The Bain of Indie Filmmaking

[jaxshooter]

Besides lack of money,what I've run across over the last ten years on the independent filmmaking scene are alot of wannabes,but very few,if any real working competent filmmakers.Lots of talent,but no direction,no money and no organization.

I'm a cinematographer and what I've been called on lately in the last few years has just about made me want to stick to TV news and forget the whole scene.I have no desire to direct or produce,yet what I've seen from people who have called themselves "producers" couldn't produce a turd with a pound of Exlax.

I understand filmmaking is a tough business,but from what I've seen,there doesn't exist a "mid grade" class of filmmaking.At least not outside of LA or NY anyway.I've seen some FEW indie films made for special venues (urban,ethnic stuff and religious)that were competent enough to get completed,and at least one of them wasn't painful to watch.But I'm talking VERY FEW.

Anyone want to tell me different?I could use something positive in this arena.

[Evan Kubota]

I basically agree, except for

"Lots of talent,but no direction,no money and no organization."

IMO there's very little talent. Lots of talk and (sometimes) money thrown around, but rarely talent and virtually never motivation.

When I begin a project, it will be *completed*. I made five short films in 2005, and felt like I could have probably worked harder and made six or seven. Frankly, I don't know anyone else who even finished one or two, and certainly none were shot on film or carefully constructed.

I guess it's the same for anything in life - people love to talk big, but those who are more capable and productive than they claim are rare.

If you want some big laughs, watch "Film School" on IFC; especially the episodes involving the "producers" who are a blonde couple. This Italian student at NYU hires them to "produce" his short film. To make a long story short, they are pathetic wannabes like you describe, and they nearly derail his project because they claim they are going to LA to raise funds and return with $50.

I also agree that there's not a "middle level" between really sketchy no-budget productions and fully-funded SAG affairs. If there are, they're usually bombs in the $50,000 range because the people aren't creative/stingy/driven enough to do something in the $5-10,000 range like "El Mariachi," but the production values are no better.

I spend relatively little on my productions, and there is usually virtually no crew other than myself and one other person, but I try to achieve higher production values than the minimal infrastructure would indicate...

[jaxshooter]

I spend relatively little on my productions, and there is usually virtually no crew other than myself and one other person, but I try to achieve higher production values than the minimal infrastructure would indicate...

*********************

I would love to see one of your films.I was once "fired" from one of these wannabe affairs,urban ethnic exploitation crap,which is fine if it's competent.Finally got to see the completed project.I would have given them kudos at least for completing it IF I had not suffered so the entire hour and some odd to view it.Although I don't drink,I had to have a few while I was watching it.There were maybe three minutes of usuable footage in the film with about 30 seconds of audible dialogue.

There are some talented folks around,they just don't have direction and they let ego get in the way.The big problem is,those with talent have no money and those with money have no talent.

[audadvnc]

I don't follow the argument. A pro film/video guy complaining about wannabe kids sounds similar to a pro baseball player complaining about Little League; how else is somebody going to start? Of course the field is overrun with kids; they're the ones with the passion, the dreams, and the time to learn new things. And of course they can't produce a turd with a pound of Exlax; they haven't been producing for 20 years. Most of them figure out after a few years that real work is involved before they can become famous and lose interst.

The rest of us work into some niche of the industry and spend our time editing, running rental operations, operating gear, or whatever it is we do, and get our movie fix in our jobs.

By the way, how much do most producers make in comparison to a high level camera tech? About zilch; they're almost intern level positions. So how many people are going to devote their careers to production when the money is elsewhere?

[jaxshooter]

Of course the field is overrun with kids; they're the ones with the passion, the dreams, and the time to learn new things. And of course they can't produce a turd with a pound of Exlax; they haven't been producing for 20 years. Most of them figure out after a few years that real work is involved before they can become famous and lose interst.

************************

In my neck of the woods they aren't kids,but 30,40 and 50 plus years olds who have made a living at some "real" job before they got the filmmaking bug.

I dig what you're saying,and yes,kids have an excuse.But the problem I have is that many of these people don't seem to understand the concept of crawling before you walk.

