Why LA?

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I spent most of my day today on a rooftop deck listening to producers talk points, financing, and product placement, and then might've gotten invited to Thailand to shoot, saw an actress from American Beauty who waved at me as she walked down the steps, then got a call from a buddy who just picked up a short who wants me to shoot it all within a 6 hour period--- these things do not happen elsewhere. So when you ask yourself, why LA, sure you can bring up examples of good things happening elsewhere, and absolute atrocious stories of people who did move to la-- lord knows I don't LIKE living in LA, or LA as a city, but you can't argue that no matter what you want to do in film as a career, the vast majority of that work for the vast majority of people will be due to some LA connection. Hell you could walk from LA back to Philadelphia, that's not arguable, but what is is that most people wouldn't choose to walk when you could fly or drive-- e.g. you can be a perfectly successful filmmaker anywhere, but the generally "easier" route is when you're in a city where you can literally walk 3 blocks through 4 differing shoots.

Seriously, you walk into DTLA on a weekend and you'll go through multiple base-camps on a nearly daily basis.

[Tyler Purcell]

$25,000 yes - though considering much of what normally constitutes a larger budget will be moved to the back end, the actual production value of whats on screen should exceed $25,000 as might be spent on a movie where we need to rent equipment, pay cast and crew, etc. Considering we can find quality actors of course.

SO what does a $25k of production and post production budget actually get you? I mean honestly.. what does your budget look like?

 

And excuse me, but a TOY? I spent nearly $3,000 on that camera and all it's accessories.

Dude, it's a toy. I shot and edited a feature made with the Canon D5MKII and I'm editing a feature right now shot with the GH4. I know what the cameras look like, I'm very familiar with them. It's not dissing you, it's just not going to look like anything a buyer would be interested in.

 

But again, this is just more of that elitist Hollywood attitude where we compare the size of our camera's rather than the end product on the screen.

It's called being logical, it's not elitist. Truth of the matter is, you can make anything you want, using any camera you want. That doesn't mean anyone will want to watch what you make. I'm not saying it's impossible to make something good for no money ($25k is no money in this town), I'm saying it's a road block that some of the most talented people haven't been able to crash through.

 

My 'toy' in the right hands can out-perfect your red in the wrong hand, and someone with experience can make both camera's look near identical in image quality. Though now you'll probably try to tell me 'real movies shoot on FILM'! I feel I can make the image quality from my GH4 look pretty good, and given my background in photography I feel secure in doing it.

RED, HA! Actually, I don't own a fancy digital cinema camera. I refuse to 'buy-in' because technology is moving so fast, what you buy today will be obsolete tomorrow. It doesn't matter though, my blackmagic pocket cameras are perfectly fine for 90% of what I shoot, which is commercial, promo, documentary and short subject pieces. Heck the feature we're shooting now, already has a distribution deal and it's 80% Blackmagic 2.5k and 20% Blackmagic pocket. For the bigger shows, I have film equipment which works great. I don't see the point in shooting any narrative you take seriously on digital, but thats because I've seen some pretty good low budget digital narrative films not get recognized BECAUSE they're digital. By contrast, even small things shot on film get huge recognition, even if they aren't very good. Not saying it has any impact on a $25,000 budget feature, but it's absolutely one of the biggest reasons I don't go out and shoot a feature tomorrow. Making your product stand out is harder today then it's been for quite sometime and "film" adds that extra layer.

 

What's funny is that 15 years ago before I moved here, I believed the same things you did when it comes to simply making a feature. I wrote a pretty kick-ass feature that was my calling card to Los Angeles. Yet, I didn't make it because I realized there was more to this game. Just living here opens up your eyes to new possibilities and you realize, hey... there is more to this game. But what do I know... I've just shot and edited award-winning feature and short films.

[Freya Black]

Of course they do, but they won't give you anything for it. If you walked up to them and said they could buy your property for $50k, they may do it if all your ducks are in a row. But they'd rather make it themselves because they're a factory.

