Just finished my first 35mm Feature film

[Guest]

You need an insider who talks with guys on a regular basis and I'm one of those. Plus, I have a great sales agent and if she likes the trailer, I'm sure she'd love to talk with you.

 

No offense Tyler, but that is quite a statement when you don't have a track record that I see in this area.

 

R,

[joshua gallegos]

We're going to make a trailer soon, so stay tuned.

 

I know it seems silly putting in three years of your life on a film financed by yourself and a friend using people who can't act.

 

But, you only live once. We did everything without compromise. Rightly or wrongly. At least I did it. Was like film school.

 

Plus point, it looks mint as you like. We hired Cooke S4's using My Arri-3.

 

Wanted to approach it Peter Jackson, Bad Taste style. Toil over something for years. And now we have something pretty demented and quite possibly un-sellable.

 

But, maybe not.

 

DCP is costing 500 quid. Not that much money, in the scheme of things. I don't want to do a private screening for family,friends, cast at the Prince Charles playing a MOV file off my laptop of some piece of poop 1080p export from FCPX..

 

There's nothing wrong with that, Lena Dunham used her own family in Tiny Furniture and they never acted in anything before. Let the film speak for itself, put it out there in film festivals and someone might just notice it.

[joshua gallegos]

I think "selling a film" should be the last thing on a filmmaker's mind, if the film has a unique story and great vision it will be found out no matter what. There's only a dozen of those movies out of the thousands and thousands that are made each year. Making any kind of film shouldn't feel like a waste of time, it takes great audacity to go out and do anything. A lot of great films have been made for under a million dollars like Sound of My Voice which Zal Batmanglij directed, Rachel Morrison shot the film with two Canon 7Ds, it's really the idea and the execution that counts. The film was picked up by Fox Searchlight once it played in various festivals. I guess my point is that just because you make a film, it doesn't mean that you will get anything back. Film doesn't owe us anything, so if someone's reason for making a film is purely for self-aggrandizement or monetary gain, they will most likely fail. Passion shows, and a film done will is a film made with passion and skill.

 

This is a trailer for 'Sound of My Voice' made for 300k by former AFI students - Zal Batmanglij, Rachel Morrison, and Brit Marling. It's great that originality is praised, we shouldn't become resentful because our own work wasn't recognized, because there are other filmmakers out there who are truly pouring their heart out.

 

Edited January 10, 2016 by joshua gallegos

[Guest]

I think "selling a film" should be the last thing on a filmmaker's mind,

 

Unfortunately many of us don't have that luxury, I have a house, two cars, two kids, vacations, etc. If I took this attitude then we'd all be living on the streets. Film is an art form, sure, however it's also a business.

 

How on earth will the crew even be paid minimum wage if one thinks, "selling a film" should be the last thing on a filmmaker's mind.

 

It might be nice to run off and make non-commercial "art films," still no idea how I'd live doing that?

 

R,

[Tyler Purcell]

No offense Tyler, but that is quite a statement when you don't have a track record that I see in this area.

Well, it still takes money to make a film. So even though I have the connections to sell properties, I don't have the connections to fund the properties I would sell. It's kind of a catch 22 and generally the opposite of what people normally do. I just happen to have a lot of buddies in Hollywood in the right places.

[Freya Black]

Vimeo lens test: the movie?

Phil that's really out of order.

There's no need to get nasty with people you don't agree with. It's true that Phil can have a negative outlook on things. He also often says things that are spot on even if he has a negative spin on them. I don't always agree with him as is obvious in this thread, but it's okay to disagree without getting mean.

 

If that was directed at Bill then it's even more mean because Bill is generally very supportive and nice and hasn't said anything to deserve that. For the record I think, tho I'm not sure that Bill is involved in experimental film where narrative features aren't really the thing.

 

I said before and I say it again I think it's a fantastic achievement to complete a feature and even nicer that it's on 35mm. We'll done! You did it and no-one can take that away from you. Maybe you need to take some time out to celebrate!

 

I'm looking forward to the trailer as I really liked a lot of stuff you were working on. :)

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

 

It might be nice to run off and make non-commercial "art films," still no idea how I'd live doing that?

 

R,

I think that people making art films often have another job. Sometimes they get work in academia.

