Stop wasting time & first feature film

[Michael LaVoie]

There's a UK based company now that offers digital renting similar to Google Play or an I-tunes store but with a Netflix style UI. The main selling point is they have all of the "extras" that are on the bluray disks and DVD's. https://www.wearecolony.com

 

I wish Netflix had thought of this. Would have been a great addition to their site. Along with different audio to hear commentary tracks. Is anyone using Colony?

[Guest]

Where I'm from, feature films simply cannot be distributed, regardless of their quality. Put it online and at least people watch it.

 

P

 

 

I suppose outside of a commercial distribution contract you could do that. Obviously at that stage you're saying the revenue will be zero.

 

I do know of a number of British distributors that can pay advances up front for low budget features, especially strong genre pictures. I've had good success getting my work into the market in the UK. My last movie was sold to SKY movies and Channel 5. And I'm not shooting with large budgets by movie standards. Getting those spots when you're up against the Hollywood avalanche is very tough, but, I've proven it can be done.

 

R,

[Tyler Purcell]

You realize you'll be violating the very the distribution agreements that you'll be signing to get your film into proper commercial distribution to monetize it?

If you re-read, you'll notice I said "own the rights" which means, I would be the distributor. If you "sell" your asset to a distributor, you have no rights.

[Phil Rhodes]

I've proven it can be done.

 

I think the point is that you've proven it can be done by you, which is importantly different to proving it can be done in general. What you have done is so microscopically rare that I wouldn't expect more than a handful of people a year to do it, worldwide, so it's very important that we don't promote this as an achievable career path for everyone.

 

The revenue from most of the filmmaking that is actually done in the world is zero, sadly. This is why I enjoin people, well, it's sad, but not to make films. You're not going to be noticed and you're not going to sell it, so it becomes a question of why bother*.

 

P

 

* Edit - There's a really good answer to this question, which runs along the lines of "the stories in my head drive me mad if I don't," but that's the response of an inevitably-starving artist, not a businessman. I don't get the impression the Boddington brain has this problem.

[Guest]

If you re-read, you'll notice I said "own the rights" which means, I would be the distributor. If you "sell" your asset to a distributor, you have no rights.

 

 

No Tyler, you always retain the "copyright." What you sell to the distributor is the distribution rights, not the copyright. There is a huge difference.

 

Now if you do 100% self distribute, that's fine, but getting one movie into major retail like Walmart without a distributor that services Walmart would be quite impossible. So it means your movie will not see the light of day in any mainstream commercial venues, VOD platforms, retail, iTunes, etc etc.

 

R,

[Guest]

 

I think the point is that you've proven it can be done by you, which is importantly different to proving it can be done in general. What you have done is so microscopically rare that I wouldn't expect more than a handful of people a year to do it, worldwide, so it's very important that we don't promote this as an achievable career path for everyone.

 

The revenue from most of the filmmaking that is actually done in the world is zero, sadly. This is why I enjoin people, well, it's sad, but not to make films. You're not going to be noticed and you're not going to sell it, so it becomes a question of why bother*.

 

P

 

* Edit - There's a really good answer to this question, which runs along the lines of "the stories in my head drive me mad if I don't," but that's the response of an inevitably-starving artist, not a businessman. I don't get the impression the Boddington brain has this problem.

 

Well as always Phil, it's hard to decipher if you're being critical of me, or, praising me? It can be interpreted either way. :D

 

R,

[Tyler Purcell]

Quite right Phil. I'm kind of on the fence about the whole feature film thing. Part of me says it's stupid, like if you're a newbie with no connections, you'll fail no matter what. The other part of me says, if you're already in the industry, if you're already busy working around people who could easily help you put something together, then why not TRY.

 

Humans are naturally storytellers. We WANT to tell stories and likewise, we want people to listen. The problem is, humans are also very visual-minded and what they have in their head, sometimes is difficult to put onto a visual medium, requiring all sorts of expensive tools and people. Plus, just because you CAN put your vision into a visual medium, doesn't mean anyone else wants to watch it. I struggle with that all the time when writing, I'll get a few treatments done of a story and realize, what the F.... nobody is going to watch this but me! LOL :)

 

So if you have a story that IS worth telling, why not break it down in to bite sized chunks that are much easier to digest as a newbie filmmaker and simply make them on your spare time. If they're too complex, then maybe your vision needs to be toned back a bit to fall in line with something you CAN achieve. This is why I suggested much earlier, to have several scripts, one of which is simpler to make, so at least you can make SOMETHING. Those bite sized chunks you can give away, show people you've got the skills to make stuff and maybe over time you garnish work from your efforts, which eventually leads you to the right people and things start happening.

