Getting started as a one man production?

JonathanLB said:
Well, if you say so. I couldn't make a feature for less than $125,000 and that's with a FREE location and a lot of cut corners. And I wouldn't do that, because that means no stars. So about $200,000 is what you're looking at for a decent film. Short of that it's just not going to happen. Sorry but the whole shooting-a-feature-with-two-buddies thing just doesn't work out. Pro work requires professionals on your set and a real crew.
Click to expand...

Actually, sometimes the two buddies with a camera thing works just fine. And plenty of times $200,000 looks like $20 in independent films... in fact, I'd say of all the less than $10,000 films I've seen- I enjoyed more of them than the 100,000-400,000 features I've seen (usually have one or two token "stars").
The reason, I believe is motivation. So many of the 6 figure films are calculations... a formula designed to help sell the film... cause you have to, cause you spent six figures.
On the other hand, you have your no budget features, which are either
A. Never Completed (sad and unfortunate, but at least you didn't lose much but time... unless you also burned bridges...)
B. Slowly finished over several months or years through sheer will. (These films often suck but Night of the Living Dead was completed in a manner like this, which would have been as no budget film you could make in that era)
C. Completed in a timely manner due to proper pre production focused on overcoming budgetary constraits and solid professional work, by a small skeleton crew who are in essence the producers. (These films are often completly unique, take risks and are made for the unique experiance and the passion for filmmaking. Of course it would be nice to sell the film, but it won't ruin you if you don't)
 
That's... interesting, but I really don't think so, haha. Even Blair Witch Project cost $60,000 and that film looked terrible. Filmmaking costs money, and you can make very solid work for a few hundred thousand, but even that takes a lot of talent and dedication and planning just to come up with something that works on such a small budget.

You cannot make a professional looking film without a professional crew. You can't have 2 people making a feature film, or even a short film. It just doesn't work that way. You need a production designer, a 1st A.D., a DP (if not also a camera operator), set dressers, grips, gaffer, etc. I mean you simply cannot make something look fully professional for no money. If you can show me some counterexamples maybe I'll change my mind, but every short I've seen filmed on no budget still sucks hardcore, and features are just magnified. That's because these people don't see them as serious endeavors, so they don't spend money on them. Professionals understand that filmmaking costs money and that it should be well planned, specialized, and exacting.
 
Did you ever watch any of the DVXuser fest entries Jonathan? There are plenty of very professional looking shorts out there that cost next to nothing.
 
Simon Höfer said:
Did you ever watch any of the DVXuser fest entries Jonathan? There are plenty of very professional looking shorts out there that cost next to nothing.
Click to expand...

Yes, because they didn't treat their employees as professionals. It's easy to make something for cheap or nothing if you just don't pay anyone, but that doesn't mean it was cheap to make. It just means that they didn't pay anyone. There's a big difference. Even my comedy short with two locations and not really much to it that was overly complicated cost $9,000, because I paid the cast and crew for their time, even with me owning the equipment. It costs money to hire professionals to do a job. If I was going to ask everyone to work for free or for almost nothing, I wouldn't be guaranteed the quality that I got. That's fine if you don't have the money and have to take the risk, but to me the greatest risk is my time. I would rather spend $10,000 on a short and have it turn out like I want, rather than $3,000 and just hope for the best, where it could turn out pretty lousy.
 
You are contradicting yourself.

If you can show me some counterexamples maybe, I'll change my mind, but every short I've seen filmed on no budget still sucks hardcore, and features are just magnified.
Click to expand...
Then I tell you about the dvxuser festivals and you wanna tell me now they don't count because nobody was paid? That's just wrong.

If you don't want to or if you are not able to mobilize people to work for free, then that doesn't mean it's not possible. Lot's of shining examples of No budget films out there. If nobody get's paid, it IS no budget.
 
Last edited:
All I'm saying is that it's not really very realistic to say that you can make a film for no budget, just because YOU did it and exploited your friends. I happen to work with and know professionals, people who don't work for free, because they are actually doing well in the industry and expect to be paid for the time, as I expect to be paid for mine. So I don't ask professionals to come work for free on my short so that I can get the glory of having a completed short and they can get no money. That's just not a good arrangement, really.

There is a lot of totally amateur filmmaking that goes on here, I appreciate that, it's great, but that's not how I operate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top