Screw it! I have 20k And im Making my Feature!

Just remember Robert Rodriguez had made about 30 or 40 short films before he tried to make el Mariachi.

I am a HUUUGE movie buff, and i watch just about anything i can get my hands on from teh 30's to today. So far ive made 4 short films and im finishing my first documentary right now.

All have been done on a zero budget aside from my equipment costs (which are still under $1,000). And still, id say im not very close to being ready to making a full feature.

If you are thats great, but as others have suggested, id make a couple of shorts so you can see what you will need to do to get arond some of the simple problems you run into. You will still run into other ones on a feature, but at least things like, lighting, sound, etc... you can practice on first for free before you start using up your money.

For such a small budget id say you need to learn to do everything.

jon
 
Lots of people are suggesting shorts, which is cool, but I'm actually finding it helpful doing a webseries from start to finish. I've never picked up a camera or edited something or done anything concerning film, but the process of creating something and then having to live with it as more and more people follow your show is a great motivator to get better -- fast! For instance we're only on the third episode and already I know that the lighting and sound need to be better because I've gotten FEEDBACK from fans and other filmmakers. So moving forward I've adjusted the lighting set up and am renting higher quality mics for the third episode.

It doesn't seem like enough people take this route. You get to practice your craft while creating a fanbase! And in the end you STILL have something saleable, except now you actually have people who are willing to buy what you're selling, assuming that you pack the DVD with enough re-shoots and extras.

Just my advice. But do whatever gets you to where you want to be. If you want to be someone who has made a feature, make it happen. If you want to learn your craft and create a fanbase for your work, I think there are other more profitable and sustainable options.

So long as you're creating something and people are watching it, I think you're succeeding.

:)
 
Web series are a good idea to, but really all a webseries is , is a series of shorts that feature common characters of themes, so essentially its the same great experience you are getting.

I dont think anyone is saying don't make a feature, but making a short by yourself or with a few friends is basically free. Making a feature with all the stops pulled is not.

Better to make your mistakes and learn while its cheap, instead of when your money, reputation, and artistic integrity are on the line.

I might suggest if we cant persuade you to try some shorts first to at least shooting a few test scenes first at the very least, maybe just rehersals, and fully edit them for lighting and sound and see how it looks. Ask yourself can i live with my entire feature looking and sounding like this, or do i need to improve this or that, etc...


Whatever you decide to do, best of luck with it.
 
I think overall the short film to feature route is best for most rookie filmmakers, but he's said that he has already done music videos and commercials, compared to most of us when starting out we hadn't done diddly squat. If he was totally green, then yeah, shorts are the way to go, but when other experience is factored in, I think either choice is fine.

When I realized I didn't have the money for proper film school, I decided to make my own films and learn on my own time, and started with a feature after doing one simple short film. The finished feature was kind of a disaster, but I learned a ton and still had a lot of fun, even though we nearly got arrested twice. I would've had to do more short films to learn all that I did on the feature, so it equals out in the long run.

One thing that doing a feature taught me, was long form storytelling under pressure. I understood the classic Hollywood 3-Act story structure much better after making my first film, as well as learning how to adapt the details of the story to solve real world production problems. I think the act of not only writing the script, but also making it and living with the story for so long really reinforced both the story structuring lessons I learned from screenwriting books, as well as my own instincts on the subject. Then through the various phases of post production, I learned a lot about what was necessary for a story to work, and what was redundant. Basically, it was a real crash course in filmmaking. Because the concept and genre I choose (pretty much a sci-fi/action film that was similar to The Matrix meets Invasion of the Body Snatchers), I was really challenged and stretched beyond my abilities. Now, some of that was me being naive and overly ambitious, but in the end, a great learning experience because of this. I think I learned just about everything "not to do" when making a film.

Yes, you can learn these things on shorts too, but with features you learn how they apply to a longer form of storytelling. Isn't that what most of us aspire to do in the first place anyways, basically feature filmmaking, and not being limited to short films?

Either way, good luck with the feature. And remember, plan... plan... plan that sucker out to a T. :thumbsup:

Chamber005 said:
So long as you're creating something and people are watching it, I think you're succeeding.:)
Click to expand...

In terms of short films, there is also the fan film route. Now, obviously you won't be able to profit from it, but it can bring you lots of exposure. As long as you pick something popular that has a large fanbase, and your film is high quality (see: The Hunt for Gollum) then you can get your name out there to millions of people in a relatively short timeframe.
 