 

I do think there is money to be had in the world of feature filmmaking, even for "Indy" filmmakers. It's just, you can't be living in some squat somewhere in the middle of nowhere. You've gotta be in NYC or LA, you've gotta spend years in the industry, getting to know people and them getting to TRUST you. A lot of being successful is EARNED TRUST and your connections that lead you down the right path. People just expect others to join their bandwagon on FAITH and the industry has better thing to do then waste it's time with that.

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

your movie will not see the light of day in any mainstream commercial venues, VOD platforms, retail, iTunes, etc etc.

 

For the benefit of wannabe filmmakers who are probably following this thread, notebooks in hand, the above statement, at least, is true in effectively all cases.

[Guest]

It's just, you can't be living in some squat somewhere in the middle of nowhere.

 

 

I'm writing this to you from the middle of nowhere. ;)

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

then why not TRY.

 

I always try to avoid asking rhetorical questions when there are awkward answers.

 

Why not try? Because failure is almost inevitable and it's incredibly expensive and time-consuming, and will sap your efforts until there are none left for more useful work. That's why.

 

P

[Tyler Purcell]

Why not try? Because failure is almost inevitable and it's incredibly expensive and time-consuming, and will sap your efforts until there are none left for more useful work. That's why.

Failure is life tho... I mean, if you have a family and mortgage, this industry may not be the right one for you to begin with. Those of us who are lucky enough to be single and not a lot of overhead, we can focus more on creative works like a potential feature. Honestly, I have the resources to make a feature right now. If I had a script I loved in my hand that was fully developed, I could be in production this summer easily. The problem is, I'm just not happy with what I've written YET. I spent the latter half of 2015 and most of 2016 developing two scrips that I simply don't like. So I dropped them and started from scratch late last year and here I am a few months later with a whole new idea that I love. Maybe when the script is done I'll hate it, but for the time being, I'm completely infatuated with this new story. It's got some awesome legs and it's a semi-taboo subject that I've never seen anyone make a movie about. So I'm exploring some new ground which is always fun. I also have my short web series that I want to produce, so there is always something on the stove smoking.

 

Ya know, I've had jobs for most of my life and the freedom of working freelance and being involved in the industry at the level I'm currently at, has been great. It takes a lot of skill and dedication to be here. I could be living in Boston where I'm from and not be "in" the industry at all. I've always wanted to work in the industry and here I am, living 2500 miles away from my family and friends, is hard. I will succeed (like many others) through sheer perseverance and when I have successfully written and directed a narrative feature that's in the theater, I may simply stop and do something else. I think like may others, that's my goal and I will pretty much die trying.

[Guest]

I have the resources to make a feature right now.

 

 

Well Tyler, talk is cheap, internet posts….even cheaper. If you're going to do it, just do it.

 

It will at the very least be an excellent opportunity to test your many theories.

 

R,

[Justin Hayward]

The revenue from most of the filmmaking that is actually done in the world is zero, sadly. This is why I enjoin people, well, it's sad, but not to make films. You're not going to be noticed and you're not going to sell it, so it becomes a question of why bother*.

* Edit - There's a really good answer to this question, which runs along the lines of "the stories in my head drive me mad if I don't," but that's the response of an inevitably-starving artist, not a businessman. I don't get the impression the Boddington brain has this problem

Why not try? Because failure is almost inevitable and it's incredibly expensive and time-consuming, and will sap your efforts until there are none left for more useful work. That's why.

.

I've talked two or three people out of getting into this. If you don't wind up doing what you intended, you're stuck in a totally unpredictable, backbreaking job with insane hours where you leave your house in the dark, come home in the dark and could go for months without getting paid. I would much prefer driving a UPS truck where you have good benefits, you get good exercise, and you have weekends off to quench your creative thirst by making little short films with your friends along with the occasional 18 holes thrown in. I would not be ungrateful for that life. As I shouldn't.