Perhaps if instead of dreaming of being the next Rodriguez or whatever,they tried perhaps music videos or even commercials and then established a technique and working rapport with professionals in the business who could help them see their projects through they could get something done.Above all, if they could grasp the concept of the "biz" part of showbiz,then maybe some money might be available for something doable then alot of egos and pipe dreams.

It's all about common sense before dreams.I just get discouraged when I see adults,even young adults out of college that have no more sense of reality then I had when I first got the filmmaking bug at age 11.

[audadvnc]

Fortunately a lot of the worst offenders are vidiots; look at the cinematography.com "first time filmmakers" forum. It's full of threads of the type:

"I've produced 6 hip-hop records and am ready to make DaFuulz' breakthrough MTV smash. I want it to look like 'Independence Day' meets 'Battleship Potemkin' and 'Boyz in Da Hood' with a breakbeat. Should I get a DVX100?"

A video store's best friend - until they return it after 2 weeks for a full refund (having shot their video and moved on to some other ripoff scheme).

[jaxshooter]

Yeah,that's a big part of it.Whatever one may think of Robert Rodriguez and El Mariachi,his approach,I feel was the correct one for the aspiring no budget indie filmmaker.You look at what you have on hand,in RR's case it was a pit bull,a guitar, a motorcycle,a small Mexican town,a jail and lots of guns and they wove a story around it.

Far better than trying to make an attic into a spaceship or an abandoned shipyard into a nuclear power plant.Know what I mean?

[steve hyde]

...I think student filmmakers get sucked into the mindset of film schools that make it their mission to "prepare students for a career in the industry". Problem is the "industry" does not like competition so students that want to resist the trajectory of the industry get curbed.

Like any feild of work, new filmmakers have to work within the established frameworks that have been created before them. The current film industry is shaped by the marketability of filmic media. That means commercial spots, high-concept features, high-concept music videos made to market flavor-of-the-week "pop stars" are given the status of
"successful" in a curriculum driven by market forces.

The upshot of this, it seems to me, is a lot of short-form scripts being streched to feature length because the student production is shooting on video.

Since short-form films are less marketable, students are driven to make features, which is a lot like trying to climb Mt. Everest before learning how ones body performs at high altitudes. It can be a career stopper.

It is too bad. What we need is more student filmmakers resisting the fatal attraction to high-concept modes of production because most of us will never be able to compete with big-budget productions. And why would we want to?

We have been discussing the "death of cinema" in that other thread and I think it is something worth thinking about and this ties into that debate as well. I also think you raise an important point about "mid level" film products. Where are they?

The answer, for me, is in what I call the new, new documentary. The new new documentary makers are mostly shooting video, often from the hip, and they deal with structure loosely in pre-production, but deal with the hard structural issues in post. Zana Briski's "Born into Brothels" is an example of "mid level" work winning an Oscar. She is a first time filmmaker and, while I have critical views on her film, I think her accolades are well deserved.

So before my response begins to sprawl more than it already has, my point is that student filmmakers need to give their old-school instructors the middle finger and need to imagine new modes of production that take advantage of smaller crews, smaller gauges and video, new distribution mediums and create a new cinema that does not try to compete with high-concept 35mm feature productions with theatrical distribution. It's time for something new and that will require imagination, not students parading around Hollywood filmsets loading film into magazines to gain "industry credibility". If the "death of cinema" and "death of art" more broadly, is upon us, then what is required to breathe life back into it?

I hope the answers to this question are found in the films we make.

Steve

[jaxshooter]

You said it man.There is a new breed of new videographer that throws the "rules" out the window and actually focus on the message more than the delivery.The good news is,contrary to what the the powers that be in the film and TV industry think.John Q consumer buying public is not as stupid as they think,so this new breed has a buying audience.

Lets hope the business community realizes this and this new breed gets a budget.

[steve hyde]

Netflix was one of the funding sources for "Born into Brothels" There are many avenues opening for indies:

article

New distribution frontiers

Big changes are coming during the next three to five years as studios adapt to a shifting distribution paradigm brought by new technology, and entrepreneurial indies are moving aggressively into alternative distribution.