Last edited:
Nektonic said:
I think overall the short film to feature route is best for most rookie filmmakers, but he's said that he has already done music videos and commercials, compared to most of us when starting out we hadn't done diddly squat. If he was totally green, then yeah, shorts are the way to go, but when other experience is factored in, I think either choice is fine.

When I realized I didn't have the money for proper film school, I decided to make my own films and learn on my own time, and started with a feature after doing one simple short film. The finished feature was kind of a disaster, but I learned a ton and still had a lot of fun, even though we nearly got arrested twice. I would've had to do more short films to learn all that I did on the feature, so it equals out in the long run.

One thing that doing a feature taught me, was long form storytelling under pressure. I understood the classic Hollywood 3-Act story structure much better after making my first film, as well as learning how to adapt the details of the story to solve real world production problems. I think the act of not only writing the script, but also making it and living with the story for so long really reinforced both the story structuring lessons I learned from screenwriting books, as well as my own instincts on the subject. Then through the various phases of post production, I learned a lot about what was necessary for a story to work, and what was redundant. Basically, it was a real crash course in filmmaking. Because the concept and genre I choose (pretty much a sci-fi/action film that was similar to The Matrix meets Invasion of the Body Snatchers), I was really challenged and stretched beyond my abilities. Now, some of that was me being naive and overly ambitious, but in the end, a great learning experience because of this. I think I learned just about everything "not to do" when making a film.

Yes, you can learn these things on shorts too, but with features you learn how they apply to a longer form of storytelling. Isn't that what most of us aspire to do in the first place anyways, basically feature filmmaking, and not being limited to short films?

Either way, good luck with the feature. And remember, plan... plan... plan that sucker out to a T. :thumbsup:



In terms of short films, there is also the fan film route. Now, obviously you won't be able to profit from it, but it can bring you lots of exposure. As long as you pick something popular that has a big fanbase, and your film is high quality (see: The Hunt for Gollum) then you can get your name out there to millions of people in a relatively short timeframe.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when I first thought about doing a web series to learn filmmaking I was going to go the fan film route and do a series regarding the Buffy the Vampire Slayer universe (since at the end of season 7 thousands of girls became slayers and the season eight comic follows that storyline), but I knew that I would become too attached to something I could never properly call my own.

I still think a webseries is more akin to a feature than are short films. In a series you're having to deal with more of an arc-style of storytelling opposed to the one-trick-pony means that a short film (or short story) typically uses. I guess I'd compare a webseries to the old serials (or excerpts of novels) they used to publish in magazines and news papers.

In the end, if you do shorts, you're leaving it to people to buy YOU not the product once you print the DVD. Personally I think Batman would always sell better than "The collected comics of Bob Kane". And, as with serials, when you compile a web series, you essentially have a feature film the same way the serials would be compiled into a novel or novella. Short stories end up as "collections", which sells for Stephen King because he's a famous novelist -- doesn't go too well for most short story writers, though.

I think it's a topsy turvy discussion, though, because I'm not quite clear on the overall intention of this guy wanting to do a feature. To me, the only reason to do a feature first would be so that you can say (and know) that you've done a feature -- that you've accomplished that feat. For saleability and the process of learning how to manage larger character arcs, I think a series makes the most sense. We can't point to how people did things in the past (shorts) because the technology wasn't there. Right now, today, the no-budget independent folk who are quietly progressing in the business are the ones doing web serials. It's the one-two punch of having something saleable to a fan base (DVD) as well as having web sites and tech institutions (like Microsoft) paying the creators to air their shows on their online networks. I don't think there's too many get rich quick stories there (like in film), but there are a lot of working-class filmmakers getting their piece for pretty much zero production costs.

May have strayed a bit. I'm just a big promoter of the web. With the exception of maybe four or five filmmakers working today, everything put in front of us in the mainstream is coming from a studio, regardless of how many times they slap "indy" on the production name. The production values are lower on the web, but at least they're doing something different -- something that's actually independently thought of and executed.

In the end, though, if you want to say you've made a feature (which nowadays seems to mean that a person simply made a moving picture that lasted for 90 or more minutes), then you should. If you want to get feedback from your peers and other professionals in real time, as you progress, you may want to look into other formats.
 
Nektonic said:
I think overall the short film to feature route is best for most rookie filmmakers, but he's said that he has already done music videos and commercials, compared to most of us when starting out we hadn't done diddly squat. If he was totally green, then yeah, shorts are the way to go, but when other experience is factored in, I think either choice is fine.

