Nothing relevant to the thread, but I just wanted to say, I like what i see of your trailer! The australian accent sounds a bit odd in a noir setting, though (but that's probably because of what I'm used to)
> Lo/No Budget Review
- Thread starter rayw
- Start date
Nothing relevant to the thread, but I just wanted to say, I like what i see of your trailer! The australian accent sounds a bit odd in a noir setting, though (but that's probably because of what I'm used to)
Nine out of 10 filmmakers have fallen into the gear box with no hope of climbing out.
No sh!t."Look @ me! Look @ me! I gotta RED Epic! I gotta RED Epic! And it's in my apartment crib! Whoot! Whoot!
D@mn.
Where's this mic plug into the camera?
Where's the hot shoe?
How the h#ll am I supposed to hold the RED - AND - the mic at the same time? WTF?"
D@mn.
Where's this mic plug into the camera?
Where's the hot shoe?
How the h#ll am I supposed to hold the RED - AND - the mic at the same time? WTF?"
Effing retards.
The strict answer is:
No bottom and up to the $250k neighborhood.
Although I have no expectation of ever crowdfunding up to that ceiling I'd like to see what the technical difference is between a quarter mil film and a hundredth of a mil film which is MORE likely where a no budget indie film I'd first make is.
Also, I'm restricting my films to 2008 to current because the camera and resolution technology has just changed so much since then that it does no good to see what was done more than a half decade ago.
However, the more comprehensive answer involves understanding that there's a profitable distribution no man's land between pocket change and $1-4M.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=34549 Spreadsheet Column X: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...Hh6cHJBMW5aQkZSMzZYR2V3VUxQVUE&hl=en_US#gid=0
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=37696 Spreadsheet Column S: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsBznn8D13zOdGlCeDRmWTFCYXJRWjJ3SUphZDNzMGc#gid=0
Lettuce say that with reasonable marketing and promotion budgets applied any given self distributed indie film could make... $10 to $50k. YMMV.
Then does it make sense to spend more on expenses than it does on potential revenue? No.
Revenue minus Expenses equals Profit, (to be rolled over into next production.)
So, you're best off thinking about making a film that costs you no more than $8 to $40k out of pocket.
If consumers don't value your product then you're manufacturing sh!te.
Quit. Yeah, you can spend money on a film, but between ineffective marketing and aggressive torrent piracy of even VERY small indie films there's almost no point in spending "I coulda bought a car or house" money on an indie film if you're just going to throw that kind of cash out the door with only 90-110 minutes of... something only less than a hundred people are ever going to see.
TO ME that's just [expletive] retarded.
Buy a car.
Buy a house.
If $1-4M doesn't guarantee any sort of profitability then you're better off spending "vacation money" on a film than "car/house money" on a film.
So... with that POV in mind, coupled with the state tax incentives for films spreadsheet I compiled last year (http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=40055), I'm SERIOUSLY looking for production quality standards for films in the >$100k range since the adjacent states I'd realistically consider transporting cast, crew, and gear to (remember: transportation and lodging expenses ARE NOT SEEN ON SCREEN!) could make a micro-feature... less implausibly profitable to fund the next film.
Snowballing from Film A to Film B to Film C is the general business plan.
I now have a sound (in principle) fiscal foundation to write and craft a screenplay's budget accordingly.
And to me that's the most sensible thing to do: write to the resources you have, or are likely to achieve.
Last edited:
$3,500 ThanksKilling (2007/2009) 70 min - Comedy | Horror | Thriller
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOjSRoxc6mg
http://www.hulu.com/watch/189208
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1129441/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThanksKilling
Good enough camera that the writer/co-producer/cinematographer/editor didn't really know what to do with. (I swear it looks like three different guys were behind the camera.)
