Should you make a low-budget movie?

[Paddy]

In the last few weeks I've had several, sometimes heated discussions with people on both sides of the "should you make a low-budget movie" fence. Some people think it's impossible or unwise to make a movie for very little money while some people think spending any money (or time) on a local indie movie is pointless. Jim Brennan's CASA post ("So you think you're so different) is a must-read for both sides.

The one thing everyone seems to agree on is that it's probably unwise for anybody to spend money to make a bad movie. Yet, we continue to see low-budget movies made locally for as little as $2k to above $250k in the last few years that, well, frankly, aren't very good. The number of really good, truly local independent movies made in the last 2-3 years can probably be counted on one hand. Denver isn't alone in this regard. Los Angeles, while home to many of the greatest filmmakers in the world, also produces a ton of crap that fail both artistically and commercially.

In many ways, budgets make a big difference on what you can and can't do. But budget is probably the least important factor to making a good movie. The most important factor is obviously the script, but bad movies get made from good scripts all the time and in most cases it wasn't because the filmmakers didn't spend enough.

Much of the heated anti-low-budget movie sentiment always surfaces when I hold a "How-to Make a Low-Budget Movie" seminar down at the Bug Theatre. I teach it about three times a year. I recently had a guy who has never shot a feature-length movie tell me (well, he yelled at me) he wouldn't shoot a feature for less than $20K. He's apparently shoots stuff for a news station and thinks "shooting is shooting." Why would I pay somebody with no feature-length experience ANY money to make a movie that looks like a news segment because that's what I'd get. If I had $20k to shoot a movie, it certainly wouldn't go to THAT guy. And, besides, would his contribution in any way shape or form make getting back my $20k investment more likely or not? The answer is simple: I could get a much better job done by someone else for much less. Going with someone better and less expensive is a huge benefit both artistically and financially. A no-brainer.

Aside form artistic choices, the truly local indie filmmaker faces a lot of choices as to what kind of movie to make to maximize their return on their financial investment. Mark Grove and John Firestone over at Asgard Entertainment understand this better than anyone in town and have a business model worth emulating, especially as commercial success become more important in your career. Most great filmmakers, btw, made a really low-budget movie before they were big time because that's how most filmmakers start their careers. Very few (unless well-connected or well-funded) start off with a huge budget. Where are you? Beginner, emerging, established, or A-Lister?

So what if you're a writer and you have a story that doesn't have an obvious market or you don't want someone else to make it (assuming for a moment that someone would) and you don't have access to a lot of capital? Or how do you get people to invest in your project when you have never made a feature-length movie before? Would you invest in such a thing? If the answer is yes, please call me! If the answer is no, then you understand one of the many reasons people don't invest in independent movies. Do you let that stop you from making the movie you want to make?

My basic belief is this: If you think of yourself as writer, keep writing and pitching your stories to anyone and everyone who will listen. Someday someone MIGHT buy a script from you or you MIGHT get paid work on other people's projects (I get a lot of this kind of work). But if you call yourself a filmmaker, do whatever it takes to make films. Get it? Filmmakers make films. And they don't let other people decide for them if they 'get' to do that.

Making an artistically successful ultra low-budget movie can be done. It takes a lot of talent, a lot of time, and a lot of help from people who share your passion. Keeping your costs down INCREASES your chances for it to be a financial success, even if that means just getting your money back or getting other paid work because of it (I've gotten paid work because of my ultra low-budget movie Jimmy Said and it hasn't even been released yet!).

So anyway, the next seminar is tomorrow (October 16th from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.). It's at The Bug Theatre (3654 Navajo St., Denver 80211). Cost is $95. Come if you want. Or not.

p

[Lewis Leslie]

Great article! I couldn't agree more with your statement "if you call yourself a filmmaker, do whatever it takes to make films" That's exactly what we did with 'Killer Ink' didn't wait for "big money investors" to jump on or we would have been sitting on our tails until the end of time! Now, we have a great movie that's in post and getting a lot of buzz. I am working on a short film, and planning another feature next summer. Paid? Maybe not paid :) but at least I'm doing what I love and having the opportunity to continue to do it. Thanks to everyone who has had faith in me thus far, and helped on my projects!

