profit potential of an indie feature?
- Thread starter Randall_Oelerich
- Start date
Randall_Oelerich
Veteran
I have to believe there is wisdom in such words, which is why I am concentrating on learning storytelling along with making short films. Unless I had a great story, a great screenplay with compelling characters, theme, plot with crystal clear structure, high concept, moral dilemma, great char arcs-- I wouldn't risk my money or that of investors, making an indie.
That's a bit of a generalization is it not? Lots of indies have everything you list... Juno, Little Miss Sunshine, Once False Move, etc. There are hundreds if not thousands of indies that fall into that category.
My 14 year old son over the years has learned to appreciate the indie film. Several years ago he would claim that he would never watch an indie film because he saw one that was horrible. When he was younger he would not watch "gray" films as he called him either (B&W). But his appreciation of film has matured to understand that a film stands on its own and there are horrible studio films as much as there are horrible indie films, and good studio films and good indie films. A lot of indie films fall into the trap of trying to make a studio film without the same means - the indies have the advantage of making the kind of film Hollywood would not - but making it well is the great equalizer.
Michael
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, let's take this as a two-pronged thing:
1) On behalf of all the viewers out there, I applaud you for not making a film without all of those elements. I wish everyone had your dedication to making sure that you made a great product first and foremost. Way, way too many lousy films being made, and they are the primary reason why it's so difficult for anyone to get their work seen.
2) Risk is relative, and may in fact be very very minimal, at least for USA filmmakers. If Section 181 gets renewed, then investor money in an indie film would be tax-deductible. When you combine tax deductions with state film incentives, you can demonstrate scenarios where your investor will receive up to 87% of his/her money back* -- EVEN IF THE FILM NEVER SELLS. So, yeah -- there's a little risk there (13%) but ... it's not like they're going to lose every dime they put up!
*depending on your investor's income tax bracket, the advice of their accountant, the passive income rules, and the state incentives available in whichever state you choose to shoot in. My example assumes a 35% federal tax bracket, 10% state income tax bracket, and 42% state rebate from Michigan (40% plus 2% "depressed areas" incentive).
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Right -
"Juno" had all those attributes Randall mentioned, cost $7m to make (which certainly isn't 'micro', but still peanuts, relatively) and earned $280M worldwide including DVD sales.
"Little Miss Sunshine" had those attributes, cost $8m to make, and earned $156M worldwide including DVD sales.
In what way is his point not perfectly illustrated?
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Exactimundo...
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
I posted a realistic approach.
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Right, all I was saying is you have to proceed as if that's the case. Because if you're entire business plan is winning and selling at Sundance, you and your investors are screwed come Feb when you didn't, and you have no other plans in mind for how to get their money back.
It has nothing to do with art or dreams, to me. Those things, I satisfy myself. Meaning, I don't depend on anyone else to tell me when I'm happy with my own work. Which is the only way I think you can ever proceed on that front.
But in our case, when we are done with our feature film, if it goes to a big fest, we have a plan on how to use that. If it does not, we have plans for how to proceed trying to sell the film other ways.
The point is, we have many plans, none of them are dependent on something completely out of our control(like Sundance). And I think that is the wisest course for what we want, which is to make the film end of our business sustain itself so we can keep making films.
Randall_Oelerich
Veteran
I am not sure but that maybe you misinterpreted my statement. I am all for making indies, but only if they have the elements that give them the best chance at success. I am not at all saying that I would not want to risk making an indie. I like good indies.
I think any filmmaker can GREATLY reduce their risk by taking their $100k to Vegas and betting it all one one hand in blackjack. This increases their odds 1,000 x.
basspig
Veteran
I speak at a lot of filmmaker's panels and always say - "don't confuse resolution with quality". I always get nervous when people say RED or Scarlet as that will make it an automatic sell into the market. It's become the panacea of the industry. And while it is a great tool, it is only but one. So many times I get invites that say, come see "such and such" feature shot on RED - but nothing else about the movie. Is the movie about a movie being shot on RED? Now there's an interesting premise.
Also, a lot of independents don't know how to deal with depth of field as a storytelling technique - just because you have shallow depth of field, does not mean that particular shot needed. It becomes part of the language you need to control like everything else in the shot - story, lighting, art direction, casting, performance, costume, makeup, score, foley, mix, editing, etc.
Michael
This is an important lesson!
It's always the kid with the $129 Flip camera that gets the success, lately, not us folks who've headed ourselves for bankruptcy by bootstrap/bankrolling our own production equipment.
Remember: mediocrity excells. If you can shoot it on an iPhone, it will probably make you more profit than if you shoot in on a RED.
filmman
Veteran
this has become a good thread. lots of good advice. so i add my 2 cents worth 
make film when you're young, because if you don't you'll regret it. don't try to become a major success with your first film and, yes, don't try to make big money with your first film (if it happens it happens).
it's better to shoot a feature film with pocket money and friends for actors than learning the process and researching for years before you start making your first movie. you have to practice.
you can't expect to make a salable movie the first time out. yes, it might happen once in a great while, but it's too much to hope for.
it's great to have a lot of footage sitting in your vault -- movies that you shot just for fun. they may turn out to be diamonds in the rough. when you know how to cut them and facet them, you'll be happy that you collected the rocks.
i own the rights to many movies, because i've been shooting a lot of them over the years. whenever you get a good idea, go out and make a movie.
live the life of a filmmaker; don't just talk about it.
this user group is one of the most realistic filmmaker groups i've been on for a few years. it's good to be cautious and teach people to learn their craft and go about the business of film in an intelligent way.