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/HDV/XHA1/specifications.shtml
They did a good enough job collecting audio and then adding in Foley, effects, and the score.
http://thankskillingmovie.com/about/the-ultimate-low-budget-experience/
A legit review by someone better than I at filling column inches: http://originalvidjunkie.blogspot.c...s-thankskilling-2009.html?zx=ffbc2bd434cb8d94
Somehow, despite being stupid as h3ll, the sequel 'ThanksKilling 3' has managed a large enough appreciation base to raise over $112k on KS.
http://www.laloyolan.com/arts_and_e...cle_0f07a57c-0ff8-11e1-879a-001a4bcf6878.html
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jordandowney/thankskilling-sequel-horror-comedy-feature-film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOjSRoxc6mg
http://www.hulu.com/watch/189208
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1129441/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThanksKilling
4,071
Yeah. It's cr@p. But at least it looks like $3,500 cr@p.Good enough camera that the writer/co-producer/cinematographer/editor didn't really know what to do with. (I swear it looks like three different guys were behind the camera.)
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/HDV/XHA1/specifications.shtml
They did a good enough job collecting audio and then adding in Foley, effects, and the score.
Downey and Stewart, both alumni of the School of Film and Television (SFTV), shot "ThanksKilling" during the summer before their senior year in Licking County, Ohio. The cheesy B-movie blends horror and comedy to tell the story of five college students who go home for Thanksgiving break only to be tormented by the aforementioned turkey.
"It literally started as a joke," Downey told the Loyolan in 2009. "We were watching a cheesy horror film and started talking about what holidays hadn't been done in horror movies yet, and Thanksgiving was the most prominent one."
"It literally started as a joke," Downey told the Loyolan in 2009. "We were watching a cheesy horror film and started talking about what holidays hadn't been done in horror movies yet, and Thanksgiving was the most prominent one."
http://thankskillingmovie.com/about/the-ultimate-low-budget-experience/
It is an independent horror film that was made for under $3,500 in 11 days. It later got a small investment to help complete the marketing and distribution of the film. It’s campy, twisted, and down right hilarious.
A legit review by someone better than I at filling column inches: http://originalvidjunkie.blogspot.c...s-thankskilling-2009.html?zx=ffbc2bd434cb8d94
Somehow, despite being stupid as h3ll, the sequel 'ThanksKilling 3' has managed a large enough appreciation base to raise over $112k on KS.
http://www.laloyolan.com/arts_and_e...cle_0f07a57c-0ff8-11e1-879a-001a4bcf6878.html
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jordandowney/thankskilling-sequel-horror-comedy-feature-film
Funded through a successful Kickstarter campaign, where over $100,000 was raised. As of 2012, ThanksKilling 3 was the highest funded horror film on Kickstarter.
Inf**ckingcredible.The original ThanksKilling was shot in 11 days. ThanksKilling 3 took over 50 days to shoot.
Last edited:
Might be some gems to review on this list: http://www.yellmagazine.com/5-movies-to-see-based-on-their-titles/64355/
1. Strip Club Slasher (2010) - Ratings: 3.4/10 from 49 users - Budget:$12,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1510986/
Fair number of people involved: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1510986/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
2. Nude Nuns with Big Guns (2010) - Ratings: 3.8/10 from 3,703 users - Budget:$85,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1352388/
3. Dead Hooker in a Trunk (2009) - Ratings: 4.2/10 from 524 users - Budget: $2,500 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1508661/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hooker_in_a_Trunk
Noting the multiple roles some people played this was still a lot of people involved for a $2,500 film: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1508661/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
4. Gangsters, Guns & Zombies (2012) - Ratings: 3.6/10 from 332 users - Budget:£1,200 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2151633/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Fair number of C&C: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2151633/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
5. Don’t Fuck in the Woods - 2014 release, however...
... an IMDB search of the "A FILM BY" name on the poster provides us with
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4624934/?ref_=tt_ov_dr#Director
But there's no mention of the above title.
So, we go on a goog search for the title which yields: http://www.horrorsociety.com/2013/07/04/an-exclusive-teaser-poster-for-dont-fuck-in-the-woods/
Perform IMDB search of Ayse Howard and get: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4868925/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1
Again, no mention of the 'DFITW' title but it dies cross refference with:
Bludgeon - Ratings: 7.6/10 from 10 users (Hmm... ) - Budget:$10,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2576830/
So we can pretty much confirm it's the same director.
Very small crew! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2576830/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
Which leads us to its prod co: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0353463/?ref_=tt_dt_co
A Shameless Revenge (2013) - no rating - Budget:$10,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2700466/
An indication of how to keep the budget low: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2700466/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast
The Sleeping Soul (2012) - Ratings: 6.9/10 from 14 users - Budget:$10,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2199665/
C&C: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2199665/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
Midsummer Nightmares (2011) - Ratings: 7.5/10 from 13 users - Budget:$20,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2051930/
C&C: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2051930/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
If anyone can find these streaming online for free I'd be much obliged!
