How much did you sell your movie for?
- Thread starter DeanShaw
- Start date
Jon Lawrence
New member
We sold our indie film, "Family," which cost a little over $100k to make, and it made it's $ back + 15% to the investors. The caveat is that the $100k-ish was hard costs - no one working on the movie, including the producers (myself included), ever got to take a deferred salary. Same with our crew - so while we were happy to outperform the S&P 500 over the course of the investment (it took 5 years for our investors to be repaid), it's still been years of work for which we (the creative and production team) didn't get paid for.
Our sales co made a bit of $$ of it as well.
Still glad we did it, wouldn't recommend it unless you're independently wealthy.
Our sales co made a bit of $$ of it as well.
Still glad we did it, wouldn't recommend it unless you're independently wealthy.
David W. Richardson
Chapelgrove Films
How are you doing that? I need to get 'Tangled Web' self-distributed, but I'm not having much luck. Any tips?
I got some figures from www.the-numbers.com
Here's a list of movies with no more than a $25,000 budget. The return on their investment over the budget, and the gross profit.
Please keep in mind that these numbers are from a dude on a forum. This is my no means a professional financial analysis of the low-budget movie making business.
A higher Return on Investment (ROI) is better. A negative ROI means it didn't make a profit.
A movie with an ROI of 1 means it got it's exact budget back in profit.
Please keep in mind that this is based on gross numbers. Distribution and other costs were not included. This is not a guide. It is merely a representation of raw data. There are also 100s of indie movies that are not on that list.
Here's a list of movies with no more than a $25,000 budget. The return on their investment over the budget, and the gross profit.
Please keep in mind that these numbers are from a dude on a forum. This is my no means a professional financial analysis of the low-budget movie making business.
A higher Return on Investment (ROI) is better. A negative ROI means it didn't make a profit.
A movie with an ROI of 1 means it got it's exact budget back in profit.
Please keep in mind that this is based on gross numbers. Distribution and other costs were not included. This is not a guide. It is merely a representation of raw data. There are also 100s of indie movies that are not on that list.
Tarnation was really shot for $218?
Edit: Oh wait, nevermind: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390538/trivia
Edit: Oh wait, nevermind: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390538/trivia
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
Go through Createspace (or Kunaki if you're on a PC) for the DVDs. Set up a store on your site and pass out flyers. In my "Action Filmmaking" book I talk about this form of direct marketing. If you can pass out the flyers around a theater after a similar film, that's even better. Also find someone with an establishment that will let you sale your wares there. That's what I'm working on.
-Nate
Last edited:
yeah that's the problem with these numbers... there's often a very large post-production cost that's not accounted for in the original budget.
famous example, Clerks. it was reportedly made for $27k, but $230k was spent on it in post (mostly for music licences).
Allen Green
Active member
Ok on this list (above) I'm counting about 16 films that made money. The earliest date is 1972 and how many films are made per year (lets say 4 thousand world wide- I know it's much more) with those odds you'd be better off buying a lotto ticket. So the lesson here is make your film with what ever money you have to put in it but don't expect much in return. If it does make something them be pleasantly surprised.
i don't think the lottery ticket is a fair analogy.
this is how i see it:
a movie production (from start to finish) needs to take care of three elements:
1. Artistic (story, directing, etc.)
2. Technical (sound, camera work, special effects, etc.)
3. Business (funding for the latter two, and then distribution concerns, publicity, etc.)
each of these can be subdivided further, of course. but i think that any financially successful movie has taken care of the business element and at least one the others.
take Paranormal Activity for example. it took care of the business element VERY successfully with its marketing.
it took care of the artistic element with "what if people were in a haunted house" (interesting).
it didn't really need to do a lot in the technical department, as long as you can see and hear what's going on. this is because the artistic element eliminated the requirement for lots of effects or stunts. no dolly, no jib, no nothing. PERFECT!
of course, Paranormal Activity's success isn't typical. and you can't really make that genre/theme/style work for every production (or viewer).
but take another example: Primer. very good results for an indie production. they took care of the artistic (time travel story), took modest care of the technical (editing/camera work/sound), and had a good distributor (thinkfilm).
the major flaw with MOST indie productions is not necessarily artistic aspects. it's the technical aspects. poor sound KILLS a movie. poor composition KILLS a movie. poor editing, etc. then the business aspects (incompetence with business matters, bad representation, etc.)
