Against The Wild II: Launch Day!

[Matthew W. Phillips]

Matthew,

 

Maybe you should give it some appeal so it might have a chance at distribution.

Landon, First off, I am not in total agreement with everything Phil said. My issue is less about Richard NOW then it is about Richard getting here. I realize that having four features under your belt that have made money puts you in a great position to entice the right people. He also has contacts at this point he can draw upon. But I am more curious about how he got here. I know Dark Reprieve was the door opener but that was what I never heard much about. I posted often during that time and there was much said about the success but not much about how it was done.

 

I agree that he owes me, or anyone on this board, nothing. No problem. But that is why people are unlikely to think that there isnt more to the story. There are graduates of prestigious film schools that still get nowhere. What he did truly is amazing and not nearly as common as most want to hope.

 

As far as my feature, I am not making it to "Get distribution." I am making it because I have something to say and this is my way to say it. I am not disparaging others who feel differently but, to me, film is my outlet. I do not wish to conform my outlet for commercial profitability. If I did, I would feel that is defeats the purpose of why I wanted to do this in the first place.

[Freya Black]

This is a crazy conversation.

Dark Reprieve was a direct to DVD release.

It's a lot easier to get a direct to DVD release than a full theatrical release and interest from Canal + etc.

All this talk of secrets is nonsense.

You can see a clear progression with the Releases Richard has had and with his career in general.

I'm not saying it's easy to get a direct to DVD release but it's a lot easier than for theatrical distribution by a mile and I know people who have done it without third parties.

 

A major aspect to getting even direct to dvd distribution is having thought about the end goal before shooting.

Which brings us to the other strange thing in this thread. People talking about features as if they are all these interchangeable lumps for which there is an equal market for.

 

Another important aspect is having good sales and negotiating and social skills.

Actually I find those skills are often the most important in life generally.

 

What kind of magic secret is it that people here are expecting?

I'm sure there are loads of things that Richard hasn't told us all about but this idea that there is a magic secret that will make some random indie feature sell is weird. If there was such a secret it would be having a really good trailer and poster (and key art generally).

 

Freya

[Matthew W. Phillips]

This is a crazy conversation.

Dark Reprieve was a direct to DVD release.

It's a lot easier to get a direct to DVD release than a full theatrical release and interest from Canal + etc.

 

I mean, it is crazy. Here is a way anyone can have BOTH if they want:

 

1) open a distribution house

2) buy out cinemas and "four-wall" your theatrical run.

 

The problems come in when you actually want others to put up money and/or resources.

[Landon D. Parks]

But I am more curious about how he got here. I know Dark Reprieve was the door opener but that was what I never heard much about. I posted often during that time and there was much said about the success but not much about how it was done.

 

I invite you to listen to this podcast interview with Richard, where he goes it descent detail how it was made and released: http://www.crafttruck.com/through-the-lens-podcast/business-of-film-7-with-richard-boddington-indie-producer/

 

 

 

But that is why people are unlikely to think that there isnt more to the story. There are graduates of prestigious film schools that still get nowhere. What he did truly is amazing and not nearly as common as most want to hope.

 

There are graduates of business schools that end up flipping burgers at McDonalds too. Film school is not any guarantee of success, especially as a producer or director. Warner Bros. is not harking film school grads to make movies for them. While it might well be that film school is great for below the line and some above the line crew positions - that is mainly due to the networking ability you have with other students after school - not anything the school gives you directly. Unless Spielberg is heading to Full Sail, your odds of networking with other producers are pretty slim - at least producers who are in a better position than you might be.

 

I don't think Richard has ever said it was common. Even if he did, anyone who thinks its common needs to re-think it. The facts speak for themselves in both directions: While it's certainly not impossible to make a movie and get it sold, it's also not very easy - and the odds are stacked against you unless you have just the right amount of talent, luck, and business sense - and your product is hitting the sales floor at the right time and in the same place as the best buyer. It's not easy, and any filmmaker who thinks it is should not be making movies for profit.

 

 

As far as my feature, I am not making it to "Get distribution." I am making it because I have something to say and this is my way to say it. I am not disparaging others who feel differently but, to me, film is my outlet. I do not wish to conform my outlet for commercial profitability. If I did, I would feel that is defeats the purpose of why I wanted to do this in the first place.

 

I'm certainly not one to tell you how to make your film. It seems to me though that you might want to try and make it appeal to someone. Why make a movie if no one wants to watch it? Artistic self-expression is great and all, but there are other - less expensive means to make that happen, like self publishing the story as a book.

 

I, personally, would never attempt anything more than a short without some interest from distributors (just a month ago I would have told you the exact opposite). I have been pretty lucky with my upcoming 220-minute, season 1 series - in that I was able to network and remain persistent in such a way that I actually secured a meeting with a distributor / web network - and not a small one - who has express interest in taking it on as an 'original' for their slate. if I can get a meeting with someone in LA who can call the shots, then why not anyone else? It wasn't really that hard, in fact. I just had a project that they like - a project that will appeal to their audiences and fill a gap in their programming. Researching and knowing WHO to contact is just as important as remaining persistent. Of course I don't have the deal yet, but I was able to get that meeting with them and get it out there - which again was not something super hard to do.

