Do You Agree With These Poll Results? - The Toughest Genre To Produuce

[themattcastro]

Went over to SoYouMadeAMovie.com for indie filmmakers to try and get some cable exposure and saw a poll asking "The Toughest Genre To Produce."

That's from writing, shooting, and editing. I chose Horror/Suspense and came up with these results of what people voted.

Do you guys agree with the results that other indie filmmakers are saying? I really don't think that the Comedy genre is the toughest genre to produce. I think that it would actually be the easiest out of the other categories.

 

[Jona816]

I would have to agree with you and would say horror/suspense simply because there are so few out there that actually provide fear and terror in people. Most of the films that come out are either cheesy or laughable. I, personally, think it's hard to convey horror where it actually scares people mentally. I'm certainly not talking about movies like Saw where the gag is clearly gore and torture to make the audience cringe as opposed to actually scaring them. Sad thing is that a movie like Saw is classified under horror! Best part of it is that Hollywood is using the 3-D gimmick to bring audiences in, mostly young teens. Can you say over-kill!?

The good thing though, is that because indie filmmakers, because they (we) don't have a substantial budget, are forced to think and come up with new and innovative ways to scare people.

Jona

 

[CDCosta]

I would say that, that is not every genre. But if the question is ment to be only out of those selected, i'd say yes for the most part, but i'd put comedy down a notch, and action up a notch.

 

[ad2478]

Completely Disagree with results

Horror/ Suspense is the toughest genre due to many reasons. The most important reason is that a filmmaker needs to create environment that can create horror. Lighting + Quality Make of evil creature is the hardest job to do. And good makeup really attracts the audience in a horror film. I few months back downloaded a horror film and just after watching a couple of scenes where the ghost was really looking horrible (due to poor makeup) i deleted the film.

While in any other genre though lighting is hard to do but still you have to just categorize the light in list of day light , evening light etc. While in horror films we not only need to create a time phase like day or night but we also have to see that is the light creating fear?
More over i personally think that in horror films we need much much better cameras (for night scenes or for scenes where light is at low level) where as in other genres we can use the natural light as an important tool free of cost...

 

[Lord of Light]

I agree with comedy. Because, just like horror, your film relies on engaging the audience more emotionally than say an action film. And not everyone has the same sense of humor as the writer and/or director.

As far as production goes though, I'd say that drama and comedy would be the easiest, with action and documentary being the hardest. IMO.

Not exactly sure what they're talking about being the hardest.

 

[Scoopicman]

The Toughest Genre To Produce]

Just my opinion. To "produce," I would say, Sci-Fi, because it usually requires sets, visuals and props. I think it takes a lot to tackle big SPACESHIP sets, shooting in exotic LOCATIONS, and dealing with COMPOSITING and EFFECTS.




Comedy, Drama, Suspense can feasibly all be done in your house and rely mostly on the writing and acting. (Let's say each genre has the same writer, so that the script part is equal.)


Next easiest would be Horror, which is like suspense, but just by adding blood or black eye zombie makeup, you can achieve that. Definitely notch up the difficulty, if it actually has a monster and elaborate makeup. Honestly, I have used flour and food color, as seen HERE to show someone's face melting, so it's not that hard. I've made about a dozen horror flicks.


Documentary may have a tough schedule, but less demands with planned/elaborate lighting setup. Now, if it is cutting coverage of a movie production, you can pretty much "make" the movie in editing. Heck, you could do an Iraq war doc and buy footage, without having to do more than interviews. However, tackling a subject, say cropdusting, and you have to follow the pilot around and get your own aerials, etc., would be challenging.

Action would be second hardest, as that would require physical stunts, car chases, and probably more camera movement and quick editing to suggest more going on than there actually is. We had several scenes of flipped vehicles, including this TIPPED VAN, which was not an effect.


Based on my personal experience with these genres, this has been my hardest to easiest, based on production demands:

Sci-Fi (writing, acting, futuristic sets, wardrobe, props, terrain, FX)
Action (writing, acting, guns, stunts, fights, chases, vehicles)
Documentary (depending on location difficulty and subject matter)
Horror (writing, acting, makeup)
Comedy (writing, acting)
Suspense (writing, acting)
Drama (writing, acting)


Obviously, the order can change, if you go for challenging settings and set pieces in a drama or suspense and you do "stranger in a strange land" sci-fi, where you don't need props, sets. If you want to know what is easiest - ask what you see the most from first time filmmakers. I've noticed a lot of zombie flicks, myself.