 

Point is, I mostly agree with Phil without being so suicidal about it.

[Phil Rhodes]

Personally I think it'd be a very good thing if we could somehow arrange for there to be a much better market for web series, things of five or ten minutes in batches of a few episodes.

 

The required resources aren't so extreme - it would give people an outlet so they aren't completely wasting their time, and it would save people having to find seven figures for some almost-inevitably-doomed project.

 

Kickstarter has not liberated as much of this as I'd hoped, possibly due to catastrophic oversubscription of complete bilge.

 

P

[Tyler Purcell]

Well Tyler, talk is cheap, internet posts….even cheaper. If you're going to do it, just do it.

Fo' Sho!

 

It will at the very least be an excellent opportunity to test your many theories.

Some of them, but the project I'm writing now, is something that COULD be crowd funded very easily because it already has a built-in audience. So for ME it may work, but for others who don't follow the "formula" it may NOT work.

 

I personally would rather find the money through one or two sources, then deal with crowd funding.

[Guest]

I personally would rather find the money through one or two sources, then deal with crowd funding.

 

 

Everyone would. But in the absence of gov't funding in the US, and no bankable sales advance or relationships with any bank. How would you finance even a $500, 000.00 budget?

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

I wouldn't.

 

If someone offered me money to make a feature film, without an agreement in place to distribute it, I'd tell them to spend it on the most qualified psychiatric help they could find.

[Tyler Purcell]

Everyone would. But in the absence of gov't funding in the US, and no bankable sales advance or relationships with any bank. How would you finance even a $500, 000.00 budget?

Ohh, 500k? HA! Yea, that's a tough market to be in. For indy's, you NEED to be in the SUB $250k market. The vast majority are made for under $150k and then fundraise another $50k or so for finishing, making the total amount under $250.

 

Also, you wouldn't borrow money from banks, you would have private people put in money for X% returns on receipts. Most of the time you can secure money on cast deal memo's. You also need a distributor who can sign off and say they'd take the movie. Doesn't need to be a financial agreement, just something really basic. A top producer also needs to be on-board pre-financial agreement being made. Deal memo's for your crew also helps, again this is all part of a well made business plan.

 

I'm talking about making stuff at the $250 - $350k budget range. If you go much over $350, the risk factor for investors goes through the roof and I fret their interest will wane. Crowd funding solves these problems, but you need to hire a full-time person to "produce" the crowd funding project, whilst you the filmmaker are focused on getting the movie prepared. I also don't think you can raise $250 - $350k via crowd funding without some huge pre-arranged donors. If you had $150k in the pot, that helps greatly.

 

The script I'm writing now could be made for $250k, but I'm budgeting more like $350k.

[Guest]

Paragraphs 1 and 2, aside.

 

350K? Ok so that means no recognizable talent, your advance from the US, if it is an incredibly good movie will be 50-75K. That would be the top of the market right now. If there even is an advance, which I doubt.

 

So let's think positive and give you 75K for the US rights, how will you make back the remaining 275K?

 

R,

[Tyler Purcell]

350K? Ok so that means no recognizable talent.

We just did a film with recognizable talent and we paid them a "day rate" because they liked the project. The documentary I did 3 years ago was stars from front to back and we paid them $150/day. They basically worked for free.

 

When you live blocks from the stars, anything is possible. If you write "bit rolls" for your A- cast, maybe a 2 - 3 day shoot situation, you can get people to show up IF there is a good producer on board. You budget $1200/day for a A- actor and $500/day for a B+ actor.

 

Anything over 5 days and/or A- actor being the "lead" and your screwed. Things get complicated very fast and actors will want distribution-crushing back end deals that can end a movie before it even begins. The key is to taylor your script for those bit rolls. This way you have "star power" on your poster, even if they're bit rolls. Again, you need ONE A- actor and ONE B+ actor in any project you do.

 

You can get A'sh talent for SAG schedule F rate of $64k, but it's more complicated then that. It actually costs around $72k to have a top cast member on set for the entire length of production. You don't NEED greater then A-, but I've heard of A+ actors, working for less then $64k, with complete back-end deals. If they like your script, if they want to help you out, they will come. For sure not something you can bank on, but it does happen.