 

There are lots of options for making different kind of films and financing them. One problem is people get all this stuff confused. If you are looking to make a commercial film then you need to think about marketing the film and genre and various other stuff. If you are making a more personal film then it might be best to forget all the fancy equipment and really keep all costs right down.

 

People seem to get caught up in a lot of stuff that doesn't matter that much.

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

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

 

P

THIS!!

 

It totally isn't the weather for camping. Also 3G is really crap and expensive.

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

Freya, of course Orson Welles was somebody before directing but he didn't have previous "film experience", he had directed plays and worked on radio but no "film", that's what I meant.

 

Yes but Orson Welles was massively successful in both theatre and directing radio plays. There is a lot of crossover skills there, especially in radio drama and he was very well known and respected already before he made films.

 

That BBC drama about Orson really is worth listening to. Definitely one of the better things from auntie.

Edited January 10, 2016 by Freya Black

[Freya Black]

On the not working for free thing. I think this makes a lot more sense than saying people shouldn't make films because it's something under your own control whereas trying to convince other people not to make films isn't and is a bit silly.

 

Freya

[Phil Rhodes]

bankers don't give a *bleep* about your art, they care about making money and getting their money back.

 

Difficult to object, really. That's why I've never done it.

 

Not that I have any objection to commercial cinema. That's the sort of thing I'd ideally like to be involved in making. It's just that there is no tradition here of cinema being a commercial product. Here's how the conversation would go:

 

Banker: Hi, Phil. I hear you're interested in producing a feature film. What are the chances of us getting our money back?

Me: None whatsoever. What, d'you think there's a market or something?

Banker: Ah.

 

You see the problem.

 

Well, actually, you wouldn't even get to that point, would you.

 

P

[Guest]

Probably not Phil, because unless your uncle is the VP of finance at the bank, well...... :)

 

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

That's sort of the point I've been making.

 

Someone, somewhere, knows someone. It can be a chance encounter, it can be drinkies by the pool, whatever, but someone knows someone.

[Phil Thompson]

Everyone knows someone unless they are born and thrown in a bin

[Phil Thompson]

Setting out to make a commercial film is a disgrace.

 

quote name="Freya Black" post="444751" timestamp="1452420382"]

 

I think that people making art films often have another job. Sometimes they get work in academia.

 

There are lots of options for making different kind of films and financing them. One problem is people get all this stuff confused. If you are looking to make a commercial film then you need to think about marketing the film and genre and various other stuff. If you are making a more personal film then it might be best to forget all the fancy equipment and really keep all costs right down.

 

People seem to get caught up in a lot of stuff that doesn't matter that much.

 

Freya

[Tyler Purcell]

Setting out to make a commercial film is a disgrace.

Umm, no not at all. It's a way to get recognized and once you HAVE recognition and a positive reputation, you can make anything you want!

 

People get this whole thing backwards, they think experimenting and making what they want early on is the right thing to do. Yet in reality, the best thing to do is make commercially viable products, even if they're short. Bang out a few short films a year, good quality one's that have a positive message and tell a good story. Have a very marketable feature script in your back pocket that's VERY low budget and find some low-end investment to make it happen based on the success of your short films and the quality of filmmaker you are.

 

Freya is 110% right and if you wish to be a filmmaker (which is a career, not a side thing) what he says is filmmaking 101, it's a business. It's not about the creativity really, in the long run filmmaking is a business.

[Freya Black]

 

 

Setting out to make a commercial film is a disgrace.

 

Why? Although I must admit it would be interesting if the big studios abandoned this idea and just let directors make anything they wanted! :)

 

I personally like the more indie cinema but I also quite like stuff like Roger Corman movies too!

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

Freya is 110% right and if you wish to be a filmmaker (which is a career, not a side thing) what he says is filmmaking 101, it's a business. It's not about the creativity really, in the long run filmmaking is a business.

 

Well I think you can be a filmmaker and not have a career of it.

I also think it's okay to make commercial films or non commercial films but it's essential to cut your cloth accordingly.

If you are making something non commercial than just be careful you won't damage your life in doing so.

Know what you want to achieve and get the balance right.

 

(Freya is a girls name BTW Tyler!)

[Guest]

(Freya is a girls name BTW Tyler!)

 

Yeah really eh, maybe Freya you can recruit one other girl for this forum and then there will be two of you. :D

 

R,

[joshua gallegos]

I think that people making art films often have another job. Sometimes they get work in academia.