When I realized I didn't have the money for proper film school, I decided to make my own films and learn on my own time, and started with a feature after doing one simple short film. The finished feature was kind of a disaster, but I learned a ton and still had a lot of fun, even though we nearly got arrested twice. I would've had to do more short films to learn all that I did on the feature, so it equals out in the long run.

One thing that doing a feature taught me, was long form storytelling under pressure. I understood the classic Hollywood 3-Act story structure much better after making my first film, as well as learning how to adapt the details of the story to solve real world production problems. I think the act of not only writing the script, but also making it and living with the story for so long really reinforced both the story structuring lessons I learned from screenwriting books, as well as my own instincts on the subject. Then through the various phases of post production, I learned a lot about what was necessary for a story to work, and what was redundant. Basically, it was a real crash course in filmmaking. Because the concept and genre I choose (pretty much a sci-fi/action film that was similar to The Matrix meets Invasion of the Body Snatchers), I was really challenged and stretched beyond my abilities. Now, some of that was me being naive and overly ambitious, but in the end, a great learning experience because of this. I think I learned just about everything "not to do" when making a film.

Yes, you can learn these things on shorts too, but with features you learn how they apply to a longer form of storytelling. Isn't that what most of us aspire to do in the first place anyways, basically feature filmmaking, and not being limited to short films?

Either way, good luck with the feature. And remember, plan... plan... plan that sucker out to a T. :thumbsup:



In terms of short films, there is also the fan film route. Now, obviously you won't be able to profit from it, but it can bring you lots of exposure. As long as you pick something popular that has a large fanbase, and your film is high quality (see: The Hunt for Gollum) then you can get your name out there to millions of people in a relatively short timeframe.
Click to expand...

jonE5 said:
Just remember Robert Rodriguez had made about 30 or 40 short films before he tried to make el Mariachi.

I am a HUUUGE movie buff, and i watch just about anything i can get my hands on from teh 30's to today. So far ive made 4 short films and im finishing my first documentary right now.

All have been done on a zero budget aside from my equipment costs (which are still under $1,000). And still, id say im not very close to being ready to making a full feature.

If you are thats great, but as others have suggested, id make a couple of shorts so you can see what you will need to do to get arond some of the simple problems you run into. You will still run into other ones on a feature, but at least things like, lighting, sound, etc... you can practice on first for free before you start using up your money.

For such a small budget id say you need to learn to do everything.

jon
Click to expand...

All of you guys have alot of great advice. As far as production goes i pretty much learned to do everything on set. I honestly feel like i am ready. I understand that it is not going to be easy, but one thing that i'm also going to keep in mind is that i dont want to take 2 years to make this movie and bring it to life.
 
Chamber005 said:
Yeah, when I first thought about doing a web series to learn filmmaking I was going to go the fan film route and do a series regarding the Buffy the Vampire Slayer universe (since at the end of season 7 thousands of girls became slayers and the season eight comic follows that storyline), but I knew that I would become too attached to something I could never properly call my own.

I still think a webseries is more akin to a feature than are short films. In a series you're having to deal with more of an arc-style of storytelling opposed to the one-trick-pony means that a short film (or short story) typically uses. I guess I'd compare a webseries to the old serials (or excerpts of novels) they used to publish in magazines and news papers.

In the end, if you do shorts, you're leaving it to people to buy YOU not the product once you print the DVD. Personally I think Batman would always sell better than "The collected comics of Bob Kane". And, as with serials, when you compile a web series, you essentially have a feature film the same way the serials would be compiled into a novel or novella. Short stories end up as "collections", which sells for Stephen King because he's a famous novelist -- doesn't go too well for most short story writers, though.

I think it's a topsy turvy discussion, though, because I'm not quite clear on the overall intention of this guy wanting to do a feature. To me, the only reason to do a feature first would be so that you can say (and know) that you've done a feature -- that you've accomplished that feat. For saleability and the process of learning how to manage larger character arcs, I think a series makes the most sense. We can't point to how people did things in the past (shorts) because the technology wasn't there. Right now, today, the no-budget independent folk who are quietly progressing in the business are the ones doing web serials. It's the one-two punch of having something saleable to a fan base (DVD) as well as having web sites and tech institutions (like Microsoft) paying the creators to air their shows on their online networks. I don't think there's too many get rich quick stories there (like in film), but there are a lot of working-class filmmakers getting their piece for pretty much zero production costs.