[Mark Grove]

Thanks for the honorable mention Patrick. I agree that most the films made here in Denver are not well thought out. The budget aspect is really not the problem at all. The problem is bad planning, bad market research, bad equipment, bad (or less experienced) crew, and as you stated...bad script. However, I really feel that if you are going to spend a significant amount of money on something, it should be something that makes sense. Even if it's just 20k, that is a huge amount of money to throw away. Making a movie just for the sake of making a movie is just plain stupid. The problem is people get tired of waiting for someone else to do something and they think the answer is to do it themselves. Although I applaud the determination of these individuals, this is not usually the answer. What typically transpires is a quickly created script, a ragtag crew, very excited actors, unrealistic hype, a long and/or hard shoot, a mediorcre edit, a really fun screening at an after party, and then the harsh reality that there is no market for what they have made. But the actors are excited because it gets an imdb listing and plays at a few local venues to rave revues from other indie filmmakers who think its so amazing and can't understand why it can't get distribution. These filmamkers will continue to tell stories of the many distributors that want the project, yet for some reason never actually take it. Now I must add that some of these films actually do get distribution. But not the way you would think. There are many low end distributors that will take crap films no matter how unsellable and find a way to get them into the market. But the filmmaker rarely sees even one dollar. This is not success. You basically spent alot of money, wasted lots of other peoples time and energy...then gave your film away for free. The real unfortunate part is that these same filmmakers will become the biggest problem in their local industry. They will quickly become teachers and coaches to the newer filmmakers and actors as if their experience somehow makes them experts in the field. I suppose if the course is "How to fail at filmmaking like I did" then it would at least be an accurate description. The hard reality is that many people in the film industry are sheep. They are looking for the quick way to make their dreams a reality. It's not unlike watching late night TV and seeing infomercials on how to earn millions a year working only a few hours a week from the comfort of your home. The people that buy these programs are the real reason that the person who created the system is rich. There are no secrets to be learned here. Do market research, get a good script, get a professional crew, put whatever money is available on the screen, get a professional post team, and then roll the dice like everyone else. Thats pretty much it. You will notice that I did not say get 20k, 250k, or 1 million dollars to complete this process...you have to make due with whatever you have. If you can get all of the above requirements with $500 and coupons for free Subway sandwiches...then more power to you. But if you sacrifice on the fundamental ingredients, then you categorize yourself as a moron and you actually deserve to lose your money.

To be clear, I am not against paying for training for something. I just want to be sure the information I am paying for is solid and delivered by someone who walks the walk. Just remember the world is filled with mediocre filmmakers...do not intend to add to their numbers.

[Mark Grove]

Patrick, I hope your class went well. Drop me a line sometime. I'd love to hear the concepts your participants have for their films.

[Sara London]

You're totally right! I'm a student, and I have to make films on like, a super-duper low budget. I don't have the money to pay my actors, I have to use my connections and friends rather than using professional editors or camera guys, blah blah blah. Love the article, hope to read more (:

[Haylar Garcia]

You should make a low budget movie only IF you want you pursue your passion for art, or get something out of your system, or want to sharpen your chops.

BUT you should set some rules for yourself.

1. if it sucks ass when you're done, you should be ready and able to pull back the momentum and not show it to anyone, as it will only hurt you in the long run.

2. Never make a low budget film with the intent of "Selling" it, cause that is a nearly non-existent model
(lotto tickets are cheaper with about the same odds and a higher return.)

3. DO NOT base your potential for financial success on wishful thinking, ie. my film will rip through the festivals and then Hollywood will buy it, then I'll be in the clique.