"The home video distribution business is going to change dramatically," Gottlieb says. "Movies will be delivered home to the TV or computer. It will be positive for our business and will expand the audience for our films, especially the 25-and-older segment -- we can let the studios have the teens."

New tech companies such as Netflix and Amazon.com offer indies smart marketing solutions and recommendation software with which to reach customers who simply don't go to theaters.

"A small independent company may not be able to release everyplace," entertainment attorney Linda Lichter says. "DVD gets the benefit of lead publicity on (National Public Radio) and (ABC's) 'Good Morning America' so the rest of the country can take advantage of it. You get more bang for your advertising buck."

2929 Entertainment, founded by dot-com billionaires Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner, is conducting bold experiments with day-and-date delivery of digital content at its 204-screen Landmark Theatres chain and its HDNet cable channel. Despite the refusal of most theater chains to book "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," which aired twice on HDNet in April, the Magnolia Pictures release has grossed more than $3.5 million on more than 150 U.S. screens.

"'Enron' is the first inning in a long season," Wagner says. "We're going to cut checks to distributors who participated in the showing of 'Enron' to pass back a piece of ancillaries to the theaters. It's our way of showing to exhibitors that we think we will be increasing revenue."

In September, Steven Soderbergh, who has partnered on several projects with 2929 Films, will deliver "The Bubble," the first of a planned six low-cost digital movies to go day-and-date theatrically on HDNet and DVD. Wagner is still negotiating the DVD deals but figures copies will sell in theater lobbies as well as retail stores.

"We want to give consumers more choice, increase revenue and decrease costs," he says. "We can promote things across different platforms -- you don't wait four months to buy a CD after you hear a song on the radio.
Fact is, consumers want to be in charge. We want to give filmmakers more of a chance to have their movies seen."

Messing with ancillary windows can be hazardous, though, as Code Entertainment's Corley and Bart Rosenblatt learned with Chazz Palminteri's 2004 holiday film "Noel." The first movie to be released simultaneously in theaters and on a $4.99 Flexplay "limited play" DVD, which self-destructs 48 hours after its sealed package is opened, "Noel" also played one night on TNT.

Flexplay owner Convex Group paid the film's producers to conduct the experiment, which included 60,000 Coca-Cola cups sold at Regal Cinemas, complete with promotional CD-ROMs in their lids. But the would-be distribution model backfired when Regal and other exhibitors refused to screen the movie, fearing the DVD would "cannibalize their theaters," Corley says. "It played on under 20 screens -- not what we had in mind."

Meanwhile, companies such as IFC Films and HBO Films, which are owned by cable companies, are looking to move the video-on-demand window closer to a film's theatrical release date.

"We're going to change our business plan over the next six to eight months as we shorten the window between DVD and theatrical," Sehring says. "We can experiment with VOD on our channels, maybe show movies a week or two after they're released theatrically on IFC OnDemand."

Sehring also expects to partner with the Weinstein Co. to acquire titles not only for IFC's video library but also for VOD. (When IFC's home video output deal with MGM/Sony expires at year's end, the Weinstein Co. likely will release its videos, too.)

Morgan Freeman's Revelations Entertainment is investing with Intel in the broadband distribution company Clickstar, which plans to make deals for original and premium studio content to upload legally and safely to consumers before it is available on DVD (unlike the major studios' download service, Movielink). The service will launch next year.

If the studios won't change the release paradigm, then someone else will. Expect Microsoft, Google, America Online, Apple, Netflix and Yahoo! to announce plans for riding the broadband movie wave. When Apple changed its microchips to Intel, observers suggest, it was simply Phase 1 of the coming iMovie revolution.

Internet downloading is the way of the future, Beeks says.

"To own (is) to burn," he says. "We're willing to experiment -- we're not running and hiding. We have to think about all these technologies carefully so that we don't have one technology stepping on another one. We have to find ways to keep all these windows healthy, including the theatrical market. We can all get along."

Published Aug. 02, 2005


source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/fi ... 1001001582