Is there honestly any money in making indie films?

[Amr Rahmy]

you might not be noticing, but the studios line-up is weaker than ever.
if you look at this weeks/or last week box office, keeping in mind that we are in the middle of the summer

big budget pop corn movies:
harry potter - that's half a movie
transformers - it's a transformers movie
and super 8 on it's way out - just there to remind you movies are not made like they used to
captain america on it's way in - another super hero movie

movies that could possibly been passed as sundance independent (low budget movies):
zookeeper
horrible bosses
bad teacher
larry crowne
midnight in paris

and across the board low budget movies (except zookeeper) are more promising.

it's a better market for indies than a few years back. people are more open to try decent no budget movies, just from demand and lack of competition

with current technology and consumer demand for content, it's not as closed off environment as it used to be.

 

[MichaelP]

Studios make frachises, not just movies - thus the types of films you see getting made. More money is made is licensing, etc. that the US Box office. Add to that, more than 50% of boxoffice revenue comes from foreign sales - so eye-candy entertainment is easy to sell and market with spectacular VFX, sound and spectacle. The nuances of a dialog translation are much easier.

So it does leave room for the more story driven, character driven, movies. Viewers do not live on high octane action movies alone. The last two Best Picture Oscar winners have shown than to be true - not to mention the rest of the nominations.

But even smaller movies need to be really good as well, seeing as the technology has reduced the cost of goods barrier that have existed. Putting together a team of talented people is actually easier than before. For example, with the drop in mid-budget features (due to tentpoles as mentioned), many very talented and nominated picture editors are looking for work - same for any other below the line role. And to some extent; actors. Creative people want to be working, so lots of talent to tap into with the right project that can engage and challenge their own needs, while giving your work another layer of goodness.

The one thing I tend to speak to at festivals and such is that just because the cost of the tools have dropped, does not mean that anything got easier. And just because the tool allows you to do something does not mean that "you" should do it. Take a careful and honest inventory of your skill set and bring the best of what you can bring to your project. Then fill in the gaps with others who are the best at what they do.


Michael

 

[vic777]

every article I read speaks of how your movie will never make money and how it is pretty much a labor of love.

Keep asking, maybe you'll get the answer you want I think the main benefit is experience and reputation, critical acclaim. And oh yes, the fun factor.

 

[Kholi]

But even smaller movies need to be really good as well, seeing as the technology has reduced the cost of goods barrier that have existed. Putting together a team of talented people is actually easier than before. For example, with the drop in mid-budget features (due to tentpoles as mentioned), many very talented and nominated picture editors are looking for work - same for any other below the line role. And to some extent; actors. Creative people want to be working, so lots of talent to tap into with the right project that can engage and challenge their own needs, while giving your work another layer of goodness.



Michael

Indeed. Another way of saying what I've been trying to.

Only thing, though, remember that the Oscar Winners weren't money makers. Kathryn Bigelow's feature film was a money loser, but her Oscar status will allow her to become more of a household name (From Oscar Winning Director Kathryn Bigelow) in the future. It's equally important to begin franchising your own name as soon as possible.

Someone mentioned YouTUbe Ads, I'm sure it was a joke but check out Freddie Wong and what he's been doing for the past few years on youTube. Guy's hitting millions of views on each release and getting paid to do what he loves, not to mention he just released a video guest starring Jon Favreau AND got to shoot on the set of COWBOYS AND ALIENS.

Find your niche, destroy it.

 

[Why4009]

Kholi, thanks for pointing out Freddie Wong. I just watched a few of his clips. Pretty amazing.

 

[Kholi]

Kholi, thanks for pointing out Freddie Wong. I just watched a few of his clips. Pretty amazing.

For what it is, definitely. In the realm of YouTube videos he kind of stands at the top with guys like Epic Meal Time.

And to think that they crank out these things ONCE A WEEK. Two videos a week if you count the Behind the Scenes material that they post up. This is exactly why he's killing it, because he's prolific as heck. His videos are self sustaining, over a lifetime they'll hit like 10M views and that translates to partner money for his small operation. It's not Mega Millions, but in this day and age I'll take Mega Thousands and be plenty happy, so long as it's enough to support our efforts to produce more content.