remember, if it's hard to watch, no one's going to watch it.
garbage in = garbage out.
with a lottery ticket you don't have any control over the outcome. which isn't like the success of a movie at all.
but... that's my opinion
this is how i see it:
a movie production (from start to finish) needs to take care of three elements:
1. Artistic (story, directing, etc.)
2. Technical (sound, camera work, special effects, etc.)
3. Business (funding for the latter two, and then distribution concerns, publicity, etc.)
each of these can be subdivided further, of course. but i think that any financially successful movie has taken care of the business element and at least one the others.
take Paranormal Activity for example. it took care of the business element VERY successfully with its marketing.
it took care of the artistic element with "what if people were in a haunted house" (interesting).
it didn't really need to do a lot in the technical department, as long as you can see and hear what's going on. this is because the artistic element eliminated the requirement for lots of effects or stunts. no dolly, no jib, no nothing. PERFECT!
of course, Paranormal Activity's success isn't typical. and you can't really make that genre/theme/style work for every production (or viewer).
but take another example: Primer. very good results for an indie production. they took care of the artistic (time travel story), took modest care of the technical (editing/camera work/sound), and had a good distributor (thinkfilm).
the major flaw with MOST indie productions is not necessarily artistic aspects. it's the technical aspects. poor sound KILLS a movie. poor composition KILLS a movie. poor editing, etc. then the business aspects (incompetence with business matters, bad representation, etc.)
remember, if it's hard to watch, no one's going to watch it.
garbage in = garbage out.
with a lottery ticket you don't have any control over the outcome. which isn't like the success of a movie at all.
but... that's my opinion
David W. Richardson
Chapelgrove Films
It seems to me like you're still hitting a limited geographical area, and not maximizing your efforts. How has this worked out for you in terms of sales/rentals?
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
Fahad is right. The only people I see who talk about it being anything like the lottery are bitter or poor filmmakers, frankly. Successful filmmakers know it's not a lottery, it's a business, and you can make money if you know what you're doing but like any business, really, most people will fail at it. Most restaurants don't succeed either but that doesn't mean it's like a lottery. It just means not everyone has the same sense of how to be successful at it, which is understandable. Doesn't make them bad people, but it does make them unqualified to be going around p*ssing on everyone else's parade because they couldn't figure it out.
Again I will say, if it was a lottery, you wouldn't have dozens upon dozens of companies in Hollywood that do nothing BUT produce indie films! There are, believe it or not, more than just the few major studios. It isn't like for them, living is easy, and for everyone else it's a lottery. You can't create a business on a lottery. There are plenty of production companies here churning out films $100,000 to $20 million and making a profit on most or nearly all of them. That's how they stay in business. It may seem impossible to you, if you're on the outside or you made a film that didn't hit, but it's pretty much by the book for them. They have standards in place to assure a quality production, professional crew they work with on a regular basis, they only develop screenplays that they believe in, they get financing, they make the movie, they have the distribution contacts and networking connections to get it into the right hands immediately, and they make money. It's just what they do.
It reminds me of a quote from a CSI episode from Laurence Fishburne that I just saw. Catherine says to him, "What are the odds?!" He says something like, "Statistically very small, but since it actually happened, 100%."
Statistics and odds are calculated on groups and for that reason have virtually no relevance whatsoever to individuals. It's different if it's something like loading a six-shooter, Russian roulette style, and then having someone pull the trigger. That gun doesn't care who you are, you are going to have a 1 in 6 chance of dying. That's it. But if someone says, "Well the odds of making a film that makes a profit are 1 in 25 because statistically speaking 4,000 films were made last year and only 160 made money." That's a wonderful stat, and I'm sure to someone it probably means something. But to me it means there are a lot of morons out there making bad films and doesn't apply to me whatsoever. It doesn't say, "Of these, 3,000 had awful scripts," which is no doubt the case, and I don't have an awful script, so I know I already don't have anything in common with these people. It doesn't say, "3,900 of them were made without Hollywood-experienced producers," which I have on my side, so therefore i don't have anything in common with the rest of the films. It doesn't say, "3,750 of these shot without all-pro crews," which I have, so again I have nothing in common with those films. When you look at the *actual* odds then, it's more like my odds of success are better than 50% of making my money back, not by any means a lottery's chance, and for our part -- the producers, specifically, we all think it's a slam dunk. They've never failed to turn a profit on films they've produced. There is no reason to think this will be the first.