 

your advance from the US, if it is an incredibly good movie will be 50-75K. That would be the top of the market right now. If there even is an advance, which I doubt.

Distribution advance? They don't exist for indy's. Earlier I said, you don't want a distributor to have any contract with you prior to the film being made. You want an "agreement" that the distributor will take your movie on IF it's made, but no more. The moment you sign advance agreements, prior to the film being made, you're screwed.

 

So let's think positive and give you 75K for the US rights, how will you make back the remaining 275K?

Nobody is getting money for their movie up front. What you get is a distributor willing to risk $100k or so on P&A and hope for the best. On a $350k movie, you will need to make back $500k in order to break even. This includes paying off investors percentages, paying off key crew back-ends (deferred pools) and paying off P&A/E&O costs.

 

$500k is a lot of money, but it's a lot easier to recoup. There are a dozen distribution methods available, each of which will whittle away at that number until it's gone. If your movie is a total, utter, gross failure, it will take years to get it all back, but it's doable. I can't imagine helming a multi-million dollar INDY movie, where the recoup is 3M or something like that. Making that back is very difficult and at that point, luck plays a MUCH bigger roll.

[Guest]

Distribution advance? They don't exist for indy's.

 

Well Tyler can you really say you know what you're talking about when I obviously get bankable distribution advances up front for my films. If I didn't I wouldn't be making movies. So no idea what you mean by, "they don't exist for indy's"

 

There's just so much in your post above that doesn't line up, sorry. A lot of misinformation frankly. Take this for example, "The documentary I did 3 years ago was stars from front to back and we paid them $150/day."

 

I looked over the Fuller Life, cast list, on which you are credited as editor and cinematographer. But it's a doc described as, "Friends and admirers of iconoclastic film director Sam Fuller read from his memoirs." So that really isn't the same as hiring all these people to star in a narrative movie, is it?

 

You say, "You budget $1200/day for a A- actor." An A-list actor is Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Tom Cruise, Leonardo DiCaprio, and one of these guys is going to come out and act in a super low budget movie for $1, 200.00/day? I really doubt it.

 

Problem is you outline this information as someone who has produced zero motion pictures, so I'm really not sure you're qualified to speak on the subject.

 

R,

[Tyler Purcell]

Well Tyler can you really say you know what you're talking about when I obviously get bankable distribution advances up front for my films. If I didn't I wouldn't be making movies. So no idea what you mean by, "they don't exist for indy's"

You forget Richard, I'm not talking about an award winning feature-film director with successes under their belt. This ENTIRE DISCUSSION is about someone making their first movie. Everything I'm talking about is "in context" with that, even if I don't mention it every time I write something.

 

Plus... you aren't making indy's Richard. If you're getting paid in advance by a distributor to make a movie, you've exited "indy" and moved on to another league. That's a positive thing, it means your successful enough to make a product and sell it, so bravo. Save the "indy" title for a bloke trying to make a feature with a crate of ramen noodles, fifty bux and an iPhone. :P

 

Problem is you outline this information as someone who has produced zero motion pictures, so I'm really not sure you're qualified to speak on the subject.

You're right, my IMDB is horrible because I don't track people down and force them to put my name on the movies I've consulted on. I have a problem with those things and ya know what, I completely acknowledge it. It's the reason I don't have a great demo reel, because I forget to ask for a finished product for the movies I've worked on and loose the contact info for the client. I've worked on dozens of features and short subjects that aren't even on IMDB for one reason or another. I started 20 years ago and was out of the industry for 10 years! So yea... the credit list kinda sucks and I apologize for that. Maybe someday I'll have to re-trace my steps back in Boston and track down the people I worked with to get copies and credit for my work. Until then... my IMDB and demo reel... well, it makes me look like an idiot. :(

[Guest]

Plus... you aren't making indy's Richard. If you're getting paid in advance by a distributor to make a movie, you've exited "indy" and moved on to another league.

 

 

Well technically any film made outside the major studios is an "indy" that's what I mean.

 

Anyhow, I hope it works out for you.

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

The concept of "independent moviemaking" varies wildly around the world.

 

When I use the term, I'm talking about this:

 

[Justin Hayward]

As opposed to Richard's shoots...