i only add that you have to do it with whatever money you have, otherwise you might not get the chance of doing it on a big scale ever.
sometimes from small beginnings there comes great opportunities.
many of you have had a lot of experience making movies and you speak from different perspectives. it's good to share advice and offer good advice.
i add this: experiment. go out there and shoot a little footage -- anything live a little.
make film when you're young, because if you don't you'll regret it. don't try to become a major success with your first film and, yes, don't try to make big money with your first film (if it happens it happens).
it's better to shoot a feature film with pocket money and friends for actors than learning the process and researching for years before you start making your first movie. you have to practice.
you can't expect to make a salable movie the first time out. yes, it might happen once in a great while, but it's too much to hope for.
it's great to have a lot of footage sitting in your vault -- movies that you shot just for fun. they may turn out to be diamonds in the rough. when you know how to cut them and facet them, you'll be happy that you collected the rocks.
i own the rights to many movies, because i've been shooting a lot of them over the years. whenever you get a good idea, go out and make a movie.
live the life of a filmmaker; don't just talk about it.
this user group is one of the most realistic filmmaker groups i've been on for a few years. it's good to be cautious and teach people to learn their craft and go about the business of film in an intelligent way.
i only add that you have to do it with whatever money you have, otherwise you might not get the chance of doing it on a big scale ever.
sometimes from small beginnings there comes great opportunities.
many of you have had a lot of experience making movies and you speak from different perspectives. it's good to share advice and offer good advice.
i add this: experiment. go out there and shoot a little footage -- anything
live a little.
basspig
Veteran
For seven years, I have been asking friends to 'act' in short films, and without exception, no one has stepped up to the plate. Hence my films are always scenic nature films, nothing really interesting.
I'm currently writing a script, but in the interest of making it a good story, the complexity of the script has blown my 0 budget. I have three novels that I've been writing since 1985, 1992 and 1995. Each of these would require tens of millions to shoot, because of the effects and location shooting.
Now trying to get back to basics again.
I'm currently writing a script, but in the interest of making it a good story, the complexity of the script has blown my 0 budget. I have three novels that I've been writing since 1985, 1992 and 1995. Each of these would require tens of millions to shoot, because of the effects and location shooting.
Now trying to get back to basics again.
Mickey Munday
Well-known member
stop asking "friends" to act in films unless they're actors. getting actors is not an issue, getting good actors is.
I don't think it's mediocrity at all. If I'm looking to see which genre of movie I should make in order to sell it after its done, it's not gonna fly.
If this kid really made it coz of this five minute piece (which I thought was an awesome piece and does have strong narrative elements) then I'm almost sure he didn't think for a minute where it was going after. The fact that it went on youtube also shows this guy wasn't thinking of the deal while he was making it. If of course this whole thing is legit and not a marketing gimmick.
Still, I strongly believe that if the deal is on your mind before the work then you're not gonna make it. I don't think finding out which genre is working out in the marketplace and writing for a 'deal' is gonna get anyone anywhere unless there's talk before.
If not, then do what that kid did, (again, if it's not a marketing gimmick) and do whatever you do best.
And while a Z1 or a flip cam may be mediocre the images that are making it aren't too mediocre. I don't think mediocrity wins at all. Maximum, a low budget can win, but that piece had everybody I showed it to lose their minds for a minute, and these are the same people watching that go to the movies.
I must say I find it a bit weird that its being called mediocre, right place and right time was kind of beat up with this piece, and the star of this show is youtube.
I think this kid's success had nothing to do with the equipment. Use whatever you have, or get whatever you like to work with, and don't zero in on a deal. You'll settle for takes if you run over time, you won't be happy. And if you don't get the deal, it's disappointing.
I've been trying to find another way to make money so I can really do whatever the hell I want on my own scale. If work is good work is good.
T
No. An indie production takes so much time and effort that I would NEVER do it unless I absolutely felt I that I was making a great film. Even so, considering the original intent in this thread, I think it would be pretty interesting to hear what other people have done and suceeded, instead of the usual droning on about what NOT to do. I know a lot about what NOT to do - cause I did a lot of it.
Also I'm here mainly out of curiosity, as I try to make my way through a very different market than you guys.
But thanks for the sarcasm.
filmman
Veteran
In your case, gi-jones, you should be able to make a $100k movie and make your money back, because you're right there in the middle of Europe, you have the equipment, the talent (lots of great theater actors, as well as movie actors), and the expertise.
The best part is that you're close to the home video marketplace; all the best markets are within driving distance. Well, Cannes is a bit far, but London and Berlin are close enough.
What you need is an American co-production deal so you can market your movie as an American co-production. I like the quality of your productions; they're very professional. What you need is my expertise in marketing and co-production (or somebody similar). There are plenty of great scripts around too, because a co-production can't be done with no script.
The trick is structuring the deal and the payback to investors and partners. This is what I'm good at because I've made a living in your neck of the woods as well as Hollywood. So email me, K.
The best part is that you're close to the home video marketplace; all the best markets are within driving distance. Well, Cannes is a bit far, but London and Berlin are close enough.
What you need is an American co-production deal so you can market your movie as an American co-production. I like the quality of your productions; they're very professional. What you need is my expertise in marketing and co-production (or somebody similar). There are plenty of great scripts around too, because a co-production can't be done with no script.
The trick is structuring the deal and the payback to investors and partners. This is what I'm good at because I've made a living in your neck of the woods as well as Hollywood. So email me, K.