But tell that to anyone here, they think you're crazy, because of the countless number of n00bs who come on this forum with their awful $15,000 movies and say how hard it is to get distribution. That's like saying it's hard to make it in the NBA, when you have one leg and are legally blind. No kidding! If you read books on distribution, without these people trying to be mean about it, the sentiment is the same: "Good movies will find a distributor." Frankly... I've seen a lot of pretty much sub-par to lousy films with distribution, so it's obviously not very difficult.
Again I will say, if it was a lottery, you wouldn't have dozens upon dozens of companies in Hollywood that do nothing BUT produce indie films! There are, believe it or not, more than just the few major studios. It isn't like for them, living is easy, and for everyone else it's a lottery. You can't create a business on a lottery. There are plenty of production companies here churning out films $100,000 to $20 million and making a profit on most or nearly all of them. That's how they stay in business. It may seem impossible to you, if you're on the outside or you made a film that didn't hit, but it's pretty much by the book for them. They have standards in place to assure a quality production, professional crew they work with on a regular basis, they only develop screenplays that they believe in, they get financing, they make the movie, they have the distribution contacts and networking connections to get it into the right hands immediately, and they make money. It's just what they do.
It reminds me of a quote from a CSI episode from Laurence Fishburne that I just saw. Catherine says to him, "What are the odds?!" He says something like, "Statistically very small, but since it actually happened, 100%."
Statistics and odds are calculated on groups and for that reason have virtually no relevance whatsoever to individuals. It's different if it's something like loading a six-shooter, Russian roulette style, and then having someone pull the trigger. That gun doesn't care who you are, you are going to have a 1 in 6 chance of dying. That's it. But if someone says, "Well the odds of making a film that makes a profit are 1 in 25 because statistically speaking 4,000 films were made last year and only 160 made money." That's a wonderful stat, and I'm sure to someone it probably means something. But to me it means there are a lot of morons out there making bad films and doesn't apply to me whatsoever. It doesn't say, "Of these, 3,000 had awful scripts," which is no doubt the case, and I don't have an awful script, so I know I already don't have anything in common with these people. It doesn't say, "3,900 of them were made without Hollywood-experienced producers," which I have on my side, so therefore i don't have anything in common with the rest of the films. It doesn't say, "3,750 of these shot without all-pro crews," which I have, so again I have nothing in common with those films. When you look at the *actual* odds then, it's more like my odds of success are better than 50% of making my money back, not by any means a lottery's chance, and for our part -- the producers, specifically, we all think it's a slam dunk. They've never failed to turn a profit on films they've produced. There is no reason to think this will be the first.
But tell that to anyone here, they think you're crazy, because of the countless number of n00bs who come on this forum with their awful $15,000 movies and say how hard it is to get distribution. That's like saying it's hard to make it in the NBA, when you have one leg and are legally blind. No kidding! If you read books on distribution, without these people trying to be mean about it, the sentiment is the same: "Good movies will find a distributor." Frankly... I've seen a lot of pretty much sub-par to lousy films with distribution, so it's obviously not very difficult.
Last edited:
Richard J. Johnson
Joystick Member
First Feature: "Torn" 2007-2008
Writer, Director, Producer
Genre: Drama
Budget: $2000.00
Sold to R-squared films
Return: $0
Camera: DVX/LEX
Second Feature: "Can't Complain" 2009
Director
Genre: Comedy
Budget: $1000.00
Did not get picked up
Return: $4500.00
manufacturing cost: About $1200 for 500 DVD's with Cases
Profit: $3300
Sold it out of the trunk and at barbershops, flea markets etc. for $10 each.
Camera: HVX/LEX
Winner: Tomi Film Festival
Winner: Another film festival down under. Can't remember the name. But we have a huge trophy award thingie.
Third Feature: "Sleeping With Fate" 2008
Director
Genre: Urban Drama
Budget: $6000.00
Return: Did Not finish, Producer ran out of money 75% done
Camera: HVX/LEX
Fourth Feature: "Razorblade City" 2009-2010
Writer, Director, Producer
Genre: Action/Comedy (honestly, it's a over the top Hood Flick)
Budget: $2000.00
Return: Waiting for replies from several Distribution Companies. Turned down 1 offer. If they say no. We are going to the streets hard.