The order would be reversed, in some cases, if you ask "what is the hardest genre to sell."

 

[Scoopicman]

Okay, I went over there and sci-fi isn't on the list. I voted for "Action." My post (above) is for this forum.

 

[aceofspades70]

I'd say sci-fi because I agree with the futuristic sense of it all, plus the wardrobe, action, etc.

Look at Terminator, didn't need a futuristic setting, but the fx alone were a pain I bet. Not to mention the car chases, stuntwork, etc.

 

[Dreadylocks]

I think there's a bit of apples and oranges going on with this poll. Sure they are all fruit, but you can't use the same scale.
Comedy is very hard to write. Especially if you want it to be funny to a lot of people. Action, on the other hand, is much easier to write, but hard to film, same with SciFi.
On most levels I think everything is equally hard/easy, in relation to the filmmaker's own skill set and level.

 

[aceofspades70]

I think there's a bit of apples and oranges going on with this poll. Sure they are all fruit, but you can't use the same scale.
Comedy is very hard to write. Especially if you want it to be funny to a lot of people. Action, on the other hand, is much easier to write, but hard to film, same with SciFi.
On most levels I think everything is equally hard/easy, in relation to the filmmaker's own skill set and level.

Good point Dready

 

[Scoopicman]

IComedy is very hard to write. Especially if you want it to be funny to a lot of people. Action, on the other hand, is much easier to write, but hard to film, same with SciFi.

Yes and no. Comedy can be gag based, like action and very similar to achieve. (I've made 11 comedy shorts.) Let's say that you are the writer for all of these genres. Good writing applies to good movies, regardless of their genre. You don't just slap together a BOURNE IDENTITY or BLADE RUNNER, by writing in a couple of car chases and shoot outs. Conversely, I could easily write a shoddy script and put in a bunch of fart jokes, nerds and beautiful babes and call it a comedy.


I think writers should write interesting characters, situations and twists, regardless of the genre. Now, it's true that a horror or action movie audience will be more forgiving about acting, if they feel it delivered the goods. This is where dramas can't get that kind of slack, so while they might have less production requirements, they are harder to successfully pull off. But, wouldn't you rather aspire in pulling off a SILENCE OF THE LAMBS or DARK KNIGHT, instead of a shallow horror or action picture? Same with any genre, I think.

As for the list, above, that is from my personal experience and style. I just happen to add more to certain genres. You could level the playing field and require that all genres require three people in a house, with no outlandish props. The comedy, suspense, sci-fi, horror and drama could all be conversational and perhaps utilize simple conventions, like something scratching at the door to create suspense or comedic effect. (PARANORMAL ACTIVITY would fit well, here.) Action would require something physical, like a chase or a fight.

I have to say that I like participating in 48 Hour Film Projects for this reason. No genre is easy, if you are doing it right.

 

[Hachi Gatsu]

I think comedy fit's the bill (but Sci-Fi would take the gold if it was on there), because, unless you're going for a niche comedy, you're going to have to come up with something funny that doesn't offend (to the point of someone suing you at least) and is, for the most part, universally funny. Most physical comedy is popular world wide because someone falling down in a funny way is funny to any one from London, to Japan, to a lonely scientist in the Arctic. Where as is it's a regional comedy, or a local pop culture reference (like some Japanese movies make a point to make fun of a certain characters regional accent), doesn't translate to another language. I mean, just look at subtitles for movies that weren't written for subtitles.

The first SAW film (not the others) was made on a small budget (according to Hollywood standard anyway) and they had limited resources, so they had to use certain shots in order for the movie to work (listen to the commentary, it's great!). And for the most part, they didn't have the budget to buy a truck load of 55 gallon drums of fake blood, they had to write a story that people could relate to (being locked in a dark room with a stranger and you have to find a way to escape with your life before you're both killed), the overall primal reflex of kill or be killed. True, now the series is nothing but a blood bath with a shred of story, but at least the first one is a great example of a good Horror/Suspense film.

But with Sci-Fi, I can't seem to get "Pitch Black" out of my head. The way they "created" an alien world by using color film filters on the lens of the camera and carefully shot the scenes where they had two suns. True, they later had elaborate monsters (either created on set or in a computer program), but there are certain parts I'm sure you could do on a low-budget film.