1. Strip Club Slasher (2010) - Ratings: 3.4/10 from 49 users - Budget:$12,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1510986/
Fair number of people involved: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1510986/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
2. Nude Nuns with Big Guns (2010) - Ratings: 3.8/10 from 3,703 users - Budget:$85,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1352388/
3. Dead Hooker in a Trunk (2009) - Ratings: 4.2/10 from 524 users - Budget: $2,500 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1508661/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hooker_in_a_Trunk
Noting the multiple roles some people played this was still a lot of people involved for a $2,500 film: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1508661/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
4. Gangsters, Guns & Zombies (2012) - Ratings: 3.6/10 from 332 users - Budget:£1,200 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2151633/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Fair number of C&C: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2151633/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
5. Don’t Fuck in the Woods - 2014 release, however...
... an IMDB search of the "A FILM BY" name on the poster provides us with
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4624934/?ref_=tt_ov_dr#Director
But there's no mention of the above title.
So, we go on a goog search for the title which yields: http://www.horrorsociety.com/2013/07/04/an-exclusive-teaser-poster-for-dont-fuck-in-the-woods/
Perform IMDB search of Ayse Howard and get: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4868925/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1
Again, no mention of the 'DFITW' title but it dies cross refference with:
Bludgeon - Ratings: 7.6/10 from 10 users (Hmm... ) - Budget:$10,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2576830/
So we can pretty much confirm it's the same director.
Very small crew! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2576830/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
Which leads us to its prod co: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0353463/?ref_=tt_dt_co
A Shameless Revenge (2013) - no rating - Budget:$10,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2700466/
An indication of how to keep the budget low: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2700466/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast
The Sleeping Soul (2012) - Ratings: 6.9/10 from 14 users - Budget:$10,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2199665/
C&C: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2199665/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
Midsummer Nightmares (2011) - Ratings: 7.5/10 from 13 users - Budget:$20,000 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2051930/
C&C: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2051930/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm
If anyone can find these streaming online for free I'd be much obliged!
Last edited:
We've already mentioned "Nude Nuns..." and "Dead Hooker... ", both of which I thought were pretty good for their budgets!
Some sh!t I can't find free online... and am okay with!
Budget: $35,000: The Bisbee Cannibal Club (2002)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2053448/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMWwj9m53N4
Budget: $5,000: Widow (2009)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1508702/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKdUbdR_sBI
Budget: CAD 50,000: The Legend of the Psychotic Forest Ranger (2011)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1978554/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz7QCquBWac
Otherwise... here's a few I will (suffer) to watch.
Eventually.
Maybe.
Probably.
Budget: $150,000 (estimated)
http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/scalene
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1647477/?ref_=sr_1
Budget: $150,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9EoCPdwNHk&feature=c4-videos
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365789/
Budget: $20,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsNiDaUBR-g&feature=c4-videos-u
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1199558/
Budget: $7,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA0RinLqIKo&feature=c4-videos-u
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1263687/
Budget: $70,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE&feature=c4-videos-u
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1141274/
Budget: $35,000: The Bisbee Cannibal Club (2002)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2053448/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMWwj9m53N4
Budget: $5,000: Widow (2009)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1508702/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKdUbdR_sBI
Budget: CAD 50,000: The Legend of the Psychotic Forest Ranger (2011)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1978554/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz7QCquBWac
Otherwise... here's a few I will (suffer) to watch.
Eventually.
Maybe.
Probably.
Budget: $150,000 (estimated)
http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/scalene
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1647477/?ref_=sr_1
Budget: $150,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9EoCPdwNHk&feature=c4-videos
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365789/
Budget: $20,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsNiDaUBR-g&feature=c4-videos-u
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1199558/
Budget: $7,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA0RinLqIKo&feature=c4-videos-u
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1263687/
Budget: $70,000 (estimated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE&feature=c4-videos-u
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1141274/
Budget: $7,000: Johnny Sunshine Maximum Violence (2008)
Starting at the budget bottom and workin' my way up!