EDIT: RAZORBLADE CITY HAS BEEN SOLD TO MAVERICK ENTERTAINMET.
Camera: HVX/LEX
We got a lot of positive press for this one in ALL of our local papers, Radio and TV. Premiere at Landmark theaters sold out in 10 minutes.
Fifth Feature: "The King Of Baltimore" 2010
Director
Genre: Urban Drama
Budget: $20,000
Return: My Fee and new Gear.
Camera: Canon 7D and T2i
The first film That I was hired to direct. Not my script.
90% done with shooting. 3 scenes left.
you can see images from all of these films on my Vimeo page. And "Torn" is in my sig. Not great films or anything but I enjoy doing them more than anything else I have ever done and with each one I'm getting better and learning more. I don't really look at business models and this and that. I just shoot and If I have the money I use it, If I don't than I don't. I really don't care. I just love doing them. If they don't get picked up, we just hit the block and pop the trunk. A lot of work but there is plenty money out there.
Razorblade is my favorite but King looks the best by far.
http://vimeo.com/6802841
Writer, Director, Producer
Genre: Drama
Budget: $2000.00
Sold to R-squared films
Return: $0
Camera: DVX/LEX
Second Feature: "Can't Complain" 2009
Director
Genre: Comedy
Budget: $1000.00
Did not get picked up
Return: $4500.00
manufacturing cost: About $1200 for 500 DVD's with Cases
Profit: $3300
Sold it out of the trunk and at barbershops, flea markets etc. for $10 each.
Camera: HVX/LEX
Winner: Tomi Film Festival
Winner: Another film festival down under. Can't remember the name. But we have a huge trophy award thingie.
Third Feature: "Sleeping With Fate" 2008
Director
Genre: Urban Drama
Budget: $6000.00
Return: Did Not finish, Producer ran out of money 75% done
Camera: HVX/LEX
Fourth Feature: "Razorblade City" 2009-2010
Writer, Director, Producer
Genre: Action/Comedy (honestly, it's a over the top Hood Flick)
Budget: $2000.00
Return: Waiting for replies from several Distribution Companies. Turned down 1 offer. If they say no. We are going to the streets hard.
EDIT: RAZORBLADE CITY HAS BEEN SOLD TO MAVERICK ENTERTAINMET.
Camera: HVX/LEX
We got a lot of positive press for this one in ALL of our local papers, Radio and TV. Premiere at Landmark theaters sold out in 10 minutes.
Fifth Feature: "The King Of Baltimore" 2010
Director
Genre: Urban Drama
Budget: $20,000
Return: My Fee and new Gear.
Camera: Canon 7D and T2i
The first film That I was hired to direct. Not my script.
90% done with shooting. 3 scenes left.
you can see images from all of these films on my Vimeo page. And "Torn" is in my sig. Not great films or anything but I enjoy doing them more than anything else I have ever done and with each one I'm getting better and learning more. I don't really look at business models and this and that. I just shoot and If I have the money I use it, If I don't than I don't. I really don't care. I just love doing them. If they don't get picked up, we just hit the block and pop the trunk. A lot of work but there is plenty money out there.
Razorblade is my favorite but King looks the best by far.
http://vimeo.com/6802841
Last edited:
Allen Green
Active member
Ok the lottery ticket analogy is maybe not the right one. I'm mainly thinking of noobs who come to me with the idea of only spending $2 grand to make a film that will be the next Paranormal Activity. And they want me to work on it for free. Thats all and I don't mean to be a kill joy but I see them spend the money and not finish the film and then are bitter. Jonathan I'm not bitter I know the secret to the film business are relationships. I make my living in the film and television business as a soundmixer.
I feel good about our film The Killing Strain- we're talking to U.S. distributor(s) and foreign sales agent. Actually I think that you can make films that make money. Yes even on Richards $1000 budget he made some cash. You're right a good movie will make money. I guess we've bought our lotto ticket -we're raising funds for a 3 film slate of family films. But- talking to distributors first before we raise any money. Using the relationship that we're developing right now with this film. In other words we can deliver a film with good production value and story. Anyway good discussion.
Allen
http://www.killingstrainmovie.com
I feel good about our film The Killing Strain- we're talking to U.S. distributor(s) and foreign sales agent. Actually I think that you can make films that make money. Yes even on Richards $1000 budget he made some cash. You're right a good movie will make money. I guess we've bought our lotto ticket -we're raising funds for a 3 film slate of family films. But- talking to distributors first before we raise any money. Using the relationship that we're developing right now with this film. In other words we can deliver a film with good production value and story. Anyway good discussion.