 

 

Tyler, I think you might be in fantasy land with that $50k figure, especially with a very small DVD distributor. Maybe 10 years ago...?

 

I started to say before but thought better of it... but go on. I know someone who made a low budget horror movie a few years ago and sold it to a very large studio who buys a lot of low budget horror movies. I'm sure you know the one I am talking about. Oh go on then it rhymes with "Village Fete" or maybe "Ryans Date" I dunno. I'm sure you know which one I mean. Anyway he sold his movie to them and they paid $20K.

 

Now think about that. It probably cost 2 years to make. So that's about $10K per year. Probably something like £6000 over here, which is less than minimum wage.

 

...and don't forget you have all the cost of deliverables on top of that and a ton of paperwork.

 

This is why the low budget stuff is coming apart and people are looking to make web series or find something else they might be able to make work.

 

Of course a lot of people sell their movies to DVD distribs for almost nothing, or sometimes actually nothing, because they think it will be their calling card or some nonsense but having something out on DVD doesn't count for very much at all these days.

 

On the other hand, it's good if you have made something and have something to show whether it gets distribution or not.

[Freya Black]

 

Yes. Yes, it is. Which is the real problem, here: you can't solve the situation by making a really good movie. Your ability to make a really good movie is irrelevant.

 

P

 

 

This is true. Talent is useful. Making a good movie can really help. It's not that major factor tho. The more important factor is your ability to sell it and get it out there. Of course this is a major kind of talent too but not the kind that people tend to be focused on.

 

This is true in many things.

 

So many amazing DP's for example, struggling to get by, and so many doing poor work and raking it in.

[Tyler Purcell]

Tyler, I think you might be in fantasy land with that $50k figure, especially with a very small DVD distributor. Maybe 10 years ago...?

Ohh you're absolutely right, $50k is absolutely fantasy from a small distributor, but so is making a feature for $25k and it being good enough for distribution. I've worked with top distributors including Criterion and if your movie is good enough to sell (AKA they feel it's a good fit for their catalog), they will promote it, but they don't pay you a dime for it up front. It's a gamble, but again getting "free" marketing is pretty good and the percentage isn't too bad either.

 

Obviously there are other channels for distribution, but without marketing (something the DVD distributor does), it's nearly impossible to connect viewer to product. Sure there is the "accidental purchase" and maybe a few hits on Netflix (who buy the way, will buy a crappy movie for $10k) or iTunes (which is costly to deliver to). What new people to the industry don't realize is that, a good percentage of your budget, needs to be spent on marketing/promotional and distribution. It costs quite a bit of money to meet the delivery specs AND deliver to VOD companies. I've worked on films that blew their wad on meeting the spec and then not having the money to submit.

[Phil Rhodes]

To be fair, much of that can be dealt with quite cheaply if you've a little background knowledge in postproduction. There should never be any real cost, these days, to cranking out all the various aspect ratios, resolutions, frame rates, and so on. If you need tape outputs, that may require external resources, but even then it can be worth renting the deck and just doing it in the lounge.

 

DCPs can be a bit of a ballache, and 3D stuff can get complicated, but it is all doable on a desktop PC. Facilities places will tell you this is not possible. They are wrong.

 

P

[Tyler Purcell]

To be fair, much of that can be dealt with quite cheaply if you've a little background knowledge in postproduction. There should never be any real cost, these days, to cranking out all the various aspect ratios, resolutions, frame rates, and so on. If you need tape outputs, that may require external resources, but even then it can be worth renting the deck and just doing it in the lounge.

It's more about mixing the film in 5.1 and stereo. About exporting splits. About native and foreign language subtitles. About paying for clearance documents. Plus, iTunes round trip costs around $2k. I just did one, that's the going rate today. If you do Netflix, Amazon and Hulu at the same time, most companies will strike a deal since they mostly use the same delivering companies. You can get away with all this for under $5k if you do all the work yourself, including subtitles. However, once you hit foreign markets, you need to pay for translation subtitles. Depending on if you go to Asia (huge market) you could need English, Spanish, German, French and Italian subs right off the bat. Very few distributors are willing to do the subs for you, but I've seen it done before. Each language is around $1500 bux for a feature film, plus the encoding.