 

I'm not suggesting that every tom, dick, and harry with an idea for a movie start calling major players - that would be a huge mistake.

 

 

I mean, it is crazy. Here is a way anyone can have BOTH if they want:

 

1) open a distribution house

2) buy out cinemas and "four-wall" your theatrical run.

 

The problems come in when you actually want others to put up money and/or resources.

 

Well, it's important to note the difference between theatrical and dvd / home video markets as well. It's much easier if your goal is home video than theatrical. Richards first film did not go theatrical (at least to my knowledge). I don't see Richard, nor anyone else suggesting it's easy. Not me, not David, not Freya, no one. Really, I'd say your best shot if you're approaching a feature is to make one that will appeal to the direct to video market. Once you have that out there, you can use that as your calling card to get into bigger meetings.

 

The odds that anyone is going to be a first time filmmaker that makes a movie that gets distributed in wide release in cinema's is not that great. Not great at all, in fact. However, if you make a film that has commercial appeal, you CAN get direct to dvd distributors interested in with the right persistence. They are not off-putting and far away as one might think.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Guest]

I have done a number of interviews that are on the web. I've also answered about 100 emails over the years from other filmmakers who have asked questions mostly about distribution. They PM me off the site here.

 

It wouldn't really be fair to ask any independent film producer....put your rolodex on-line for us all to read. I started from zero anyway.

 

My level of success is nothing FYI compared to a guy like Gareth Edwards, now there's a success story! WOW!!

 

R,

[David Mullen ASC]

Common sense tells you that independent movies have more than a "zero" chance of distribution, otherwise there would never be any independent films on the market, they'd only exist in film festivals or just dumped onto the Internet by the filmmaker.

 

Sure, the odds are poor, and get poorer the smaller the budget and the less marketable the film is for whatever reason (genre, cast, etc.) And some films are just too bad on many levels to find distribution. But I don't see why it seems so impossible for Richard to have made a horror film and find a home video distributor -- he's not the only one.

 

While it isn't helpful to sugarcoat the problem for independents to make and distribute their films -- it's a huge problem -- to tell people that there is no way they can make a film and get it distributed, that their chances are zero, is simply not accurate. I think the odds are more against them seeing any return on their investment or even recouping their costs, that's a bigger hurdle than just making the movie or finding some company willing to put it on the market somewhere, if only on a streaming service.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

 

The odds that anyone is going to be a first time filmmaker that makes a movie that gets distributed in wide release in cinema's is not that great. Not great at all, in fact. However, if you make a film that has commercial appeal, you CAN get direct to dvd distributors interested in with the right persistence. They are not off-putting and far away as one might think.

I think the elephant in the room that I, and maybe Phil (not sure how he feels honestly), is that Dark Reprieve did not have what is normally considered commercial appeal. It was panned by critics and it didnt have the wide appeal that his current family themed films do. I am not disparaging him and saying that it was a "bad" film because that is subjective. As a purchaser of the film, I was not particularly happy with it and I did not even really understand what was going on. I am not saying that as a member here but as a paying customer. If "Against the Wild" was his first film then there is little doubt how he landed a direct to dvd or even limited theatrical release.

[David Mullen ASC]

As for finding capital from an investor, well, that's a mystery to me, not being a business person, but clearly some people find ways.

[Freya Black]

I would bet my whole net worth (which isnt much these days) that Richard's rise is more than just hard work and a "can do" attitude.

 

Who was saying that? and define "hard work" as that could encompass almost anything.

 

Richards rise is all kinds of stuff including a lot of paper work but what does that have to do with anything?

Why are people conflating everything together like this?

 

It's talking like there is some magic word you say, some incredible secret that will not only get you an initial DVD release but also this whole "rise" over multiple releases. You just keep saying that magic word.

 

If there was such a secret that held across everything it would again be having great sales and negotiating skills.

 

There is a clear progression in what Richard has done, why are people here talking like it is all the same thing?

Edited May 13, 2016 by Freya Black

[Freya Black]

While it isn't helpful to sugarcoat the problem for independents to make and distribute their films -- it's a huge problem -- to tell people that there is no way they can make a film and get it distributed, that their chances are zero, is simply not accurate. I think the odds are more against them seeing any return on their investment or even recouping their costs, that's a bigger hurdle than just making the movie or finding some company willing to put it on the market somewhere, if only on a streaming service.

 

THIS!

[David Mullen ASC]

Jeez, Matthew.

[Guest]

Richards first film did not go theatrical (at least to my knowledge).

 

Actually Landon I released that movie into four theatres in Ontario. The press I got was off the charts, full page write ups in two papers The Kitchener Record and the Barrie Examiner. Actually front page on the Barrie Examiner. I should scan these for people to see as everything seems to need to be proved these days. How did I do it? Simple, you pick up the phone and you call the events desk at the papers in question, hey I'm Richard Boddington and I am releasing a movie in your city, want to do a story on me? The answer was, yes, yes we do.