Allen
http://www.killingstrainmovie.com
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
Absolutely, and it is important to be aware of the risks, but it's also important not to let that absolutely cripple your ability to see the bigger picture.
I was reading the history of Lion's Gate -- on their own site -- and I highly recommend it just because it's really interesting, frankly, I think I found the link on the part of their site that was meant for investors, because it basically addresses their business holdings and strategies. But about 2/3 of the films they have made have ultimately turned a profit. By no means guaranteed, but that is not bad at all, especially considering a lot of their movies have a fair amount of money riding on them, thus are more difficult in some respects to get a full return on investment. Of course, you could argue it's easier for any studio of that size or larger simply because they have a lot of properties with names, and have better distribution to theaters, TV, home video, etc. Very true, but if you make a $150,000 film your road to profitability is short. If you make a film for $20 million, you are going to need theatrical, home video, TV, foreign sales, etc. You can't really get around a longer road. Lion's Gate does a fantastic job, though, a really great track record and they've made a lot of great properties too. They also buy a fair number of titles and maintain a large library.
I have no problem with anyone saying it's an uphill climb making your money back on an indie film (it is), or that it's very difficult finding good distribution (it is), or that it's extremely risky as an investment (it is!). What I have a problem with is people putting it in such discouraging terms, which has been done in the past on this forum repeatedly, that it comes across as a joke. I kept seeing these discussions repeated over and over here, and it got me down, and when I asked, "Ok so what's the alternative? If you make an indie film, you have almost no chance of making your money back or getting anywhere. Let's just for the sake of argument assume that's true. Now what? How does one become a director then?" No good answers were ever given. So basically, nobody can tell you what a good path is, but I can tell you what is a certain failure -- doing nothing. Sitting home and watching TV all day. The only risk worse than making an indie film with your own money is NOT making an indie film at all. That's the real risk, in my opinion, because that one has a 0% chance of success. Whatever you believe the chance of success is with making an indie film, it's a lot better than 0
I think sometimes it's best to be a little bit naive or at least stubborn enough that you think you can do something other people indicate is extremely difficult. For me, that example is when I was in high school. I was 15, started collecting articles about Episode I, which later became known as The Phantom Menace. My parents kept bugging me about it, why I was collecting every article, magazine clipping, you name it. I finally said, "Because I'm going to write a book about this movie!" My dad laughed and was like, "You hear that hun, he's going to write a book!" I wasn't too amused, and while my parents were always very supportive, I just thought yeah ok whatever, you guys will see. I'll show you. I kept researching, then when I was 17 I started writing the book, which I finished by the time I was 18 and still in high school. I read some books about finding a literary agent, which everyone said was very difficult and that some authors had written for decades without being able to break through. Well, no matter, I figured I'd give it a try. I wrote a proposal, sent it out to a few agents who had requested it based on my query letter, and one agent called it "a gangbuster proposal" and "one of the best I've read," which was amazing to me because I thought what the heck? I haven't even done this before, I'm an 18-year-old kid, how could my proposal possibly be that good? Are other people just retarded or something? [I think there is a pretty clear indication that 95% of people in this world can't even follow basic rules and do the simplest things right, so that would pretty much be my conclusion but I digress] No matter, it was very encouraging. But I had my proposal with another agent, who I was waiting to hear from. He wrote back, told me he loved it and was very excited to read the book. I sent him the book, expecting to have to wait 6-8 weeks for a response. Four days later, he sent me back, he told me he loved the book, and attached the agency contract to the e-mail. This wasn't just any agent, it was Leonard Maltin's agent (who gave me a positive endorsement to use for publishers, which was kind of cool), a guy who had written 50 books himself and been president of the organization of agents that represent authors. I was officially the youngest person ever to sign with him, before I even had my high school diploma; my mom was still driving me to school! lol. I'll never forget going into my dad's room, "I just signed with one of New York's biggest agents!" He was really happy for me, haha, but I think he was in disbelief, like, "Holy crap he actually did it!" I don't think they believed in a million years that I would be able to write a book in high school, let alone find a top agent, haha.