 

These are the reasons why the cost just skyrockets. Now if you just sell your film to a Walmart DVD distributor, they don't care about any of these things really.

[Landon D. Parks]

Look Tyler, I don’t claim to be an industry professional. In fact, the fact I’m not has been pointing out so many times that people should know to take my advice with a possible grain of salt, or at least compare it with others who work in the industry to figure out how they want to do it. I speak from my experience working in theatre, as well as my over 10 years of experience in business-management and executive level positions, as well as my 15 years of book knowledge of the film industry. I feel my advice applies across the board, and is actually pretty broad. Mostly, my advice is this: If you want to work, move where the work is. If you want to keep working, you’ll probably have to keep moving around when the work does. This might actually apply once you’re already established though. As for moving to LA, I still say don’t make that move lightly. Can one even pay their rent working for $100 a day as a PA in Los Angeles? I can barely pay my bills some weeks clearing $90 a day after taxes, and I live where a 1-bedroom apartment costs $500 a month.

I just want to caution potential filmmakers about making a sudden and premature move to LA without their ducks in a row. It’s the same thing as moving to NY to be on Broadway – it’s a tough and closed market, so unless you have everything in place to make it happen – such a move can lead to you actually being worse off. Yes, I can move to NY and work stage for an off-Broadway show for $100 a day as well – but that won’t pay my rent, and I could have done a similar thing right back home with my local IATSE.

My whole point is that until you have the experience to knock on doors in LA – I really don’t think a move to LA is wise for anyone. Just my opinion, and maybe I’m jaded, but that is my opinion – and short of proving a miracle to me, it probably won’t change.

 

 

I think Richards first feature cost a million dollars, you'll have to ask him, but that's what it says online. You can do a lot for a million dollars, you can do a lot for $500k, but you can't do much with $25k.

According to Richard’s interview over at Craft Truck (http://www.crafttruck.com/through-the-lens-podcast/business-of-film-7-with-richard-boddington-indie-producer/), he made the movie self-funded for $125,000 with no real stars to speak of. He shot it in an abandoned hospital, and sold it to a distributor based pretty much on a professionally designed cover art.

Now, I’m not suggesting that such a practice is normal operating ways, not would I expect myself, or anyone else, to follow that same path and expect the same success. It does prove though, that anything is possible in the film industry. We need to remember that Paranormal Activity was shot on handycam’s, and look where it is. Yes, it’s an anomaly, but the again ALL indie films that get real distribution are anomalies. By ‘real’ I don’t mean a limited run in LA/NY and Chicago…. I can rent out a few art houses and get my film there... I mean a true wide theatrical release with a multi-million-dollar marketing campaign. Until your film is at that point, you have no yet ‘made it’, no matter how many art houses your movie is playing in.

 

SO what does a $25k of production and post production budget actually get you? I mean honestly.. what does your budget look like?

 

Well, there are a couple of important things here to understand: First, the $25k is our current budget if we cannot obtain more funding, which we are far from reaching at this point. We are actively, right now, working on a crowdfunding campaign by working with a crowdfunding manager and putting together a kick-butt teaser trailer and incentive package for donors. We plan to launch that campaign this summer, and our goal is another $10k from that.

The other important point is that the $25k does not include what I have personally invested to bring the project to where it now. This includes getting legal entities formed, contract templates made, getting a 46 min script written for the pilot, getting our ‘virtual sets / CG’ mostly done (I and my co-producer have been working with VFX artists around the world, mostly armatures and hobbyists, to get our CG elements done in advance), etc.

Interestingly, this morning a got a call from one of our prospects we were touting for a smaller investment in the project, who might want to increase that investment substantially if we agree to take the idea to a feature deal rather than a TV/Web series. Something to consider, though far from set in stone. Though the additional money being offered would put the project into a different class.