Now he's shaking hands with Jon Favreau and, even if it was Favreau's way of building more awareness for Cowboys and Aliens through Freddie's Fan Base (marketing, and it's brilliant because that's what I was going to approach Freddie for with Superseeds), that's a contact he will have for the rest of his career.

Do work.

 

[Gary Huff]

Freddie Wong isn't just about great FX and shooting. His stuff is constantly creative and entertaining, and has that vibe of enjoyment. He and his team aren't doing it because they think it'll help them to get rich, they love doing it, and want to share it with the world.

And that right there is the difference between 99.9 percent of everyone else who is trying to do similar things.

 

[Kholi]

... check out Freddie Wong and what he's been doing for the past few years on youTube. Guy's hitting millions of views on each release and getting paid to do what he loves...

Find your niche, destroy it.

Yeah, that's what I said. Haha

 

[john threat]

i wasnt joking about youtube ads. youtube ads!
VOD = no money

 

[Martay]

I've been both filmmaker and for 20 years president of LEO Films, an indy distribution company that released over 80 features in the U.S. Admittedly a lot of what we put out was dreadful, but it usually had some hook we could exploit in the art work to get some leverage. On occasion I'd find a little gem that I would put out despite the expectation that it wouldn't make any money. The hundreds of features that were sent in that I didn't put out fall somewhere in between. I sent them on to Gitmo for use in enhanced interrogations. There's no Blockbuster anymore, (they'd buy 10s of 1000s) no Hollywood Video, Netflix rarely buys the smaller films now, foreign has dried up for all but the name filled specific genres for prime time tv time. So where will the money come from. Not VOD yet. Redbox only has 40-50 titles in it. What's left?

Sad, but true. One huge regret on Step Off is that we weren't able to shop it prior to the fall of Blockbuster. I'm confident that a year prior release date would have meant at least double the copies for it...plus there's not much cooler than walking into a Blockbuster or Hollywood Video and seeing your movie on the shelf (Luckily had that experience as just a screenwriter before).

What's left is squeezing a profit from an ultra-low budget movie that can still have some success. Show you can do it on limited resources and (hopefully) you'll get the chance to do it with adequate resources and leverage new marketable elements that you couldn't previously afford and keep the train rolling.

That's my idea of how to do it. We'll see how it goes. However, as previously mentioned by myself and others, manage expectations and deliver something that can be SOLD to an audience (like you mention).

-Martin

 

[arroway]

Exactly. I rent cameras, trucks, lights grip, generators etc... I have made far more money doing this than on any indie project I have done myself.

Levi Strauss made money in the 1849 gold rush by making pants for miners, not by panning for gold. As a colorist who's worked on several indie features & docs, I suspect that I've made more money from my fee than most of them have made back for their owners.

If you want to make money in indie films, sell a product or service to indie film makers.

This is true for any craft that increasingly self distributes...music, publishing etc. It's a depressing state of affairs.

And to think that they crank out these things ONCE A WEEK. Two videos a week if you count the Behind the Scenes material that they post up. This is exactly why he's killing it, because he's prolific as heck.

This is the porn model. Shorter form, dirt cheap content pumped out on a regular basis.

It has its place but I sincerely hope it's not the future of independent film.

His videos are self sustaining, over a lifetime they'll hit like 10M views and that translates to partner money for his small operation. It's not Mega Millions, but in this day and age I'll take Mega Thousands and be plenty happy, so long as it's enough to support our efforts to produce more content.

Despite the proliferation of cheap gear, filmmaking is still a very rare talent. It takes too much study, too much work, too much luck, and too much time to be paid middle manager money (IMO).

Someone mentioned YouTUbe Ads, I'm sure it was a joke but check out Freddie Wong and what he's been doing for the past few years on youTube. Guy's hitting millions of views on each release and getting paid to do what he loves, not to mention he just released a video guest starring Jon Favreau AND got to shoot on the set of COWBOYS AND ALIENS.

I enjoy his videos but in narrative terms, I think they're only one or two steps up from the ubiquitous "cat videos". It's fast food entertainment, which again, has its place, but ideally there would also be room for greasy spoons, mid range restaurants, and fine dining. Right now the internet seems to only provide video fare from the dollar menu.

 

[RyanMKincaid]

I know I'm relatively new here, and have less experience than most, but allow me to throw my 2 cents in.