So, being that I have only made, and wrote a limited number of films, touching in almost every genre with the exception of Documentary, I have to say it's equally hard to make a good film from any of them.

 

[sonnyboo]

Do you guys agree with the results that other indie filmmakers are saying? I really don't think that the Comedy genre is the toughest genre to produce. I think that it would actually be the easiest out of the other categories.

I agree with that chart 100%.

Comedy is not the hardest to do; it is the hardest to do WELL... Making a comedy that is actually funny and audiences respond to is the hardest thing imaginable.

What is laughing? It's an involuntary convulsion, but a pleasant one. You are trying to tickle the mind of the viewer and knowing or thinking you know what that is can be really difficult. Try putting a comedy out there for the world to see and then let them decide if it's funny. Tough stuff.

 

[tongoll]

I agree with that chart 100%.

Comedy is not the hardest to do; it is the hardest to do WELL... Making a comedy that is actually funny and audiences respond to is the hardest thing imaginable.

What is laughing? It's an involuntary convulsion, but a pleasant one. You are trying to tickle the mind of the viewer and knowing or thinking you know what that is can be really difficult. Try putting a comedy out there for the world to see and then let them decide if it's funny. Tough stuff.

now, im saying this from a viewers position.
All most every comedy relies deeply on the actor and the script.
i can watch sienfield and crack the hell up, and all that has is about 4 sets, 2 random ones and 2 main ones, the random sets aren't even used for that long. its mostly just the apartment and the diner.

now, you could never pull this off with horror. i mean you can use a small amount of sets but it wont be a good horror movie sense horror movies need to take you to places you have not been and feel uncomfortable inside off.

as a matter of fact, truly scary horror is so hard, it cant really be made into a television show anywhere near as often as a comedy can.
look at the list of horror television shows and you'll see the ones there aren't even scary, they just involve dead things, like buddy the vampire slayer, and supernatural.

now speaking as a horror fiend.
i think the way you described special effects make up as being incredibly easy is just insulting.

"but just by adding blood or black eye zombie makeup, you can achieve that. Definitely notch up the difficulty, if it actually has a monster and elaborate makeup. Honestly, I have used flour and food color, as seen HERE to show someone's face melting, so it's not that hard. I've made about a dozen horror flicks.'

i will spend hours creating tumors, fake arm, etc etc so that they can be used in a matter of seconds for a scene involving cutting into peoples flesh and popping tumors with a surgical knife, or just making them explode. i make them have pressure and blood pump.
it involves a lot of intensive work and before you speak as if special effects make up is easy i suggest you learn the difference between Halloween and special effects make up.

the decision of the type of make up to use, the type of blood, how thick, how dark, etc etc if you have a good make up artist, will know should be in accordance to the lighting, skin tones of the person, location.

if you don't know the workings of the inner body of that area then you do research.

its not just flour and blood.
and frankly i find that extremely ignorant.

the amount of detail put into the few seconds of every wound, every prosthetic is a lot more then you know apparently. Special effects make up is a must for horror movies.

and to produce it is only a step in the process, before that you need to consider what the director wants, what the budget is, the lighting, the specific person you are working with, and how they need to be able to react with it on their skin, know any allergy's, if anything what you can use instead etc etc.

so i say sci-fi and horror are the hardest.

 

[Scoopicman]

now speaking as a horror fiend. i think the way you described special effects make up as being incredibly easy is just insulting. its not just flour and blood.

If you knew how I felt about makeup and horror, we would probably have a shitload in common! However, I have done a lot of simple material makeups. I made this melting man, from TWO BROTHERS, with .......... flour and fake blood.

Acid burn. I made myself up for a 48 Hour movie, THREE STRIPE, using..............flour and fake blood:

Movie HERE Acid part is 6 minutes in.

I made these fangs out of ...............Wriggley's Spearmint gum!!!

I made this short, called THE GRAVE, where I come back from being buried. Naturally, I used..............Mud!!!

I met a filmmaker, Tiffany Sinclair, who would use chicklets, when someone needed to spit out a tooth, bloody marshmallows for eyes being torn out, and maggots from the fishing section of Wal-Mart. Quick and cheap is limited only by your imagination. Granted, I like more complex makeups (below), when possible.




I've also made myself up, using nose putty, latex, spirit gum, hair, vaseline on the eyebrows, etc., as a werewolf and this killer who rips his face off, in this shot:

Continued on next page...........

 

[Scoopicman]

......Continued from previous page.


