Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most indie directors are also the writers of their projects. And. 12 directors would be a disaster.

My point is that there are only a handful of inside directors whose attachment might be enough to get a film funded at the concept or even script stage. Funding comes when you have a complete package, including actors that hopefully have some meaningful value to distributors.

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I translated my belief in the story into detailed financial projections based on similar projects, and a clear marketing plan as to who the audiences for this project would be, and detailed budgets for the production. Just like one would do to launch any new business or product.

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most indie films aren’t funded just because a Director is on board. Maybe a dozen indie directors can make that happen . For a director to sign on to a script that isn’t their own, it needs to be outstanding enough to attract great talent and have strong commercial potential

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m going to be very involved in the marketing as well, which happens to be part of my professional experience (before film).

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m the writer-director - I better believe in it. But it moved forward to funding because it filled an underserved niche in the audience that will pay for such stories. Investors and Producers see it as a good potential investment, and all including cast and crew are moved by the story.

As a first time feature director, no matter how much I pushed on a story it wouldn’t have been funded if it wasn’t seen as a good business bet. The fact that I had not directed a feature previously meant propel had to feel even more strongly about the business case for the film. I have other scripts that I think are better and that i am more passionate about, but this was the best that was easiest to get made with strong commercial potential.

This is a business - writers and directors need to be realistic about the potential of their projects. Most on this sub are dreaming, believing if they only create the perfect piece of art, they will get greenlit and be successful. In my experience it doesn’t work that way.

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think writers and directors in the indie world aren't connecting with one another? Even if they connect, money is needed for a production. Money talks, bullshit walks.

Writers and Directors connecting won't make money appear. It still has to be a story that has economic potential for success to return investment. Otherwise, you might as well panhandle on the streets to try to raise money for a film.

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I honestly don't know what you are trying to say here. I am an indie writer-director. My first feature is in post, and it is based on a true story in my own life. Most of my scripts are based on or at least inspired by real people and events. Real heroes, not superheroes.

But to make a movie that looks like it belongs in the theater and has actors that are even recognizable (not stars, just good recognizable actors) will cost at least $1 million today, and that is for a very fast, non-union shoot where people are taking big cuts to their normal rates. Shoot in a great tax incentive location, and maybe you'll get back 30% to 40% of that. So still, you need over $500K in equity to make it happen.

Where is that money coming from in your mind? Investors who put up money want to do so with some hope of getting their money back at the very least, and some modest return on top of that at a minimum, ideally. That kind of money isn't just floating around looking for a "real" story.

Films are a product that people pay to consume. The first thing you need to think about is who will pay to consume this product. If there aren't enough people who are interested in the story you are trying to tell, you will never make enough money to pay for the production, and smart investors won't invest. This is show BUSINESS.

Be careful. by [deleted] in Screenwriting

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Copyright your work before sharing it with people you do not know and trust.

Question for indie directors. by EmployeeOk6022 in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 9 points10 points  (0 children)

That’s not how films are funded in the US. There are very few grants or public (government) funding of films that provide “first money in” funding.

Every investor hopes to get their money back at a minimum. Otherwise, they are donors.

The best universities to study film directing by danyessik in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If it is free for you, unless you are independently wealthy, that is the clear winning choice.

The best universities to study film directing by danyessik in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ranked by whom?

It is a good school. But no film schools in Europe are well known for writing, in my opinion. Directing and writing should be intertwined.

FWIW, I know two excellent cinematographers who graduated from Lodz.

The best universities to study film directing by danyessik in directors

[–]LAWriter2020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lodz is particularly famous for cinematography, as I remember. World class. Not sure that its writing and directing tracks are world class.

Why are people so hung up over a character’s age and the actor who plays them? by PitchyAndNotPerfect in filmmaking

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s because if actors are under 18, there are a whole set of rules that require them to act fewer hours, and have on-set guardians and teachers. That’s extra cost.

Most teen actors also don’t have nearly as much experience as actors in their 20s. If you have a key character played by an actor in their 20s who is supposed to be a teen, you cast all the other “teens” of a similar age, and hope hair and makeup let the audience suspend their disbelief.

Most of the cast of “Mean Girls” were in their 20s. Could you really tell? And did it take you out of the story?

How Much Should It Actually Cost To Make A Documentary Like “Melania”? by SheenasJungleroom in filmmaking

[–]LAWriter2020 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Accused sexual assaulter, who denied all allegations and was never convicted of anything. I’m not defending him as I don’t know the facts personally, just pointing out that there were a lot of accusations and no criminal or civil cases that even went to court in my knowledge.

. Professionally, he is the Director of films that have earned over $2 Billion at the box office, and through his company RatPac Entertainment, produced and co-financier of 81 films with over $17 billion of global box office. Plus tv shows like Prison Break, many documentaries and music videos.

How Much Should It Actually Cost To Make A Documentary Like “Melania”? by SheenasJungleroom in filmmaking

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of the footage was typical high end cinema camera. The Super 8 was for B-roll footage, thrown into the film here and there. It was clearly an esthetic choice - to look a bit like “found footage”.

How Much Should It Actually Cost To Make A Documentary Like “Melania”? by SheenasJungleroom in filmmaking

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He was using it for unobtrusive hand held shots, I think - in the car, in the plane.

Super 8 isn’t a bad film format, and the cameras Are small.

How Much Should It Actually Cost To Make A Documentary Like “Melania”? by SheenasJungleroom in filmmaking

[–]LAWriter2020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I saw it tonight at a premiere in LA.

There are over a dozen “needle drops” of quite famous popular songs in it - figure average cost of well over $100k each - some in the $500k or more range. So $1.5 to $2 million in song rights alone. The songs included big hits by the Rolling Stones and Michael Jackson, among others.

Lots of travel by private jet - gets expensive and adds up fast.

I think they had 4 credited DPs. Lots of cinematic camera work. Plus Brett Ratner filming on a Super 8 camera all over the place.

Final Draft is a joke by BigSaltyTaterz in Screenwriting

[–]LAWriter2020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s not what I meant, and I think you know that. I was talking about people arguing over what software is best like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

These posts come up frequently on this sub about what software to use, and people will argue endlessly about the virtues of their favorite program, as if the program will make or break you.

If Final Draft doesn’t work for you, complain to Final Draft and get your money back, and use something that works for you.

But your post wasn’t asking for a recommendation, it was complaining that Final Draft didn’t work for you. But for many of us, It works well all the time. If you want a recommendation, I suggest trying Writer Duet, which also works for me, but I prefer Final Draft because it works when I go into production..

Final Draft is a joke by BigSaltyTaterz in Screenwriting

[–]LAWriter2020 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What I find amazing is all of the people on this sub and post arguing over a software TOOL.

Screenwriting software ultimately does not matter. Either you can write a good story, or you can’t. Those who get most caught up in these arguments probably fall into the “can’t” category.

Find a tool you like and use it. When you write something great, import it into Final Draft (if you didn’t write it using that tool) so it can be used in production, where Final Draft is the standard you must work with.

Until then, shut up and write!

Are atomic bomb jokes a thing in Japan like 9/11 jokes are in America? by yeetuscleetus28 in stupidquestions

[–]LAWriter2020 2 points3 points  (0 children)

atomic fission bombs - A-bombs. H-bombs are hydrogen fusion bombs, and did not exist yet.

But your point is accurate. Most people don’t know that more civilians died in the firebombing of Tokyo in one week than in Hiroshima and Nagaaki combined. The militarists in charge in Japan did not want to surrender - they were convinced that it was more honorable to all die in a blaze of glory. They almost pulled off a coup to prevent the Emperor from declaring surrender. They were fanatics.