Really, it’s too early for me to comment much on the project I’m working on now. Things are still volatile and subject to change and reworking. I can tell you it’s a fantasy aimed at families, that it’s based loosely on my book series I’m writing, and that a good 80% of the project is green screen with virtual sets.

I can tell you that regardless of the outcome of the project (TV series / feature) we are working toward an 8-person crew, expanding to 10 or 11 on location shoots. Our three primary cast members will be between the ages of 10 and 13. I can tell you that most of the budget we raise will go toward props and wardrobe, as well as location catering and small per-diems for gas for the cast and crew on location.

While doing the studio shooting, I’m taking a cue from my days working in theatre, and we’ll be shooting about 3-4 hours, 4 days a week after work/school – and 8 hour days on some weekends - following almost exactly what a community theatre rehearsal schedule might be. Because of this, we have much better access to talent who might normally have day jobs – basically the same talent who regularly work in theatre around here, which is very good BTW.

Location shooting will be in a local park that we have already gotten a year-long permit for ($100 – I use the park for commercial photography as well, so I already have the permit), were we will be camping at their campground and putting full days in.

That is really all I can offer right now to explain the budget. I expect that here in the next few weeks’ things we start taking off at a faster pace once I have the teaser trailer done. Since I’m acting as the VFX Supervisor, I have been spending much of my days compositing and rendering out 2040x858 sequences from the CG work. Once we are ready, I’ll start a thread in the ‘in production’ forum to document the project – including screen shots, vlogs, and other updates. It’ll be great to get professionally feedback from people as the project progresses on that front. Hopefully the professionals on here will follow along with that and be able to offer some advice and critique.

So there you go. Hopefully that gives you some early idea about the project and our 25k budget. More of that will come later once I set up a dedicated thread for the project.

PS) I also understand perfectly well deliverable and the need for subtitles and 5.1 mixes... Clearances, e&o, etc. I'm currently also working on these things for the earlier 'handycam' documentary.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Guest]

Tyler, I'm about to put Landon in charge of my next feature just so he can come on here and say.....I directed a feature film Tyler and you haven't! :D

 

R,

[Landon D. Parks]

Tyler, I'm about to put Landon in charge of my next feature just so he can come on here and say.....I directed a feature film Tyler and you haven't! :D

 

R,

 

According to the DGA, my rate is $5,507 a week. My agent will be in contact with you :)

 

:rolleyes:

[Landon D. Parks]

Another issue I seem to have though with Tyler, and I like him a lot and hate to bring it up, but according to his IMDB profile, he has not produced or directed any feature length content either... Because of this, I am beginning to wonder what makes him more qualified than me to offer advice? Unless he has actual experience, simply living in LA does not really make him any more qualified to offer advice on the LA film industry than me on the Cincinnati film industry - from a producing standpoint anyway.

 

Not trying to push buttons here, but he does seem to point out my lack of a completed project he deems 'worthy', yet I fail to see any such projects (other than Shorts and directing a couple of TV episodes) from him. His Cinematography credits are pretty long, but does that qualify one to make assumptions about production and direction? And they are mostly shorts...

 

For what's it;s worth, it might be a handycam documentary - but I was able to bring said documentary through post and into the hands of an aggregator, which appears to be more than Mr. Purcell has done... Unless his IMDB profile is misleading somehow.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Guest]

 

According to the DGA, my rate is $5,507 a week. My agent will be in contact with you :)

 

:rolleyes:

 

And first class air also I assume? What tier are you looking at to get $5, 507.00 a week? I have to pay myself a hell of a lot more than that or I'd starve!!!

 

R,

[Landon D. Parks]

 

And first class air also I assume? What tier are you looking at to get $5, 507.00 a week? I have to pay myself a hell of a lot more than that or I'd starve!!!

