Just finished my first 35mm Feature film

[Phil Rhodes]

What I'm talking about there is the fact that banks won't lend to film producers.

 

They won't do that because there is no market for the product - it is not a business, because feature films cannot be sold here - and they're quite right to withhold funds on that basis.

 

What I especially do not want is for there to be lots and lots of production going on - which on the face of it would be lovely - but then for absolutely none of it ever to get distributed, and for the film industry to be seen even more as the pointless money black-hole it's seen as now.

 

Yes, that has the side-effect of ensuring that only people with connections can make films. So be it. There is no good alternative.

 

P

[Freya Black]

What I'm talking about there is the fact that banks won't lend to film producers.

 

They won't do that because there is no market for the product - it is not a business, because feature films cannot be sold here - and they're quite right to withhold funds on that basis.

 

What I especially do not want is for there to be lots and lots of production going on - which on the face of it would be lovely - but then for absolutely none of it ever to get distributed, and for the film industry to be seen even more as the pointless money black-hole it's seen as now.

 

Yes, that has the side-effect of ensuring that only people with connections can make films. So be it. There is no good alternative.

 

P

 

 

I don't get this. If you want to get in debt to the financial system you can just get a ton of credit cards out and make a feature film.

I don't think it's that sensible however.

I don't see how getting a bank loan = distribution either.

 

There has been a lot of money going into films in the form of tax relief lately. There were even those scams with the people who didnt bother making the films. I thought that was really silly given it's the UK. Talk about penny pinching. Just make the movies and get the tax money... anyway...

 

I think what you are saying is really odd, and it's quite common nonsense that I notice has become a bit of a common meme in the UK film world. It reminds me of this:

 

https://www.change.org/p/indie-filmmakers-stop-making-indie-films-update-we-failed

 

It's very funny but people really think like this in the UK a lot.

 

I take the opposite view. That it's okay for there to be a lot of films getting made but people in the UK need to accept that they are basically involved in the film making equivalent of am-dram. I think there is a place for that too and there is nothing wrong with it.

 

Freya

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

people in the UK need to accept that they are basically involved in the film making equivalent of am-dram

 

I tend to agree. There's perhaps more crossover than in theatre, but you're absolutely right. The difference is that most people who are in the local musical theatre group know what they're doing, and don't suffer delusions of grandeur.

 

For what it's worth, I agree to some extent with the idea behind that petition. There is no point in most of this stuff being made. None at all. We literally might as well not bother. It is an almost complete waste of time.

 

P

[Freya Black]

 

I tend to agree. There's perhaps more crossover than in theatre, but you're absolutely right. The difference is that most people who are in the local musical theatre group know what they're doing, and don't suffer delusions of grandeur.

 

For what it's worth, I agree to some extent with the idea behind that petition. There is no point in most of this stuff being made. None at all. We literally might as well not bother. It is an almost complete waste of time.

 

P

 

The point of the petition however is that it's really not going to make a difference either way.

A glut of movies that nobody sees isn't really that big of a deal.

If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody there to see it, does it make a sound?

 

Again it is people having an overblown idea of their own self importance.

 

I'm sure there are plenty of people in am-dram who have delusions off grandeur but you are right that it appears much worse in the UK movie scene. At least you don't see casting calls anymore that say "...and we are going to send it to... SUNDANCE!!!"

 

I don't think am-dram or other art practices are a complete waste of time. They can be theraputic and/or cathartic for the people involved. I think it would be great if there was a much wider diversity of feature films being made in fact.

 

Freya

Edited January 9, 2016 by Freya Black

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

A glut of movies that nobody sees isn't really that big of a deal.

 

Well, I guess. In a macro sense there may be some problem of genuine ability being buried beneath the pile of relentless, churning shod, but the problem isn't really ability anyway. The reason I think it's a real problem is that people frequently risk funds they can't afford to lose, or end up working for a long time for not much money. As I've said a thousand times I consider this abusive. Cast and crew all over the country are frequently asked to do all kinds of things for cheap or free, as you say, on the microscopically slim basis that one play at a minor film festival in some church hall somewhere is a positive outcome.