Heck there was a teacher in my department in college, the only one I didn't like (the rest of the department loved me), who told me that I couldn't take 24 credits in a term and still do well. Nobody could do that. Well, I took 24 credits two terms in a row, the second term I worked part-time for the department on a research project, and both terms combined I had straight A's besides one B, my first in college, and won Best Undergraduate Essay for something I wrote my last term there. The point is if you listen to what other people say is impossible or how bad the odds are of this or that, you'll just sit home and never do anything. I love being told what I can't do, what is nearly impossible, and how badly the odds are stacked against me -- it makes it that much sweeter when I succeed. What is success without overcoming obstacles? A hollow victory.
Usually when people tell me what I can't do, I'm very amused because what they're really telling me is what they can't do. And that's their problem, not mine.
I was reading the history of Lion's Gate -- on their own site -- and I highly recommend it just because it's really interesting, frankly, I think I found the link on the part of their site that was meant for investors, because it basically addresses their business holdings and strategies. But about 2/3 of the films they have made have ultimately turned a profit. By no means guaranteed, but that is not bad at all, especially considering a lot of their movies have a fair amount of money riding on them, thus are more difficult in some respects to get a full return on investment. Of course, you could argue it's easier for any studio of that size or larger simply because they have a lot of properties with names, and have better distribution to theaters, TV, home video, etc. Very true, but if you make a $150,000 film your road to profitability is short. If you make a film for $20 million, you are going to need theatrical, home video, TV, foreign sales, etc. You can't really get around a longer road. Lion's Gate does a fantastic job, though, a really great track record and they've made a lot of great properties too. They also buy a fair number of titles and maintain a large library.
I have no problem with anyone saying it's an uphill climb making your money back on an indie film (it is), or that it's very difficult finding good distribution (it is), or that it's extremely risky as an investment (it is!). What I have a problem with is people putting it in such discouraging terms, which has been done in the past on this forum repeatedly, that it comes across as a joke. I kept seeing these discussions repeated over and over here, and it got me down, and when I asked, "Ok so what's the alternative? If you make an indie film, you have almost no chance of making your money back or getting anywhere. Let's just for the sake of argument assume that's true. Now what? How does one become a director then?" No good answers were ever given. So basically, nobody can tell you what a good path is, but I can tell you what is a certain failure -- doing nothing. Sitting home and watching TV all day. The only risk worse than making an indie film with your own money is NOT making an indie film at all. That's the real risk, in my opinion, because that one has a 0% chance of success. Whatever you believe the chance of success is with making an indie film, it's a lot better than 0
I think sometimes it's best to be a little bit naive or at least stubborn enough that you think you can do something other people indicate is extremely difficult. For me, that example is when I was in high school. I was 15, started collecting articles about Episode I, which later became known as The Phantom Menace. My parents kept bugging me about it, why I was collecting every article, magazine clipping, you name it. I finally said, "Because I'm going to write a book about this movie!" My dad laughed and was like, "You hear that hun, he's going to write a book!" I wasn't too amused, and while my parents were always very supportive, I just thought yeah ok whatever, you guys will see. I'll show you. I kept researching, then when I was 17 I started writing the book, which I finished by the time I was 18 and still in high school. I read some books about finding a literary agent, which everyone said was very difficult and that some authors had written for decades without being able to break through. Well, no matter, I figured I'd give it a try. I wrote a proposal, sent it out to a few agents who had requested it based on my query letter, and one agent called it "a gangbuster proposal" and "one of the best I've read," which was amazing to me because I thought what the heck? I haven't even done this before, I'm an 18-year-old kid, how could my proposal possibly be that good? Are other people just retarded or something? [I think there is a pretty clear indication that 95% of people in this world can't even follow basic rules and do the simplest things right, so that would pretty much be my conclusion but I digress] No matter, it was very encouraging. But I had my proposal with another agent, who I was waiting to hear from. He wrote back, told me he loved it and was very excited to read the book. I sent him the book, expecting to have to wait 6-8 weeks for a response. Four days later, he sent me back, he told me he loved the book, and attached the agency contract to the e-mail. This wasn't just any agent, it was Leonard Maltin's agent (who gave me a positive endorsement to use for publishers, which was kind of cool), a guy who had written 50 books himself and been president of the organization of agents that represent authors. I was officially the youngest person ever to sign with him, before I even had my high school diploma; my mom was still driving me to school! lol. I'll never forget going into my dad's room, "I just signed with one of New York's biggest agents!" He was really happy for me, haha, but I think he was in disbelief, like, "Holy crap he actually did it!" I don't think they believed in a million years that I would be able to write a book in high school, let alone find a top agent, haha.