4. If you must make a low budget film, know ahead of time that the money will evaporate NEVER TO BE SEEN AGAIN, get financial success out of your mind and make something awesome, original and inventive so at least your efforts can be used as a calling card, make a film that will make others want to know who you are. Never make a film that has to compete with a thousand other low-budget genre films for sketchy piss-ant distribution slots to the mighty nowhere.

See your goal for the film, focus on it, be truthful without ego about it, then and only then pull the trigger.

[Mark Grove]

Patrick Sheridan just stopped by my studio because he received lots of phone calls from people thinking I was targeting him specifically with the comments in my previous post. The answer is no, I wasn't. The comments were general in nature. What Haylar has written below is my exact point really. I think all these wanabe teachers who run classes give the facade that they will teach people how to be financially successful at filmmaking. If you were up front with the rules that Haylar posted, then it would be much different. But why would someone want to take a class entitled "How to throw away money". Making money in the film business is very difficult. My partner Jon Firestone and I are among the lucky ones who have built a successful studio. Over the past couple years we have built our own project, Gathering of Heroes, but have also shot and edited four other features, done national commercials for companies like Teva and Colombia skiwear, and television shows such as locally produced Distaster House for the DIY network and Superhuman for the History channel.

But these last few years do not make up the bulk of our knowledge and expertise. I started in the business in 1989 and have been involved with too many productions to count. I've choreographed for Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Highlander, been a historical consultant and The Hunted and Conquest, stunt and special effects coordinated dozens of shows, wrote and sold my first screenplay in 1994 for 20k, written a ten other projects, Directed three films that have all been distributed, produced multiple films that have been distributed, and I work as a sales agent at the film markets where the buyers actually buy the films. And this is just a quick list.

Jon Firestone is the best DP in the Mid West in my opinion. He is not only a master RED camera operator and technician, he is also equally if not more skilled in lighting and so technologically gifted to such an extent that I think he can actually speak to computers. Add all of this to his expert level skills as a compositor, animator, and 3D Graphics you pretty much have a one man army.

In the end we have walked the walk. I hope those of you concerned about my comments can see past them and understand that it is just painful to watch the blind leading the blind. Actors calling themselves producers, acting classes charging people to be in productions, and yes, indie filmmakers who teach classes on how to make it in the business when they themselves haven't. It's just a reality check.

You might take all these comments as me saying that I don't respect the local industry...but that isn't true. I just think we need to be real.

Haylar Garcia is one of the people I consider real because he tells it like it is. No fluff, no dreams of grandeur. And, like Jon and I, he knows that success comes at a cost. There are no easy answers and making money even when you have the skills and knowledge is difficult.

So ask yourself, do you want the truth or some opinionated drivel from teachers and coaches who have never actually accomplished anything or merit? I say this because I do love the Colorado industry, not because I hate it.

[Christopher Vickers]

If you checked out the Scream 2010 Awards on Spike, the movie Paranormal Activity was a low-budget Indie. And it ripped through the box office like a machine gun at a firing range.

They had a meager budget of $15,000.

[Ken Hendricks]

Bring on the TRUTH, Mark! There's too much smoke blowing in Colorado.

[Christopher Vickers]

Maybe I do need a shot of that, Mr. Hendricks.

[Haylar Garcia]

Paranormal Activity may well be the best example of why NOT to make an indie low budget.
Do some research on how much the filmmakers were paid for it, and how long it sat around at dream works before they decided to put it out.

It ripped through the box office making millions, but the film's success came from millions in marketing from a studio. The promo was meticulously constructed to look homemade/grass roots as though the filmmakers still had something to do with it (just like blair witch).

There is always the chance that you might be an as paranormal activity was, but think about it blair witch was released in 1999. paranormal activity was made in 2007 and released in 2009 that's ten years between bottle lightning. As a filmmaker, I need better odds than that. That is why i stick to screenplays now, you can generate a wider variety of original ideas with almost No investment. overall it's a better gamble with less creative limitations.