May have strayed a bit. I'm just a big promoter of the web. With the exception of maybe four or five filmmakers working today, everything put in front of us in the mainstream is coming from a studio, regardless of how many times they slap "indy" on the production name. The production values are lower on the web, but at least they're doing something different -- something that's actually independently thought of and executed.

In the end, though, if you want to say you've made a feature (which nowadays seems to mean that a person simply made a moving picture that lasted for 90 or more minutes), then you should. If you want to get feedback from your peers and other professionals in real time, as you progress, you may want to look into other formats.
Click to expand...


I dont just want to say i made a feature if it was that route that i wanted to take i would simply take a screenplay of any movie and shoot it shot for shot! I am making this because its really where me and many other people here really want to be. And that is making movies for fun or for profit.

To me its a passion! Its the air that i breath. Im never going to do something just to say i did it no matter how big or small the budget is.
 
I think you're going about this the right way based on the budget. $5000 for equipment is awesome.

-Nate
 
Hey there duranracing,

I really don't have any idea of your skill or knowledge level, so I'm not going to try and give you any advice one way or another because I don't know what your strengths and experiences are. But I will just make a couple comments on things from this thread.

duranracing23 said:
Why? Because i am a HUUUGE Robert Rodriguez fan and if he did what he did with "El Mariachi" Almost 20 years ago, with little support and with few technologies at that time. Why cant i do the same?
Click to expand...

I don't know that you can't do the same, but I do know that there are thousands and thousands of first-time festure filmmakers who asked the same question and, in the end, they couldn't do the same. Guys like Rodriguez and Kevin Smith etc are all anomolies. It's kind of like saying "Hey, that guy from Virginia picked the lottery numbers, why can't I do the same?" Well sure, it's possible you could do the same. Just not really likely that you'll relive the Rodriguez or lottery experience.


The other thing I'd note is that making sucessful commercials and music videos really isn't anything like trying to make a narrative feature. While these all use the same equipment and fall under the umbrella of "filmmaking", there are just completely different demands and issues when shooting a feature.

I won't suggest that you shoot some shorts, because I don't have any idea if that would help you at all or not but the overall suggestion of making shorts first holds some valuable truth in it because it is just a different experience shooting narrative rather than commercials or music videos. Different things to focus on and different problems to deal with.

All that said. Good luck on your feature and I look forward to reading more about it.
 
HI,

very nice work.. please tell us wich mic and tools you have used for color corection etc..

Thank you
 
Texanite said:
Hey there duranracing,

I really don't have any idea of your skill or knowledge level, so I'm not going to try and give you any advice one way or another because I don't know what your strengths and experiences are. But I will just make a couple comments on things from this thread.



I don't know that you can't do the same, but I do know that there are thousands and thousands of first-time festure filmmakers who asked the same question and, in the end, they couldn't do the same. Guys like Rodriguez and Kevin Smith etc are all anomolies. It's kind of like saying "Hey, that guy from Virginia picked the lottery numbers, why can't I do the same?" Well sure, it's possible you could do the same. Just not really likely that you'll relive the Rodriguez or lottery experience.


The other thing I'd note is that making sucessful commercials and music videos really isn't anything like trying to make a narrative feature. While these all use the same equipment and fall under the umbrella of "filmmaking", there are just completely different demands and issues when shooting a feature.

I won't suggest that you shoot some shorts, because I don't have any idea if that would help you at all or not but the overall suggestion of making shorts first holds some valuable truth in it because it is just a different experience shooting narrative rather than commercials or music videos. Different things to focus on and different problems to deal with.

All that said. Good luck on your feature and I look forward to reading more about it.
Click to expand...

I too wish the best to everyone in the arts who are there for the sake of being in the arts -- regardless of what path they take to complete their piece.

I do think it is an incredible misfortune, though, that so, so many people look to these aforementioned anomolies (Rodriguez, Smith, Tarantino) with hope that they can do what they did. I think it's a misfortune because I have trouble understanding why any artists anywhere would ever in their life want to mimic anything (even the successes) of another artist. We're all human so we're all going to be predisposed to idol worship and to a greater extent the need to examine and learn from our elders (or the ones who came before us), but to hope for a similar finding or experience -- that seems the least like what an artist would ever want in life. If you look at each of these anomolies, they all accomplished what they accomplished by going AGAINST the norm, AGAINST what people told them they should do and, effectively AGAINST what people commonly refer to as "inspiration from others" but is really just a kind of copy catting.