My background: I'm currently trying to complete production on my own $155k feature for film festival submission. Fully funded by me, my entire life savings and working some serious over time to cover the last $16k needed for post. I know that in order for me to be considered for distribution, certain things could not be short changed; color, sound, edit, music, script, great crew and cast working environment (this included making sure that meals were especially satisfying since I was asking everyone to work 12-14 hour days in the blistering heat for 20 days).

Why I did this and foot the bill exclusively are all different questions to be answer later, but rest assured, I wouldn't do it had I not had a sound business plan and be sure that I could get the project sold for a profit.

At the end of the day, I'm following the model of the indie artist-turn-story-line-success. Now I say artist because whether film or music, the model is the same:

Jay-Z couldn't be signed by a record label so he created his own and did it himself
Diddy basically changed the format of hip-hop in the early 90s and became a success on his own
Then there's artist now-a-days that are crap-tas-tic but labels are chasing after them ie: soulja boy, Kawyshawn just to name a few
A movie like Blair-Witch project, which wasn't really that good, still killed on the business side.
Tyler Perry films are atrosious and still make $55 mil off of a budget of $3-7 million.

What do these examples all have in common? They created their audience and proved to the majors that they are a force to take seriously.

Today, record labels don't find raw talent and cultivate it like they did 10 years ago when they'd send NSync and Back Street Boys to Europe to practice their stage performance and learn to gel. Instead A&R comb the web for youtube hit counters.

I suspect that this is going to be the new trend with movies.

Tyler Perry, even though he's a terrible writer (IMHO), is a smart business man. He created a following across the US that flocked to his stage plays. He made millions. He wanted to negotiate a deal with Lionsgate Execs who didn't take him seriously, so what did he do; He invited them to one of his plays when he was out in LA. When the big wigs saw just how devoted his fans were and how quickly he sold out shows, it was only a matter of negotiating the deal. In the end; he still owns all his propterties out-right, and takes home 40% of the box office take.

40%; a percentage that I suspect no one else comes close to.

We all know the story about Blair Witch. What I suspect at the end of the day with these low budget films that we're talking about that aren't making the money for film makers, is that they are resting on the "here's the difference between my film and others" montra too much. What I suspect is that they're lacking the marketing push thereby creating a devote audience which is needed to negotiate a deal with a distributor.

Studios are getting lazy. They aren't going to care if the project is good, how much you shot if for, if the genre is marketable. What they care about; is there an audience there already waiting for the project to come out?

Why do you think they have tons of actors dropping buzz words like "we're looking at a script for part 2 now." To test the waters and see if there's an audience for it. Look at how often actors say it in Hollywood, when a film that's suppose to be a franchise does ok numbers to be considered a profit but not enough to green light a sequel out of the gate?

With us, the independents, we need to create that audience. Our job isn't complete on picture lock. It's not complete when we score an invite to a film festival, no matter how big it is. Until checks are signed we are constantly working. Now we have to work to get our audience if only to prove to a distributor that we can get a WIDER audience.

My .02. Take it for what it's worth.

 

[Why4009]

Ryan, thanks for sharing. Totally looking forward to hearing about your movie, the path you took and your distribution success! Maybe start a new thread for us to follow? Thanks.

 

[RyanMKincaid]

Ryan, thanks for sharing. Totally looking forward to hearing about your movie, the path you took and your distribution success! Maybe start a new thread for us to follow? Thanks.

Yeah, I promise I will. I didn't want to make it seem like my method was a hard and fast rule but it was a model that others have used and I've attempted to follow. Hopefully in once everything is put together in the coming months I can give massive amounts of details on what I did.

At the end I still believe that an idie can turn big bucks for the film maker; it just depends on how you package your product. You can go with a newspaper and clear scotch tape or a big box with a huge read bow on top of a bunch of bigger boxes with bigger red bows.

Read this:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ent.../lionsgate-extends-deal-with-tyler-perry.html

The most important lesson this article offers:

"Atlanta-based Perry makes his movies with total creative control and also keeps half of the profits in one of the most filmmaker-friendly deals in Hollywood, according to people familiar with the matter. That's because he brings Lionsgate a devoted fan base that consistently shows up to see his movies on opening weekend."