 

 

 

I don't think am-dram or other art practices are a complete waste of time.

 

Well, sure, for fun, great, do as you will. But that's not really what this thread is about, it's about someone who thinks the am-dram level of filmmaking that most people have access to in the UK is actually saleable - which, of course, it isn't.

 

The real shame is that this is the level the conversation has come to. We're reduced to sitting here having a chat about whether amateur filmmaking is OK or not. Because there's really nothing else to talk about. It's just crushing. It's awful.

 

P

[Justin Hayward]

a hell of a lot of work being done, no matter how awful it is. It's sad directly because of the work you put in. There is no point in most of this stuff being made. None at all. We literally might as well not bother. It is an almost complete waste of time.

 

Sounds like you really hate filmmaking. I was recently asked to direct a short movie for the Make a Wish foundation (which I'll post here shortly) and they asked me if I don't mind working for free. I said, make a movie for free? That's like asking a starving man whose favorite food is pizza if he would like a fresh pie and the man turning it down because they won't pay him to eat it.

 

But, yes, it was several months of work all in, and it was a blast!

[Phil Rhodes]

I love filmmaking. I also love living indoors and eating food.

 

You need to bear in mind that you come from a culture wherein filmmaking is at least in part a big business. I come from a culture where it is a fringe artform at best and more usually a waste of time. The economic outlook is nowhere near comparable.

 

P

[Bill DiPietra]

Sounds like you really hate filmmaking.

 

Having worked with Phil, I can tell you that is absolutely not true.

[Tyler Purcell]

Umm... if I shot stuff for random companies/people for free, I'd be living on the streets with no equipment.

The biggest problem we have in the film industry today is the fact strangers can get "free" help. Once you spoil them once, they will ALWAYS expect you to do it free again. This is why we have a craigslist generation of filmmakers. They know people are out there and are so desperate to make something, they'll do it for free.

 

Do you think Make a Wish Foundation asks's their CEO to work for free? They have employees, they pay rent, they have no problem blowing money on themselves, so they can absolutely blow money on you.

 

Which is the frustrating part... if NOBODY accepted that job for free, they'd be forced to pay someone. Now, how much they pay, that's a different story. Honestly, even if they paid $100/day, that would be SOMETHING and you'd be much happier getting something!

 

Even if I do projects for myself, I always work them around the possibility of getting paid. I never ask people to work for free anymore, that just doesn't happen.

[Bill DiPietra]

Which is the frustrating part... if NOBODY accepted that job for free, they'd be forced to pay someone.

 

Totally agree with you, Tyler.

[Phil Rhodes]

Without getting into specifics I don't think there's a problem with doing charity work, not at all.

 

There is a problem with endless freebies for people like to claim they're going somewhere.

[Justin Hayward]

To be clear, I'm not talking about commercials or something like it, I'm talking about movies. I directed a commercial a couple weeks ago, and trust me when I tell you, I got paid plenty. But I am in no position where producers are offering directing feature film jobs, so I'll take what I can get because I absolutely love making movies. I'm putting together a small passion project feature at the moment, and if the money comes together, I honestly don't expect any of it to end up in my pocket. But that certainly won't stop me from making the movie, because I LOVE MAKING MOVIES :D And no, I won't be asking anyone else to work for free. Just me.

 

And I don't really think you hate filmmaking, Phil. I was only responding to all the negativity toward it. I should have added a ;)

[Bill DiPietra]

Without getting into specifics I don't think there's a problem with doing charity work, not at all.

 

I never said I had any issues with charity work, either. I personally think it's great that Justin committed himself to something like that but I fully understand what Tyler is saying. Very often - regardless of the craft - when people basically volunteer to work for free, they are effectively becoming part of the problem. What I mean is that the clients will come to expect the "endless freebies," if not from the same person, then another because there is an endless pool of hungry candidates out there to choose from. But this will always be the case, so at the end of the day, the thinking becomes "Well, I'd like to do this. It's a noble cause and if I don't take it they'll just find someone else to do it for free who is probably not as good as me. So I'll do it."