They're anomolies because artists are anomolies. You should learn from other artsists, but if you start to hope to EXIST as another artist does you, for all intents and purposes, cease to be an artist and become just another kitten in the litterbox (or, letterbox)

Kevin Smith would never want to mimic the success of Kevin Smith. Rodriguez wouldn't mimic Rodriguez, etc. They existed from within and decided, "I can do what others can't or are unwiling to do." Half of that equation is talent, the other half is experience or a straight up appointed direction from the gods (and it's probably best to have both on your side in Hollywood).

Just make sure that if you're going into something with any other artist in mind, you're looking to crush and defeat all they've ever tried to accomplish -- make sure you're going in because you know you can do it better having had the experiences of their losses and wins. That's what they did, and that's why they "won" and everyone else who wasn't them "lost". ;)
 
I am stoked for you. People take different paths to their dream and each is very different. Mine took the route of learning through short films before I realized I was ready to make Stricken, but I believe it is not the only way. I am excited to see this film be born and I will gladly answer any questions you may have for me as I just went through this for the last year. Our crew was about 3-5 people, sometimes more, but usually about 4-5, and we fought to make the movie for as little as possible.

Our secrets were this:

Plan everything well "Locations, casting for the best actors, studying "directing actors" by Judith weston, etc.

Study and get good sound.

Never settle. Ever.

Best of luck! -Matt
 
It's very hard to give advice under the circumstances.
First of all, a filmmaker should consider that every penny invested will be lost, irretrievably lost. The experience earned is valuable, but $20 is a lot of money. My advice is shoot it for nothing. Borrow a camera. If you can't borrow it, rent one ... for as little as possible.
Seaking as a filmmaker, there are so many better ways to go.
 
ahh, now you have some footage, now we can have a little better idea about what your working with.

What did you use for lighting? Audio?

I like your establishment shots, but your shots of your actor standing, look slightly overexposed (the guys have a very washed out almost vampire like skin tone), i think some basic color correction could fix it, id try a few different plugins and see what looks a little better.

I can telly youve made music videos, because some parts actually almost have a music video like feel. Shoot some more and show us some more.

Im curious if you have a camera, and equipment and access to actors etc... where is the money going? (or are all your actors paid?)
 
jonE5 said:
ahh, now you have some footage, now we can have a little better idea about what your working with.

What did you use for lighting? Audio?

I like your establishment shots, but your shots of your actor standing, look slightly overexposed (the guys have a very washed out almost vampire like skin tone), i think some basic color correction could fix it, id try a few different plugins and see what looks a little better.

I can telly youve made music videos, because some parts actually almost have a music video like feel. Shoot some more and show us some more.

Im curious if you have a camera, and equipment and access to actors etc... where is the money going? (or are all your actors paid?)
Click to expand...

Like i mentioned in my previous post, i dint have any lighting, mic or crew. I dint intend for this to be what it is i simply had the actors read the scene. "It was an audition", and i had the camera rolling.

As per the color. Its the feel that i am going for. I dont want it to have that "standard" look. I want it to feel really gritty.

As per actors no, noone will be paid for this.
 
filmman said:
It's very hard to give advice under the circumstances.
First of all, a filmmaker should consider that every penny invested will be lost, irretrievably lost. The experience earned is valuable, but $20 is a lot of money. My advice is shoot it for nothing. Borrow a camera. If you can't borrow it, rent one ... for as little as possible.
Seaking as a filmmaker, there are so many better ways to go.
Click to expand...

I agree with Filmman, accept for one thing, always buy your computer and editing stuff. Buy a camera if you'll be the one shooting, if you're the star, hire a camera person. You'll have to pay a DP anyway and DPs have cameras, so hire a DP. Or buy the camera and get a person from the local film school to shoot (but you have to train them on your camera). Also get a big flat screen monitor. You should at least purchase some kind of camera in case you get the urge to run out and shoot something.
Texanite said:
I don't know that you can't do the same, but I do know that there are thousands and thousands of first-time festure filmmakers who asked the same question and, in the end, they couldn't do the same. Guys like Rodriguez and Kevin Smith etc are all anomolies. It's kind of like saying "Hey, that guy from Virginia picked the lottery numbers, why can't I do the same?" Well sure, it's possible you could do the same. Just not really likely that you'll relive the Rodriguez or lottery experience.
Click to expand...
I think it has more to do with the want to do it versus believing you'll end up in Hollywood. If you end up doing something and promoting it right you can end up getting on video shelves or selling the feature yourself and making a profit or at least getting notice. It's a hard road, but it can be lot more rewarding too. I'll be teaching video production next quarter which is awesome for me. Currently I teach Writing for Multimedia and Graphic Design. All skills I use for making my films and packaging. A steady income came as a result of my filmmaking and writing. How awesome is that? Remember the film is not the product, you are.