 

R,

 

First class all the way :). I'm actually shocked the DGA minimum commercial rate card calls for $5,507 a week. I would have assumed production that where union enough for DGA would have exceeded this, though apparently I'm wrong (source: https://www.dga.org//~/media/Files/Contracts/Commercial/DGACommercialRates2014thru2017.pdf)

 

Heck, In theatre to SDC I think was this much more for a director... And that's in theatre.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Guest]

That is for commercials, you need to find the feature film schedule.

 

R,

[Landon D. Parks]

That is for commercials, you need to find the feature film schedule.

 

R,

 

$17k a week! :o

 

All I have to say to that is, wow. That is what most jobs pay in half a year. Though that is for $11 million + movies. It refers to a side card for lower budget which I cannot seem to find, but I assume it's a little lower.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Guest]

There you go, join the DGA and you're off.

 

FYI, Tyler and Landon, you want to read about one of the great Hollywood success stories? Have a look at my friend Brad Peyton from Gander Newfoundland, ever heard of that place? If you think Toronto and Ohio is a long way from LA, look up Gander Newfoundland!!

 

Brad made a short film that was screened at TIFF, it got attention and from that he was hired to direct, Cats and Dogs 2, then right onto Journey to the Centre of the Earth. Look him up on IMDB. He's only a young guy and his career has been through the roof!

 

And he didn't go to USC, didn't have any family in the movie industry, and again.....all the way from Gander, Newfoundland.

 

R,

[Miguel Angel]

Just saying.. I have seen all Brad Peyton's movies!

 

He is very good and seems to know what Hollywood wants and he is happy with that!

 

If I were a director I would be doing exactly the same, either what he or what Collet-Serra does, being hired to make A movie, give to the producer a good product he / she can make money out of it and then going to the next one, hired by the same producer!! :D

 

In Spain there are not too many people who would like to shoot Cats and Dogs 2 though, most of the directors think about them as "artists", which is good as they keep almost all the control of the movies that they make and they are very interesting :)

 

Have a good day!

[Landon D. Parks]

Never been to Newfoundland, but I was in Toronto only a month ago. My girlfriend goes to college at York, and I make trips there a few times a year. Last trip we actually ventured up to Quebec City, which was amazing (and a much longer drive from Toronto than I thought). Canada truly is a great country, and I'd move there if I had my choice. Of course, Canadian's don't just allow us yanks to come at our will and setup shop.

 

Perhaps I'll look you up for coffee, Richard, next time I'm up that way.

 

Success stories like Richard's example though, including his own and the story of his friend, prove that getting a career in filmmaking does not involve one path. There are multiple ways to enter the industry, and it just bugs me that Tyler seems to think there is only one way. Filmmakers time and time again have proven this 'one method only' wrong. Not saying Tyler's way isn't feasible or even a good idea, but it's far from the only method that one can use for success.

 

I'm also not naive enough to think that major motion pictures originate out of Ohio.. Of course they don't, but I cannot see what is stopping someone from making their own self-financed feature from here, especially their calling card feature.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Guest]

Brad had a faster climb up to big time movie making than either Lucas, Spielberg, or Cameron.

 

Oh and speaking of James Cameron, there's another Canadian from out of no where. Also the director of the two biggest movies of all time. How many of you can find where James Cameron is from....Kapuskasing.

 

R,

[Guest]

Oh now let's look at Peter Jackson, all the way down in New Zealand. Let's face it, 99% of Americans cannot find New Zealand on a blank map. I lived in NZ in the late 80s, and there was zero film activity to speak of.

 

Then Peter Jackson builds an empire there entirely on his own. He doesn't even bother to move to the USA or LA, he shoots everything in NZ! And even creates a world class VFX company.

 

What a story....WOW!!!!

 

R,

[Guest]

Canada truly is a great country, and I'd move there if I had my choice. Of course, Canadian's don't just allow us yanks to come at our will and setup shop.

 

Can you be a Syrian refugee? If so Canada will give you better housing and healthcare than any Canadian has access to, all FREE of charge.

 

If you become a CDN you can gain access to our socialist tax credit system and use it make movies with.

 

R,

[Landon D. Parks]

Let's face it, 99% of Americans cannot find New Zealand on a blank map.