 

There are lots of options for making different kind of films and financing them. One problem is people get all this stuff confused. If you are looking to make a commercial film then you need to think about marketing the film and genre and various other stuff. If you are making a more personal film then it might be best to forget all the fancy equipment and really keep all costs right down.

 

People seem to get caught up in a lot of stuff that doesn't matter that much.

 

Freya

What about Darren Aronofsky who made 'Pi' for 50k dollars, it was considered an odd little art film and it went on to win the Sundance grand prize. The only marketing he had were pamphlets of the movie and a trailer. Marketing a film for the masses would cost millions of dollars, so the best bet for any new filmmaker is to hope their film has a festival run and get noticed. A film is a film no matter what, there is no such thing as a "commercial" film, unless it's made by the Warner Brothers or Lionsgate. No one thought Juno or Beasts of the Southern Wild would exceed 100M at the box office, and certainly they weren't considered "commercial" films. The world has changed, anything is possible, it's all about having a unique story- something many filmmakers can't do, because they're caught up in some formula for success, which there is none. It's all a risk, no matter what you do.

Edited January 10, 2016 by joshua gallegos

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

the best thing to do is make commercially viable products, even if they're short. Bang out a few short films a year, good quality one's that have a positive message and tell a good story. Have a very marketable feature script in your back pocket that's VERY low budget and find some low-end investment to make it happen based on the success of your short films and the quality of filmmaker you are.

 

Please take this as my personal endorsement that this message should be printed on very large banners and flown proudly wherever short filmmakers gather in the UK.

 

P

[Guest]

Beasts of the Southern Wild would exceed 100M at the box office,

 

Waaaaaaa? I'm seeing a 12.7M domestic gross on this. Still damn impressive, but a long long way from 100M.

 

R,

[joshua gallegos]

Umm, no not at all. It's a way to get recognized and once you HAVE recognition and a positive reputation, you can make anything you want!

 

People get this whole thing backwards, they think experimenting and making what they want early on is the right thing to do. Yet in reality, the best thing to do is make commercially viable products, even if they're short. Bang out a few short films a year, good quality one's that have a positive message and tell a good story. Have a very marketable feature script in your back pocket that's VERY low budget and find some low-end investment to make it happen based on the success of your short films and the quality of filmmaker you are.

 

Freya is 110% right and if you wish to be a filmmaker (which is a career, not a side thing) what he says is filmmaking 101, it's a business. It's not about the creativity really, in the long run filmmaking is a business.

 

I can't help but wonder why anyone would even bother to pick up a camera to just try and make "commercial" films, whatever that means. Why not be honest to your own vision, and not care about what everyone else would want to see. I think that's why today there's a lot of insignificant films flooding the moviemaking landscape, if film was just a "business" then why not become a real business man, you certainly don't need a camera for that.

[Guest]

The world has changed, anything is possible, it's all about having a unique story- something many filmmakers can't do, because they're caught up in some formula for success, which there is none. It's all a risk, no matter what you do.

 

Quite right, but you can't run film as a business with this approach. There's always going to be another Paranormal Activity or Blair Witch coming down the pike. If this was a viable business option, you would think those smart people in Hollywood would make 250 $30, 000.00 films a year and hope one or two of them became huge hits.

 

R,

[Freya Black]

What about Darren Aronofsky who made 'Pi' for 50k dollars, it was considered an odd little art film and it went on to win the Sundance grand prize. The only marketing he had were pamphlets of the movie and a trailer. Marketing a film for the masses would cost millions of dollars, so the best bet for any new filmmaker is to hope their film has a festival run and get noticed. A film is a film no matter what, there is no such thing as a "commercial" film, unless it's made by the Warner Brothers or Lionsgate. No one thought Juno or Beasts of the Southern Wild would exceed 100M at the box office, and certainly they weren't considered "commercial" films. The world has changed, anything is possible, it's all about having a unique story- something many filmmakers can't do, because they're caught up in some formula for success, which there is none. It's all a risk, no matter what you do.

 

 

You aren't understanding what I mean. There are a fair few little films like Pi that have had some sort of success but there are also still people who go the Roger Corman route and make genre films for that market which is a different thing.

 

Sure there are plenty of people making films for the festival circuit.

 

Freya