 

Unfortunately stories in the Barrie Examiner and the Kitchener Record don't get you deals at Paramount :)

 

R,

[Matthew W. Phillips]

Jeez, Matthew.

I am sorry. I knew that post would sound bad. I did not intend it to.

[David Mullen ASC]

If we really just want to talk business here, with horror movies, there are distributors and customers who just buy them based on the cover art or the concept.

[Landon D. Parks]

 

Actually Landon I released that movie into four theatres in Ontario.

 

My bad - didn't know that.

 

How did I do it? Simple, you pick up the phone and you call the events desk at the papers in question, hey I'm Richard Boddington and I am releasing a movie in your city, want to do a story on me? The answer was, yes, yes we do.

 

I can attest to this. Getting press really is not that hard. You just have to be persistent and reach the right person. During my 3 years running a theatre company, I was featured in over 3 magazine articles (one is on my profile page here), and countless local news paper write-ups. All I did was contact the papers and magazines and pitched them something that might be of interest to their readers.

 

 

[Matthew W. Phillips]

If we really just want to talk business here, with horror movies, there are distributors and customers who just buy them based on the cover art or the concept.

Fair enough David. But perhaps the more interesting question is how one goes from getting a break in one genre and being able to make the switch to the exact opposite? I mean, Richard has done more than one remarkable thing...his whole story is incredible actually.

[Guest]

Actually Matthew I will have to disagree with you, there were some critics that liked Dark Reprieve, there are links. Do I show that movie off as my best work? No.

 

Main thing it did Matthew...it stopped people from saying, but Richard, you've never made a feature film. They could hate it all they want, they could not disprove its existence.

 

BTW, I have two new projects hot on the boiler plate...so more coming! :)

 

R,

[Landon D. Parks]

If we really just want to talk business here, with horror movies, there are distributors and customers who just buy them based on the cover art or the concept.

 

Which I think Richard said in that podcast was the main reason Dark Reprieve got picked up... Cover art, was it not, Richard?

[Matthew W. Phillips]

... I think the odds are more against them seeing any return on their investment or even recouping their costs, that's a bigger hurdle than just making the movie or finding some company willing to put it on the market somewhere, if only on a streaming service.

I recall Richard saying around that time that he was picking out a Ferrari...black or red...maybe he would get both?

[Freya Black]

I think the elephant in the room that I, and maybe Phil (not sure how he feels honestly), is that Dark Reprieve did not have what is normally considered commercial appeal. It was panned by critics and it didnt have the wide appeal that his current family themed films do. I am not disparaging him and saying that it was a "bad" film because that is subjective. As a purchaser of the film, I was not particularly happy with it and I did not even really understand what was going on. I am not saying that as a member here but as a paying customer. If "Against the Wild" was his first film then there is little doubt how he landed a direct to dvd or even limited theatrical release.

 

Definitely not what Phil is saying.

 

I don't know where to start with this.

It seems to come out of that thing where people don't understand why there are B-Movies.

Dark Reprieve was obviously aimed at a particular market and not a mass audience.

 

Against the Wild was also aimed at quite a specific audience.

 

This is one of the things I keep saying about this thread that people keep talking about indie features like they are this thing you sell like butter or maybe some kind of material that you buy by the metre and it's all the same.

 

"but it's the very best butter!"

 

Freya

[Matthew W. Phillips]

 

Definitely not what Phil is saying.

 

I don't know where to start with this.

It seems to come out of that thing where people don't understand why there are B-Movies.

Dark Reprieve was obviously aimed at a particular market and not a mass audience.

 

Against the Wild was also aimed at quite a specific audience.

 

This is one of the things I keep saying about this thread that people keep talking about indie features like they are this thing you sell like butter or maybe some kind of material that you buy by the metre and it's all the same.

 

"but it's the very best butter!"

 

Freya

Very well. Then if there is a market for all of these different types of films then why do some get picked up and others dont? Since obviously commercial viability isnt the only thing at play (if it even is at play at all.)

[Freya Black]

I recall Richard saying around that time that he was picking out a Ferrari...black or red...maybe he would get both?

 

I understand that Richard is at least partly British I'm afraid.

[Guest]

I recall Richard saying around that time that he was picking out a Ferrari...black or red...maybe he would get both?

 

Uh, you do know that is my sense of humour right? What you missed was the intense sarcasm, the very idea that an indie filmmaker would make enough money to buy a ferrari, ha ha, get it? Maybe not?

 

R,

[Freya Black]

Very well. Then if there is a market for all of these different types of films then why do some get picked up and others dont? Since obviously commercial viability isnt the only thing at play (if it even is at play at all.)

 

I didn't say there was a market for all the different kind of films.

I'm saying the exact opposite.

 

Also commercial viability is obviously very much at play. You just have weird ideas about that as I already said.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

 

Uh, you do know that is my sense of humour right? What you missed was the intense sarcasm, the very idea that an indie filmmaker would make enough money to buy a ferrari, ha ha, get it? Maybe not?

 

R,

Richard, tone does not come out over the internet without emoticons. And the context which you said it, at the time, sounded like you were on the defensive so it made sense that you actually meant this.