Heck there was a teacher in my department in college, the only one I didn't like (the rest of the department loved me), who told me that I couldn't take 24 credits in a term and still do well. Nobody could do that. Well, I took 24 credits two terms in a row, the second term I worked part-time for the department on a research project, and both terms combined I had straight A's besides one B, my first in college, and won Best Undergraduate Essay for something I wrote my last term there. The point is if you listen to what other people say is impossible or how bad the odds are of this or that, you'll just sit home and never do anything. I love being told what I can't do, what is nearly impossible, and how badly the odds are stacked against me -- it makes it that much sweeter when I succeed. What is success without overcoming obstacles? A hollow victory.
Usually when people tell me what I can't do, I'm very amused because what they're really telling me is what they can't do. And that's their problem, not mine.
Last edited:
HerzogisGod
Well-known member
Names?
Film reps and distributors I should be considering for my micro budget indie, Mnemonica?
Thanks
Film reps and distributors I should be considering for my micro budget indie, Mnemonica?
Thanks
GRENCH
Well-known member
Yes....If no one knows you made it how will they know to buy it. I used to go into blockbuster and wonder the store for 30min trying to find something I haven't seen that would interested me. Even when you are looking for something to watch you could very well go stare crazy looking at row after row of movies. Marketing helps to point a consumer to your product (like you didn't know that). I appreciate a well marketed film.
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
That depends. We've been using this as a calling card, but I haven't had much time to do much more with it considering I'm working now (with help from my film being out there) and getting ready to shoot a bigger project that I'm focusing all my attention on. Sales haven't been great because we haven't been promoting, but we maintain control of the film and can do as we please at anytime. I could sale this on the street if I so choose.
-Nate
dalethompson
Well-known member
I read most of this thread, so forgive me if this has been covered so far in discussion.
I just attended a production clinic and here's some of the info I came out of it with (which I was a little surprised to hear):
1). Overseas markets rank first before domestic markets in terms of being the most valuable when it comes to revenue per dollar spent. If you get an agreement with a foreign station or company ahead of time, this is worth gold.
2). There's more money out there than you think for production costs... especially in foreign markets. You just have to look for it very carefully or have someone who knows these markets find it for you. Again, for the same reason above, very good to have upfront.
3). You can qualify for lots of grants or bursaries if your film deals with a very specific topic (cultural medical, historical etc.)
4). Getting a recognized name to be in the film, even if it's for only 30 seconds.
I'm getting a little bit away from the topic here on how much a person sold a movie for but for the above-mentioned notes, if you have some of these included in your film, well, of course you can sell it for more.
I'm basing this on Canada (Ontario to be specific), so it may be different in your area. All I know is a good idea can be valuable but it's in the way you present it which determines how much more it will be worth.
Do your homework first before doing a proposal too. If you cover every angle, leaving nothing to be questioned or unanswered by a production company, they will then focus on the business side of things and see how much your film is worth. That prep work itself will make you money... you have to convince them it's worth more.
I just attended a production clinic and here's some of the info I came out of it with (which I was a little surprised to hear):
1). Overseas markets rank first before domestic markets in terms of being the most valuable when it comes to revenue per dollar spent. If you get an agreement with a foreign station or company ahead of time, this is worth gold.
2). There's more money out there than you think for production costs... especially in foreign markets. You just have to look for it very carefully or have someone who knows these markets find it for you. Again, for the same reason above, very good to have upfront.
3). You can qualify for lots of grants or bursaries if your film deals with a very specific topic (cultural medical, historical etc.)
4). Getting a recognized name to be in the film, even if it's for only 30 seconds.
I'm getting a little bit away from the topic here on how much a person sold a movie for but for the above-mentioned notes, if you have some of these included in your film, well, of course you can sell it for more.
I'm basing this on Canada (Ontario to be specific), so it may be different in your area. All I know is a good idea can be valuable but it's in the way you present it which determines how much more it will be worth.
Do your homework first before doing a proposal too. If you cover every angle, leaving nothing to be questioned or unanswered by a production company, they will then focus on the business side of things and see how much your film is worth. That prep work itself will make you money... you have to convince them it's worth more.