-Nate
 
Nathyn said:
Remember the film is not the product, you are.
Click to expand...

Really?? In what respect? I mean, you're the one selling the film (if you don't have an agent), but very few of your direct sales will be face to face except at conventions or when you meet with distributors.

I think sometimes the "story" behind how the movie was made can be the "product" (or, the thing that sells the movie). But, by and large, it's the actual movie and its packaging that is the product -- in the end that's what people are buying.

I'm not really sure I understand your position about the filmmaker being the product -- unless you're talking about filmmakers who are trying to get jobs for someone else? In that case, yeah, but that doesn't have any bearing on producing and marketing a movie out of your own pocket. The final result will be based on the film and its packaging; you yourself matters very little to an audience. Unless your movie sucks, then they may steer clear of anything you ever do in the future.
 
The modern day indy filmmaker has virtually no support and Hollywood hates you, unless they deem you as a profitable prospect. Otherwise you are competition. The low budget distributors will take your film, but most of the times won't pay you or will only pay so much, so making a $20,000 film becomes an exercise in loss. I'd much rather make a $10,000 with a name B actor and try to sale to Maverick and make a $10,000 profit or make a $1000 - $3000 and give (yes give) it to York. At least I will have my film on the video shelves somewhere. (The Fourth Beast, my little $800 action film, was being sold in Walgreens at one time. Crazy right), than do a $20,000 that may not hit it's mark or may just be a festival film. So the question is what to do?

So if you do have $20,000 then you must have a plan. The film is nothing now, but a card that says, "Look what I can do." Make the film for $5000, spend the other $3000-$5000 on equipment, save $10,000 for promotion and push the hell out of the film until your name is known. Start teaching others how to do what you've done. Sale your film from you website, home, car, wherever. I made $100 in under an hour selling "Action Filmmaking" and (my last three copies of "Wages of Sin") at a film fest and I wasn't even in the showing.

You have to use the film to make opportunity for yourself. Get in the local papers, send things to the trades, speaking of which I talk about all this in the new edition of "Action Filmmaking" (which some DVXUsers may be getting soon enough if things work out). You have to make yourself into a name. Keep your day job but at the same time leverage yourself to become "hot" in the community. Make yourself famous. It doesn't matter if you're A list, if people have heard of you, then you're hot right then.

There's a science to it that I couldn't even go into on the forums. You have to really research guerrilla marketing and basic marketing. Your film is a POP item (point of purchase) which makes matters problematic if you're not in stores. B films are sold based on people seeing them on the video shelves in the "new" section and wondering what the film is about. They're bought on the spur of the moment mainly because of packaging. Your goal is to make your film seem like if people don't have it, they simply aren't down. You must make people want to buy your film, make people want to know you and make people want to help and offer themselves/services to you. It's hard to explain without going into a whole spill but I think you get my point here.

-Nate
 
I totally agree with nathyn, and he echoes a lot of what im learning in my film production class right now. Just making a film is really only part of it, selling it, pitching it, pitching yourself etc... is the rest.

If your really going to put your money up on the line then you want to be able to get at least some of it (if not all, or maybe even make a slight profit). I think what nathyn is suggesting is pretty reasonable.

I mean for an urban setting, you wouldnt seem like you would need a whole lot of effects or anything. Im still wondering where the $20k is going to go towards?

I have also heard that its a good idea to spend some money (if your hell bent on spending) on some B actors, basically to add some credibility and name recognition to your film.

Im not sure what kinda bank roll you have, but for most of us $20k is a lot of money, if you have it to just toss around then by all means. But if this is money for college, or for a down payment on a house, or wahtever, then id really consider maybe lowering your budget a tadd, particularly since its your first feature.

Check out all Robert Rodriguez 10 min film school.

he talks about making a plan, make the first feature for almost nothing, your only goal is to make enough money off it to buy some more equipment, and learn from your mistakes to make a second film (which will hopefully be bigger and better) which will allow you to make a little more and learn a little more and finally make a third that can hopefully get your name out. He hit the lotto and got his name out on the first film, so basically he exceeded his expectations, but that is not very typical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top