R,

 

Normally to such a comment my reaction should be :angry: , but the truth of the matter is, my face is like this :lol: cause you're 100% right.

 

I was substitute teaching at a 9th grade high school in Indiana about 4 months ago, and the lesson plan called for a cold-calling of the students to name different continents on a blank map. I had to go through eight students before one got 'Africa'. I threw a bone in the cogs and asked them to identify the United Kingdom - none. In a class of probably 28. In one study I read, most American high-schooler's cannot even identify half of OUR OWN STATES on a blank map, let alone other countries.

 

Don't even get me started on our adults.... Most don't even know Washington DC isn't a state.

 

American education, rather we want to admit it or not, is shameful. :ph34r:

Edited March 31, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[John E Clark]

 

 

If you become a CDN you can gain access to our socialist tax credit system and use it make movies with.

 

R,

 

Speaking of that... Peter Jackson did do several low budget slasher/zombie type films... He also did get NZ funds to finish one of his films early on. This sort of thing is quite lacking (sure there are some types of grants, perhaps even government grants...) but in the US getting grants for films is rare, and these days, especially for 'dangerous' topics... like "KIssed"(1996) which get some press at Tronto and Sundance...

 

Also the other 'lottery winner' of Rodriguez, he was shooting "Mariachi" for Mexican TV distribution, and again equivalent to the lottery winner, got noticed and the film pickedup... and after a million or so of reposting... distributed.

 

Newfoundland... where's that... I know of Vinland...

Edited April 1, 2016 by John E Clark

[Phil Rhodes]

Again, one of the things that's become almost meaninglessly low-cost these days is post.

 

If you are halfway competent, you can shoot stuff to ProRes, cut it, grade it, mix it and output it in formats to satisfy at least some distributors and it costs nothing more than a fairly modest desktop PC, a fairly small amount of software, and your time. Yes, if you have a lot of complex requirements - if they want many subtitles, audio tracks, and so on - it may cost quite a lot of your time, but there need be little or no actual expenditure on this beyond things like the subtitle translations, and often the external QC assessor.

 

People will get concerned about grading and mixing. It can be done on a reasonable computer monitor and a reasonable home cinema system, assuming you know roughly what you're doing. Is it ideal? Do I recommend it? No, of course not, but can you do it this way and achieve a distributable product? Yes, absolutely you can. It's not a great idea - particularly, it's unusual to find people who can do both the grade and the mix and often one or the other is sent out, often to a low-cost provider working from the back bedroom. But the idea that this needs, in straightforward cases, to be a five-figure expenditure is not accurate. I know this because I have been directly involved in doing it and I don't think my knowledge and experience is that unusual.

 

But, again, you do have to know roughly what you're doing.

 

P

[Guest]

I agree entirely Phil, I have cut four feature films on my laptop in my basement. The last two were quite amazing, output one giant pro res file, about 180 GB, and hand that off to the post house with the EDL. Done.

 

I still use a pro post house for finishing and final colour and sound. But you can certainly put a Rec709 LUT on the 444 raw and do a pretty good mix in FCP and you have a piece more than good enough to show anyone.

 

In fact I would say to a first time indie filmmaker working with his own funds, do not finish the movie at a post house when you can show it to buyers in a pretty good, "as is" state. If the movie never sells, you didn't waste more money on a useless project. If you do find some traction, then it would be worth doing the final finishing work.

 

Of course I know of so many first time indie filmmakers who suddenly discover that they need to spend $8000.00 on an E&O policy before they can sign a deal with anyone. And most of these deals these days are what's called "straight distribution" so the filmmaker never sees a dime as the distributor eats up all revenue to fund their costs.

 

Then there are the guys who want to do their own theatrical release, ok pony up $4000.00 for a DCP and $6000.00 to the MPAA for a rating certificate. Then poster money, then DCP drives, then ad money, then VPF, then.....

 

Pretty soon one sees why having a rich uncle is a real benefit in this business :)

 

R,