden film like "Monsters" being produced for such a relatively small sum still bodes well for other great projects being produced for similarly low costs. Personally, I am not a fan of movies like "Monsters"; preferring more intimate, personal dramas, which "Should" be less expensive to make than high concept effects laden films. BUT... the proof is in the pudding... Right? So until we get up off of our butts and go and make that amazing film for $10,000, this is just an academic exercise. I suggest we get up and go do it.
And, he's still being vague. Dancin' around numbers. Not accusin' him of lyin' but I guess I kinda am? I've still been told, outside of forums etc. through that certain "grapvine" that it definitely wasn't in the 200's as far as what was SPENT.
Deferred, might've been a different story. I could suddenly start puttin' up deferred amounts on my feature and we're well into 300K.
Either way, I guess it doesn't truly matter what the budget was, and never really does unless it's a marketing ploy/technique.
Monsters is much more of an "intimate, personal drama" than it is an "effects laden film." There are really very few special effects shots throughout the film, which is primarily about the journey and relationship of the two leads.
I would be shocked if Monsters cost anywhere near $200,000 to get to its initial cut. Aside from the numerous locations, it is a very small, low-key film. And from everything I've heard, it doesn't sound like they had a big crew.
Last edited:
DeterminedFilmmaker
Active member
It would be hard. You would need to make sure that most of the cast and crew are working free for you, probably friends and family. You would also need to keep the special effects to a minimum as a lot of the time they need to be supervised by someone qualified, which can cost a lot. It could be done, but I'm not sure how great it would be.
Nick Wernham
Member
In theory can it be done? Sure. Just write the greatest script ever involving two or three characters and one or two locations and shoot the whole thing with equipment that you either already own, build yourself or get for free. Then do post for free and put together deliverables together for next to nothing as well.
Have I ever seen it done? Nope.
Have I ever seen it done? Nope.
Justin Kuhn
Veteran
Yes. But...
You just need to be a gifted shooter, editor, writer and a competent director; you have to have at least a few people supporting you, for free, and you yourself are working for free. And you own your equipment. So you bring the cost down to paying your actors a minimal day rate, and food. The distribution of skills could be argued but the core mechanic of film making is in the shooting and the editing, so I place a lot of value on those skills. If your script calls for props that need fabricating, that needs to be free as well, i.e. done by you; hot glue, spray paint and cardboard are your friends. Habitat for Humanity is your friend. The hardware store is your more expensive friend. Regardless of where your strengths are, you need to know them and your weaknesses. Play to your strengths and compensate for your weaknesses. If your weakness is directing actors, then find good ones who improv well and rehearse with them until the scene is good. Keep the script elastic. Give your cast room to play if they have the chops and know when to curb their excesses. Then do all the post yourself, and be good at it.
That said, if you can pull off the production itself it's likely you'll spend about the same amount getting it to market. So be ready for that.
You just need to be a gifted shooter, editor, writer and a competent director; you have to have at least a few people supporting you, for free, and you yourself are working for free. And you own your equipment. So you bring the cost down to paying your actors a minimal day rate, and food. The distribution of skills could be argued but the core mechanic of film making is in the shooting and the editing, so I place a lot of value on those skills. If your script calls for props that need fabricating, that needs to be free as well, i.e. done by you; hot glue, spray paint and cardboard are your friends. Habitat for Humanity is your friend. The hardware store is your more expensive friend. Regardless of where your strengths are, you need to know them and your weaknesses. Play to your strengths and compensate for your weaknesses. If your weakness is directing actors, then find good ones who improv well and rehearse with them until the scene is good. Keep the script elastic. Give your cast room to play if they have the chops and know when to curb their excesses. Then do all the post yourself, and be good at it.
That said, if you can pull off the production itself it's likely you'll spend about the same amount getting it to market. So be ready for that.
Last edited:
kevin baggott
Well-known member
of course you can - my two cents. write something from yer heart. cast actors or non actors who are close to the character. dont compromise.
David G. Smith
Steak Knife Member
Then there is always articles that come out showing us those that are doing it. From DV mag. The Polish brothers newest flick. I know that there are those that will debate whether this is an "Amazing" feature... but it looks like it is going to be a financially successful feature. Of course the Polish brothers have a bit of cache to exploit and their digital distribution model is not accessible for everyone... BUT....
http://dv.com/article/112756
http://dv.com/article/112756
J Davis
Veteran
C'est arrivé près de chez vous
this ultra low budget belgian feature film is amazing and it won two awards at cannes, one award at toronto and a stack of other awards and screenings at many festivals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Bites_Dog_(film)
Do I think it is possible to make an amazing feature for under $10k? YES !! and I plan on trying to do just that !
Last edited:
Justin Kuhn
Veteran
You will compromise. You may be forced to compromise when your location pulls out from under you and you have to find a new place for the climatic battle scene or whatevs. Or you'll just have choices to make about what to spend money on, and the less money you spend the better. At 10K compromises will be made. Make the right compromises.
I think this proves it's possible: http://vimeo.com/27377057
You may notice some technical issues with the production, but those don't make the movie any less amazing.
David G. Smith
Steak Knife Member
"The enemy of art is the absence of limitations"
-Orson Wells.
Wow, where have I heard that before?! .....
David G. Smith
Steak Knife Member
C'est arrivé près de chez vous
this ultra low budget belgian feature film is amazing and it won two awards at cannes, one award at toronto and a stack of other awards and screenings at many festivals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Bites_Dog_(film)
Do I think it is possible to make an amazing feature for under $10k? YES !! and I plan on trying to do just that !
Just added to my Netflix queue and moved to position 1! Thanks.
J Davis
Veteran
after you watch it, write to me and tell me what you think !
I need to add it to my best of list
http://jdmax.com/influences/
Justin Kuhn
Veteran
seriously watch Bad is Bad they say they spent 6K. http://vimeo.com/27377057 (the whole feature)
Synopsis:
A locally loved suburban family man has to pay for the worst thing he's ever done when two mysterious young criminals break into his home.
So it's mostly in the house, but there are a couple other locations before that, nothing too extravagant. But it's f'n riveting.
Synopsis:
A locally loved suburban family man has to pay for the worst thing he's ever done when two mysterious young criminals break into his home.
So it's mostly in the house, but there are a couple other locations before that, nothing too extravagant. But it's f'n riveting.