The Business of Indie filmmaking

[Phil Rhodes]

As someone who's desperately trying to scrape up about £15k to make a TV pilot right now, I find all of this incredibly depressing.

 

Phil

[Adamo P Cultraro]

A producer's rep is someone (person, entertainment attorney, etc) who has established distribution avenues and takes your movie on for a piece of the action. Think of them as a movie broker. Their job is to get things sold to the various markets - cable, VOD, pay per view, foreign, DVD rental, etc.

 

Here is an example of one such company (No affiliation to me whatsoever)

<a href="http://www.lanternlane.com/About" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.lanternlane.com/About Us/producersrep.html</a>

 

Also, here is an example of a movie that was made on a DVX100A and obtained a US and Canadian distribution deal. The film is on store shelves and in all the major rental chains. Get this - the budget of the film was equal to the advance they received from the distribution company. Again, No affiliation: http://www.plasterheadmovie.com These guys had very little film festival exposure as well.

 

And how about the holy grail...theatrical distribution?????? Here is a film that has a 1100...YES - 1100 theater theatrical release. Shot on an HVX-200 (again again, no affiliation): http://www.sarahlandon.com As of today it has pulled in $586K. Not too shabby.

 

It's all due to a good producer's rep. I am shooting a feature on my HVX this spring that I am very confident will see direct to DVD distribution at a minimum. It can be done. In fact, it is done very frequently.

 

Phil: Feel your pain. Spent $40K last year on a failed TV pilot. Had fun filming, though.

Edited October 28, 2007 by Adamo P Cultraro

[Phil Rhodes]

You have to be realistic, though. £15k/$40k (where $40k is only fractionally more money in real terms) isn't really a "real" production, and I don't think that any of the issues described in this thread really apply. Do they?

 

Phil

[Guest]

I was wondering when you would join this thread Phil :)

 

As for your budget not being a "real" budget, it's all relative.

 

A 1 million dollar movie doesn't have a real budget compared to a 100 million dollar movie.

 

15,000 pounds is huge compared to the guy working with 1,000 pounds.

 

Oh well Phil at least you're not posting the usual, "why bother trying you will all fail" post.

 

What happened did you turn positive on us?

 

R,

 

As you know, I like to jerk your chain. :)

[Adamo P Cultraro]

I'd like to think I could've spent $400K and they still would not have liked it. I think TV pilots are more idea driven than production value driven. They either like it or they don't, plain and simple.

 

At least a low production value feature has a chance of generating some revenue. TV pilots either sink or swim.

[Phil Rhodes]

Well to be honest we have avoided making it into a feature because of the near 100% certainty of zero revenue. At least with a TV ep it's clearcut. There's actually a lot more places we could go and look for funding for a feature but it just seems wrong somehow to go begging for money when you know damn well it's a pipe dream to think about selling it. I can't imagine there's a rep in the world who'd touch Mr. Boddington's production if it were made in the UK.

 

Also, in the UK the feature market is completely unregulated and hopelessly swamped by American content forced upon the market by blisteringly anticompetitive sales practices against which even a several-million production cannot hope to prevail; the TV market is actually subject to some content controls.

 

So no, I'm not getting positive on you; I'm just doing my hopefully-sensible best to sidestep the more predictable outcomes. Yes we will still almost certainly produce something nobody will ever see, but at least I'm not just walking straight into the feature-film trap.

 

Phil

[Guest]

Well to be honest we have avoided making it into a feature because of the near 100% certainty of zero revenue. At least with a TV ep it's clearcut. There's actually a lot more places we could go and look for funding for a feature but it just seems wrong somehow to go begging for money when you know damn well it's a pipe dream to think about selling it. I can't imagine there's a rep in the world who'd touch Mr. Boddington's production if it were made in the UK.

 

It's a good question. My rep does carry a British title though. Of course I had to make the characters appear like they live in the USA. One character gives her address and it's in Chicago, not Canada. In another scene one character makes reference to an "HMO." Which of course is found only in the USA. You can put Canadian stuff in a movie and sell it to the USA, but it has to be some thing Americans already accept as "Canadian" like a mountie, a dog sled, an igloo, free healthcare, or a valuable currency.

 

Also, in the UK the feature market is completely unregulated and hopelessly swamped by American content forced upon the market by blisteringly anticompetitive sales practices against which even a several-million production cannot hope to prevail; the TV market is actually subject to some content controls.

 

Walk into a video store in Canada, 99.9% USA titles .01% Canadian. We have Can Con rules for broadcast here as well, and I have a shot at making a cable TV sale here as a result. But why not do both? A feature can air on TV AND be in the video store at the same time.

 

So no, I'm not getting positive on you; I'm just doing my hopefully-sensible best to sidestep the more predictable outcomes. Yes we will still almost certainly produce something nobody will ever see, but at least I'm not just walking straight into the feature-film trap.

