WhiteMonkey
Well-known member
What he said.
Does genre matter for a $30k-$50k indie production?
- Thread starter Randall_Oelerich
- Start date
What he said.
Coming from actually DOING a somewhat (or mostly) genre-ish "wanna-be" feature film for under 50K, and not just talking about it or speculating, there are positives and negatives to both and alot of them are pretty much outlined right in this quote.
Thank you for a level-headed response... this post is unfukwitable.
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
Because even if you take your $50k and make your film look like 10x the amount you are still about 10-15 mill short of what the big guys are putting into it.
"This is what I did with $30k, imagine what I can do with $1M" - world doesn't work like that. There is plenty of people who have done nothing in their past and still got TONS of money to do their films. Nobody looks at an average film and think, despite of what most no-budget filmmakers would like to think: "gee if youc an do THIS with $30k i wonder what you can do with $1M"
Eric Boellner
Well-known member
If execs and investors don't look at what you've done with anything less than $1mil, then how do filmmakers keep getting noticed and getting jobs from YouTube shorts, and from micro-budget features that play at festivals? I get what you're saying, but you seem to be proposing a catch-22 in which filmmakers can't break out unless they raise $1mil or more, when that's nearly impossible without something to show for yourself in the first place.
I know there are plenty of examples of filmmakers raising money for their first features, but isn't the key mantra of indie filmmaker "Just do it?"
-JMT
I know there are plenty of examples of filmmakers raising money for their first features, but isn't the key mantra of indie filmmaker "Just do it?"
-JMT
Luis Caffesse
Admin
Sure. But I would venture to guess there are plenty more who HAVE done something in their past.
I agree, it's not as easy as "I did this with 30K, imagine what i can do with 1M" - but that is a much easier proposition to make than "I did nothing with nothing, imagine what I can do with 1M."
There is no silver bullet - but one thing is for sure, investors give money to people who get stuff done.
It doesn't have to be a one to one relationship with dollars (meaning, I agree, no one is going to assume you can make a movie that is 100 times better if they give you 100 times your last budget).
But investors like to back people who are going to get something done REGARDLESS of whether or not they give you the money.
A microbudget feature that is well made sends the message that you are the type of person who creates work. Period.
Granted - much of this depends on what kind of career you are looking to build.
If someone wants to be a studio director, then no - a 30K microbudget feature may not be the best route to take.
But if you're looking to build a career as an independent I don't see any reason why someone should pound the pavement for years hoping to find the right angel to bet a 1M buget on an unproven talent.
Randall_Oelerich
Veteran
I am with you Michael. Best advice I got here on dvxuser was to join up on filmspecific.com where i learned how it is done-- make a microbudget feature film $50k or less indie to show you can go through the production process, then you can make the leap to $1M-$5M funded productions and get that type of funding easy without even using any investor equity. Thus why I started this thread, as that is exactly what I am going to do-- produce a $20k-$50k indie, then I can move on to do the $1M-$5M indies. The method works, the guy that explains how to do it has done it over and over and over and over and over. Anyhows, I have my microbudget indie horror story idea, will be writing it up, then later this year I can start pre-production, film it in 2013.
R
Yes.
And, the last paragraph goes back to asking yourself the question of "what do I want int he next five years?"
Again, once you answer that question then everything becomes pretty clear. There's no mystery involved, you just go and get it done.
Eric Boellner
Well-known member
I'd have trouble believing it's "easy" to secure $1-5m funding, even after directing a micro/low-budget. I think having a well-done (that's the key word) feature under your belt certainly gets you a chance to pitch yourself on the $1m+ project, but I've seen directors who've done solid works at even the $200k range who have had trouble bagging $1mil.
That said, I DO think that just doing it is the best way to start. Whether you've got $500 or $50k, if you're smart and you've got a good story to tell, then go for it. And to echo EuropeanDistributor's point, I think a solid genre film is the best way to prove you can make bank.
-JMT
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
I think the best rout to take is as follows. If you want to make films but have a limited experiences do a few short films (3-4 at least) where you can oversea the prep, production and post and see how thing change from vision to actuality, but also get a sense of what's possible and what remain wishful thinking. Those few shorts will allow you to judge how much an elaborate version of those shorts - a feature film might cost. Armed with that and some projected budget try to raise the money. Go for real numbers. Don't go for impossibly low but also stay away from empty statements or budget such as i need about 1mill to make it. Try not to overlook the "hidden" expenses such as the fact that you won't be employed for about 4-6 months while dong the film so part of the budget you will try to raise is some kind of basic salary for yourself. I know, i know, many will tell you that this is your golden ticket for fame and fortune so just suck it up and go for broke but based on many many film (including many produced by dvxuser members) it's obvious that often it's not the case. No, you will not become overnight sensation right away. It might take at least a few films for that to happen. So don't get discourage, be a dreamer but more so in terms of ideas rather than tiny budgets.
One thing that a determined filmmaker/content creator should learn to do early on: decide for themselves! People can rattle off about the right path, so on and so forth, realize most of them talk and have no idea what it's like to walk. Everyone's path is different, no matter how "similar" they may seem.
Listen to people with an open mind, but trust your own instincts. At the end of the day, they aren't the ones responsible for your future.
You are.
Listen to people with an open mind, but trust your own instincts. At the end of the day, they aren't the ones responsible for your future.
You are.
EuropeanDistributor
Member
It is extremely unrealistic for anyone working on their first feature, especially if it's a microbudget movie, to expect to be paid.
On your first movie you don't get paid, you haven't earned that yet.
You try to raise $20k-$30k which you spend on stuff you can't get for free. You shoot the film on weekends and on holidays and you keep your dayjob.