 

[Kholi]

George Lucas gets 70 percent of everything. E v e r y t h I n g

 

[craigbowman]

George Lucas gets 70 percent of everything. E v e r y t h I n g

I'm much more interested in following how Faith makes out on revenues from her current screening tour and how that is also translating to her growing DVD sales. After all, she'd had already taken in around $200k by the end of February since her November 14, 2010 release and its now the end of July. While it took Kevin Smith 17 years to reason he should try going direct to exibitors, Faith just did that naturally right out of the gate.

 

[Kholi]

I'm much more interested in following how Faith makes out on revenues from her current screening tour and how that is also translating to her growing DVD sales. After all, she'd had already taken in around $200k by the end of February since her November 14, 2010 release and its now the end of July.

I'm also interested in Faith's numbers. Although she did spend three years of her life working on the movie, and looks to be on her way to spend two or three more (five year stretch), at least whatever she's going to take in will be hers unless she chooses to share that. Her example is prime for those who are considering extremely niche based content...

...one of those people would be I. The last time we chose to go broad, superhero slacker with VFX... it wasn't a mistake I'd say, but looking back on it I wish I had chosen one of my more "tight-niched" interests and started there, building true fans etc before expanding to something more broad.

In that case, going at it again with this in mind.

 

[RyanMKincaid]

George Lucas gets 70 percent of everything. E v e r y t h I n g

I don't think he gets 70 percent of the box office though. Merchandising and retaining ownership of the property was the trade off, I believe. At the end of the day we're talking about how to make indie projects profitable. If you have a potential franchise: create the fanbase and retain some kind of ownership, take the 'L' on the upfront money if you know that there's potential for a huge payday later (ie: George Lucas). If it's a one off-project, then STILL create the fanbase and show distributors that there's life outside of DVD sales. We don't even have brick and mortar video stores where you can stroll the isle endlessly looking at box art of VHS tapes. Nowadays you need to show those youtube numbers and get a fanbase locally where ever you film is showing at a festival to come out.

If you can produce a good movie PLUS show you have a massive following, you'll either get a nice distribution deal or at least a meeting so see what else you can pitch/produce.

 

[RyanMKincaid]

I'm also interested in Faith's numbers. Although she did spend three years of her life working on the movie, and looks to be on her way to spend two or three more (five year stretch), at least whatever she's going to take in will be hers unless she chooses to share that. Her example is prime for those who are considering extremely niche based content...

...one of those people would be I. The last time we chose to go broad, superhero slacker with VFX... it wasn't a mistake I'd say, but looking back on it I wish I had chosen one of my more "tight-niched" interests and started there, building true fans etc before expanding to something more broad.

In that case, going at it again with this in mind.

Can someone link me some info about this 'Faith'? I'd like to know more about it

 

[Kholi]

I don't think he gets 70 percent of the box office though. Merchandising and retaining ownership of the property was the trade off, I believe. At the end of the day we're talking about how to make indie projects profitable. If you have a potential franchise: create the fanbase and retain some kind of ownership, take the 'L' on the upfront money if you know that there's potential for a huge payday later (ie: George Lucas). If it's a one off-project, then STILL create the fanbase and show distributors that there's life outside of DVD sales. We don't even have brick and mortar video stores where you can stroll the isle endlessly looking at box art of VHS tapes. Nowadays you need to show those youtube numbers and get a fanbase locally where ever you film is showing at a festival to come out.

If you can produce a good movie PLUS show you have a massive following, you'll either get a nice distribution deal or at least a meeting so see what else you can pitch/produce.

Then where does Tyler Perry come in? Because he wasn't indie at all, not at our level. And never will be.

Trying to compare anyone's career here to Tyler Perry is a flawed logic that's waiting to be disappointed... severely. Tyler Perry spent a good portion of his life in a gutter, literally. Those names shouldn't have come into the equation, or you'd might as well bring Lucas up, too.

And, let's also make it known that distros DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR YOUTUBE NUMBERS without YEARS OF DATA to back them up. They may say "oh, let's keep an eye on this guy for another year and see what happens."

If you aren't showing a fanbase over an extended period of time or you aren't producing content that's up to theatrical standard, you should be ready to do this non stop for a good five or more years (like Faith) or being prolific as heck (like Freddy Wong).