Then, I rigged up propane and fire so that I flame up:



On Fire!





And, of course, we spent some time with this werewolf victim, for my super 8mm film, METAMORPHOSIS. This is the kind of stuff we were doing, when I was 18........

Obviously, this was during appliance, as the neck latex was not glued down, yet. I played the werewolf and I put blood baggies under my shirt, front and back, for getting shot.

I've made a few exploding heads, too. (from TERRARIUM)

I was fairly proud of the exploding head I made for ROADKILL, which you can see at the 1 minute mark of THIS clip.

It's such quick, but effective cut. I got the idea from the squibbed heads used in THE LAST BOYSCOUT, which had amazing head shots.



Monster tentacles from EXILE:

You can see the monster at the 1:20 mark of THIS Trailer

i find that extremely ignorant. the amount of detail put into the few seconds of every wound, every prosthetic is a lot more then you know apparently..

You don't know me. I'm used to having to whip out something quickly in many cases, such as for a 48 Hour Film, but with a bit of blood (and flour even), I often do. As for features, what I have noticed from a lot of indies is that they put on black eye makeup and tell a bunch of people to walk like zombies. These movies are made in abundance. Ever see HIDE AND GO CREEP, DEADLANDS: THE RISING, ZOMBIES ANONYMOUS, DOOMED TO CONSUME or any of those sorts of movies????

Filmmaker, Tiffany Sinclair, was asked to shoot a zombie movie in 10 days and she delivered it to her producer/distributor. (That would be APOCALYPSE OF THE FLESH EATERS.) These movies would get distribution. You can't force a drama in 10 days and expect to sell it, but a horror flick can be quickly done and sold. That's a fact that even John (NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD) Russo's book, Making Movies, points out - blood is one of your cheapest, most impressive effects.



As far as all the time making small wounds, etc., I host The Las Vegas IndieMeet and we've had some in depth makeup/silicone demos from the likes of Teresa Fahs, John Perez, Mario Salcido, etc.

More pics:

Silicone Demo

Silicone Demo2

John Perez


For what it's worth, I am one of the biggest Tom Savini, Rick Baker, Rob Bottin, Screaming Mad George, Patrick Tatopoulis, Dick Smith, Chiodo Brothers fans around. I have Dick Smith, Tom Savini and many other makeup books. I'm a mega horror fan. I've made a dozen horror flicks and have a horror feature in the works.

 

[sonnyboo]

now, im saying this from a viewers position.
All most every comedy relies deeply on the actor and the script.
i can watch sienfield and crack the hell up, and all that has is about 4 sets, 2 random ones and 2 main ones, the random sets aren't even used for that long. its mostly just the apartment and the diner.

now speaking as a horror fiend.
i think the way you described special effects make up as being incredibly easy is just insulting.

so i say sci-fi and horror are the hardest.

I guess we need to clarify - which genres are the hardest to produce in terms of production design and costs or which ones are the hardest to create a good product?

I agree 100% that Sci Fi and Horror by their nature have more set building or design, moodier lighting, props, and effects and are therefore harder to produce in that regard. But are they easier to get away with low production values and still entertain the audience? SyFy would suggest that quality is not a prerequisite to making a sci fi or horror film.

As the Seinfeld example shows, making a comedy is easy, making a GOOD comedy is hard. It's harder to come up with a script and find the right actors that most viewers would find funny, and yes it could be 1-2 sets and a cast of 3, but it sure is harder to make that good than a horror or sci fi film (See AVATAR for "fill in the blank metaphorical plot set on a new planet with giant robots and spaceships".

So this is haggling over semantics over what the intent of the initial post was in this thread.

 

[MangoFan]

Yes, it is sort of a silly poll. They're all difficult in different ways.

 

[grinner]

I disagree with the documentary at 25%. It's by far the easiest to produce, imo. Comedy is the hardest. Then action, drama, and horror.

 

[sonnyboo]

I disagree with the documentary at 25%. It's by far the easiest to produce, imo. Comedy is the hardest. Then action, drama, and horror.

I agreed with Documentary being #2 to comedy. You have no idea what you're going to get when you set out and it's shaped entirely in editing, with literally about 100x more footage to deal with than nay other genre of movie (unless you're Peter Jackson or Kubrick with 75-100 takes per).

A documentary is a beast that has to be chiseled from what real people say or said and it's a different animal because the control is more subjective than real.