You are going to have a hell of a hard time to get people invest their time and money into your small film when they find out you have budgeted six month's salary for yourself.
leteeci
Well-known member
I think you should not be shy about giving yourself a salary.. Yes, actors will come for couple of days and make it for free.. but you, as director, producer, cinematographer in one person will spend six month without much sleep and dieying to organise all like it should be.. don't forget about yourself..
Eric Boellner
Well-known member
I don't think Patryk's talking about in the micro-budget range, I think he's speaking more in the scope of $400k-$2mil or similar budgets ranges where key cast/crew are actually paid.
-JMT
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
I think we are talking about two different things. "First feature" as in: i think filmmaking is cool but i don't want to bother with shorts is one thing. "First feature" as in: have been doing it for close to 9 years and it just happens that i never had a chance to direct a feature length films is another. In first case, yes you haven't earned the right but also i would question why start out with such an ambitious undertaking. In other i would be suspect of anyone who is not asking for salary as then they will be devoting their time to other things (such as making s living) which will hamper the film in some form.
I, too, have shot two feature films on the weekends but i don't list those on my credits because... well, they never got finished. And too have shot a small 60k feature that did get finished but because the director had to do his day job took over a year and a half to edit.
The only time i have seen a 45k feature bear any fruits (that is it wasn't embarrassing to look at all things considered) was from an experienced filmmaker friend of mine who took all his savings to do it... And he'll be the first one to tell you that he would never do that again. Too many compromises because of the budget, not enough crew, empty bank account at the end and still no possibility of recouping the costs. And none of those are negative comments. They are simply putting stuff in perspective.
Michael, i think, anything above $150k should have some small living salary for the director.
EuropeanDistributor
Member
Well in that case obviously everybody working on the film will get paid.
However he advised the original poster earlier to raise the budget over $50k and that is not advisable at all unless you can raise the budget to a level where you can cast BIG names who will get you distribution, and in that case we would be talking about a budget close to $1M and private equity would be a minimal part of that funding process anyway.
The original poster wanted to make a microbudget feature hoping to eventually be able to make movies in the $1M-$5M range.
When he raches that level, then of course he will get paid to do these movies.
But when he's doing his very first movie with a budget of less than $50k, a salary for himself would be really unrealistic.
A genre movie with no names isn't worth a whole lot, so you make the movie for as cheap as possible.
If you pay a salary of even $10k for yourself, that $10k is something you need to recoup, and at this level you probably can't.
You try to put as little as possible of your own money into the movie. Kickstarter, indiegogo, film grants, sponsorship, donations whatever, you only invest the bare minimum of your own money, because without any names a genre movie isn't worth much nothing in today's market.
prexdealer
Well-known member
+1,000,000
You are the one that has to push it into the end zone when people stop helping because you don't have any more money, so you might as well be totally invested in it as Kholi "the wise" is saying.
prexdealer
Well-known member
Depending on what shorts they could cost several thousand bucks (I know it seems ridiculous but it can add up). Maybe the OP should just get involved in some other people's shorts who are footing the bill and learn that way. I like to help out on sets just to get the experience without necessarily putting up the $$$. If his 3 or 4 shorts, collectively, come near 10K that is feature money. Shorts will "never" recover money unless it is some amazing thing.
EuropeanDistributor
Member
The first feature with a microbudget is still a movie with a microbudget whether the director has been doing short movies for 9 years or this is his first production ever.
You can't afford to pay yourself a salary out of a $20k-$30k budget, and obviously in that case most people can't quit their dayjobs and devote a 100% of their time into the movie, it doesn't matter how experienced they are, the budget is what it is and a salary is not realistic.
I agree, if you are working with a budget over $150k you should get paid something.
However, you should only be making a movie for over $50k if the product in the end is worth it.
There are basically three things that distributors want in movies:
1. Cast
2. Genre
3. Story
Name cast is the most important, then comes the genre, it needs to be a marketable genre, Action, Thriller, Horror, Sci-fi etc. Finally the story needs to be really good.
Let's pretend you have a budget of $150k, you obviously can have a killer story done in a marketable genre, but can you cast names big enough to secure you distribution at this level?
Sure you can, but are the names big enough that you can sell the movie for $150k once it's finished? Probably not.
Movies done in this budget range are tricky, because they are probably not big enough to receive tax incentives, and the actors who distributors want won't bother with movies this small.
So unless you can cast big actors, to a sales agent or a distributor your $50k movies is worth exactly the same as your $150k movie.
In my opinion it's too big of a risk to make movies in this budget range.
You should only raise the budget over $50k when you can go way over $500k where you can film in a state that offers tax incentives, and you can cast names that are big enough to get you pre-sales.
If your cast and budget is right, it's much less of a risk to make a $1M movie then it is to make a $150k movie.
I've posted this in other places, but the concept is generally lost on people. Unless the extra 100K gets you a name, indeed, it's the same thing.
The only thing I would question is this:
A baseline is needed when discussion worth. If I could make a fifty-thousand dollar feature film and gross three-hundred thousand dollars after all options have been exhausted, I call that worthwhile. Even if it takes two or three years. And, I know of people that have done that first hand, not second, conjecture, etc.
No, it's not the same as millions, of course, but my wager is that most people on this site would be enthralled to have spent one to two years working on a feature, then another two or so grossing 300,000.00 of their own money (to be distributed amongst others how they see fit.)
Even if that only worked out to thirty or forty thousand a year after it was all said and done, that's still forty thousand a year doing what you love the most.
So, yeah, relativity.
As far as anything above 60K? I say no way. Not unless you have a guarantee for a name and some sort of pre-distribution in place. 60K and below is safe territory, IMO.