 

Looking at it from a union worker's standpoint, I totally disagree with the practice of working for free. Looking at it realistically - provided you have the time and money to commit yourself to something you believe in - why not do it?

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

when people basically volunteer to work for free, they are effectively becoming part of the problem

 

Well, quite.

[David Mullen ASC]

There are always exceptions -- I've only done three or four short films for free (I think) since I graduated film school, but they were calculated risks done in order to meet new people or to help out an old friend in half the cases. And in the one case of doing it to meet people, it worked out well, I went on to shoot a few features with the producer and director that I met. But I wouldn't work for free for any sort of commercial project or to benefit a for-profit institution.

[Phil Thompson]

Some people should stick to creating Vimeo camera/lens test movies. Some people should grow some balls and self finance a 35mm feature. And if it fails. Who cares, because I will be on my death bed saying, I DID IT. I made my own 35mm feature film and did it exactly how i wanted too. I didn't cry on internet forums that i wasn;t supported by the industry and no body cares about me. waaaaa waaaaaaaaa waaaaa

[Justin Hayward]

provided you have the time and money to commit yourself to something you believe in - why not do it?

 

Especially if you really enjoy doing it. But, I guess that's where Phil saying, "making a movie is a waste of time since you can't sell it" is sort of like saying watching a movie is a waste of time, because you can make money watching it. Which isn't untrue. Just not a lot of fun.

[Justin Hayward]

Do you think Make a Wish Foundation asks's their CEO to work for free? T

 

It's funny, when I read this the first thing I thought was, "does Make a Wish have a CEO? Never really thought about that." But, this was a ten year old boy's wish to be a ninja superhero in a movie, not a commercial for the foundation.

[Bill DiPietra]

Some people should stick to creating Vimeo camera/lens test movies. Some people should grow some balls and self finance a 35mm feature. And if it fails. Who cares, because I will be on my death bed saying, I DID IT. I made my own 35mm feature film and did it exactly how i wanted too. I didn't cry on internet forums that i wasn;t supported by the industry and no body cares about me. waaaaa waaaaaaaaa waaaaa

 

Many of us here have/do finance our own films. And if you hope to have some success in this business, you need to be able to differentiate between what you call crying and people trying to give you some real-world advice. That's exactly what Richard and Phil have been trying to do, so show a little respect.

[Guest]

What I'm talking about there is the fact that banks won't lend to film producers.

 

Well, generally banks do not lend risk equity that is very true of all banks. National Bank Of Canada has a gap program for select producers, and the interest is very high, but fact is....they have that option.

 

It certainly took me a while to qualify for bank financing as a producer, but I didn't have an uncle who was a VP at the bank, and now they ask me....when is your next project Richard?

 

There are only two banks in Canada with film finance departments, the rest steer clear. There are a bunch in LA of course that are quite active. No idea which bank in the UK does this? I would be surprised if there wasn't even one UK bank with a film finance dept.

 

How to use a bank to finance a movie is a long and complex thread in its own right, but I've done it three times....so it can be done. Biggest problem I see is that too many "filmmakers" are kinda, how shall I say....counter culture types. They care passionately about their "art", and bankers don't give a *bleep* about your art, they care about making money and getting their money back.

 

R,

[Phil Thompson]

I was referring to crying Philip Rhodes Bill.

 

Phil sort it out yeah!!!!?

 

 

Many of us here have/do finance our own films. And if you hope to have some success in this business, you need to be able to differentiate between what you call crying and people trying to give you some real-world advice. That's exactly what Richard and Phil have been trying to do, so show a little respect.

[Bill DiPietra]

I was referring to crying Philip Rhodes Bill.

 

And my previous statement still stands.

[Phil Thompson]

?

[Phil Thompson]

 

 

Oh, this sounds like it could go in so many different directions...[/quote

 

What's the name of your last 35mm feature btw?

[Phil Thompson]

Vimeo lens test: the movie?