 

But with a TV only product it's 100% reliant on the suits of the network liking it in order to get on air. At least a feature on DVD can be sold direct to the public if every thing else on the planet fails.

 

R

 

Phil

[Phil Rhodes]

You're missing the point.

 

A Canadian feature or TV show can effectively masquerade as American in many markets, as you are clearly trying to do. I can't do that. Americans will only watch American content, or a very close approximation. If a production is not saleable in the US it's a waste of time; trying to sell something direct to DVD here is laughable. The market is too small; I'm not aware of it ever having happened - seriously, never, not once.

 

At the moment I'm sitting here having made nothing with everyone going "What've you done"; the pressure is therefore on to create something, anything, as long as it's of vaguely broadcastable quality, to answer these questions.

 

Phil

[Adam Thompson]

Can you tell me more about what a producer's rep does and what they cost?

 

Also, please no more lectures about how Red is "not going to make your film better." Jeez louise. I know that.

 

The market is far worse than I think anyone here knows. I've seen some sad days over the last few years. The last film I worked on was a low budget indie (24p) that is still sitting, a year after post, looking for anyone that will just watch it. They even had real music, efx, good story, etc. The only hope they have now is one of the very low end DVD companies that will not ever pay you back a dime. (no matter what they might tell you)

 

And Tom, the little red cam coming up in every conversation is really getting old. The hype is over, it's another video tool, no one cares, least of all someone who needs sellable content to keep their company alive. Some people try to lie to them when they are asked "whats it shot on" but this isnt good practice. You get much further, fast, with "film" whether thats 16mm or 35 because for the most part they know that a bunch of high school kids or porn producers didn't shoot it and all those other factors that go along with productions that bother using film and professionals. If you trick one into watching your red/hd/magic cam movie and they spot the usual bad "other things" they will turn a cold shoulder forever.

 

Just to recap: bad acting (90% of the time, this is what youll have), poor sets, cheap music and bad sound are the first signs they look for. If you get them past that, it's content time.

 

Yes, I have spent some time with one of these mysterious buyer guys. It's not something I recommend to others if you dont want to hear how poor or lottery-like your chances of selling small films are... and forget seeing it in a theater, that's something like 10,000 to 1 or worse. All the examples you hear about are all the lottery winners. "Once" is like a quad-state powerball winner! I guess that makes companies like panasonic and red just like the state lotto commercials. hype hype hype.

[Guest]

At the moment I'm sitting here having made nothing with everyone going "What've you done"; the pressure is therefore on to create something, anything, as long as it's of vaguely broadcastable quality, to answer these questions.

 

Phil

 

I hear you on this point, I was so sick of hearing, "but you've never made a feature film." Now I have, so shut the *bleep* up. I don't mean you Phil, I mean, the "world".

 

 

The market is far worse than I think anyone here knows. I've seen some sad days over the last few years. The last film I worked on was a low budget indie (24p) that is still sitting, a year after post, looking for anyone that will just watch it. They even had real music, efx, good story, etc. The only hope they have now is one of the very low end DVD companies that will not ever pay you back a dime. (no matter what they might tell you)

 

And Tom, the little red cam coming up in every conversation is really getting old. The hype is over, it's another video tool, no one cares, least of all someone who needs sellable content to keep their company alive. Some people try to lie to them when they are asked "whats it shot on" but this isnt good practice. You get much further, fast, with "film" whether thats 16mm or 35 because for the most part they know that a bunch of high school kids or porn producers didn't shoot it and all those other factors that go along with productions that bother using film and professionals. If you trick one into watching your red/hd/magic cam movie and they spot the usual bad "other things" they will turn a cold shoulder forever.

 

Just to recap: bad acting (90% of the time, this is what youll have), poor sets, cheap music and bad sound are the first signs they look for. If you get them past that, it's content time.

 

Yes, I have spent some time with one of these mysterious buyer guys. It's not something I recommend to others if you dont want to hear how poor or lottery-like your chances of selling small films are... and forget seeing it in a theater, that's something like 10,000 to 1 or worse. All the examples you hear about are all the lottery winners. "Once" is like a quad-state powerball winner! I guess that makes companies like panasonic and red just like the state lotto commercials. hype hype hype.

 

Yes it can be pretty darn bleak, no question. But as you point out many of these small films suffer from, "poor sets, cheap music and bad sound." So in that case should the filmmaker be surprised that they can't sell it? I mean who here would pay good money for a car that has ripped upholstery, a bad sound system, and makes a rattling noise.

 

None of us would part with our money for a cheap badly made product, we should not expect film buyers to.

 

R,

[Adamo P Cultraro]

Adam - check out the examples I posted. There are many more. I personally know of half a dozen people who've done it. It may be a small number, but it is doable nevertheless.

 

Keep tabs on me. I'll be doing it shortly.