Johnny Sunshine Maximum Violence (2008)
Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoO54iEE4Hk
Movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA0RinLqIKo
Someone else's review: http://thelastexit.net/cinema/violence.html#Johnny Sunshine Maximum Violence
The entirety of comments about this film at IMDB:
I'm not quite this... vitriolic with animated hyperbole: http://horrorbuffgirl.blogspot.com/2012/02/johnny-sunshinemaximum-violence-2008.html
I punched out after my typical 20min mark.
Truth is my opinion is kinda mixed.
It's a p!ss poor film, no doubt.
The opening credits are waaaaaaaaay tooooooo long.
(For God's sakes, please just overlay opening credits over an introductory scene or prologue. No one really cares at this level of filmmaking.)
However, for basic skills the graphics in the opening credits are fairly interesting in execution and design.
However, as soon as the filmmaker actually gets into actual filming (and not graphics) the images instantly look like amateur rubbish. I mean the camera work is just turnip truck worthy.
But there's been a lot of effort put into planning these scenes - but they just look like cr@p. But at least I can respect that they don't appear to be expensive cr@p.
Sometimes it does, but most often not. Not from the evidence I've seen.
The inconsistent use of quasi-classical grindhouse effects is problematic.
The premise and tone I find interesting.
But the actual execution I find totally dismissable.
It's like a very disjointed diary of what SHOULD BE, on paper at least, and interesting and unique dystopic future.
But this is boring.
I guess I'd have to really, really, really be into scifi torture porn to be digging this film, but it's not even really torture porn.
It TP-lite. Meh. I've seen more interesting BDSM videos at kink.com (The crazy sh!t I run across on searches is just... crazy. Believe me.)
If you like Star Wars, Star Trek, Blade Runner, Fifth Element, Total Recall, Terminator, Mad Max, The Book of Eli et al then this scifi-lite cr@p like The Adjustment Bureau, Source Code, Limitless, and the penultimate Never Let Me Go just kinda p!sses you off.
Same thing here.
And the zombie aspect isn't introduced until after the 20min mark.
And then there's some brief Max Headroom-esque video camera thing on occasion. WTH?
IDK what to make of this broken bicycle.
The frame's not bent or rusted, but the wheels are bent, the tires are threadbare, the chain is rusted, the gears slippy-worn, the coaster brake is blown, the seat's missing, and the handle bar is bent.
Whachagonnado for $7k?
Mostly I empathize with this review: http://www.soiledsinema.com/2008/08/johnny-sunshine-maximum-violence.html?zx=70ff82075ab90e73
EDIT:
Oh! I forgot to include that the music and score is actually pretty good. Perhaps one of the consistantly good things about the first 20min of the film!
Not epicly great, but pretty good.
Starting at the budget bottom and workin' my way up!
Johnny Sunshine Maximum Violence (2008)
Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoO54iEE4Hk
Movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA0RinLqIKo
Someone else's review: http://thelastexit.net/cinema/violence.html#Johnny Sunshine Maximum Violence
"Now I know why they call this trend torture porn. This limp low-budget movie tries to be cutting-edge nastiness by depicting a future where the streets are overrun by zombies, zombie slayers that torture and kill zombies, drug-addicts, where necrophilia is a way of life, and where the most profitable and popular product is a snuff movie. In addition, a hot girl is given kinky outfits and shown having sex with her victims while torturing and killing them. Sounds like promising exploitation or a gorehounds delight? Think again. The result is so weak that the victims and zombies look the same and the protagonists aren't much livelier either, not much is shown, including the gore, the plot is mostly non-existent, making this a series of vignettes, like a porn flick without the porn. "
The entirety of comments about this film at IMDB:
pls dont watch this movie
by sanasinky » Sat Sep 27 2008 18:09:34
pls dont watch this movie.....i dont know how do people put money in making such films...let the producers and directors watch this...worst movie ever....0 out of 10
by sanasinky » Sat Sep 27 2008 18:09:34
pls dont watch this movie.....i dont know how do people put money in making such films...let the producers and directors watch this...worst movie ever....0 out of 10
by Larue1872 » Sun Sep 28 2008 14:36:45
They didn't really put that much money into the making of this - only a couple of thousand dollars went toward the actual filming. I didn't know it was possible to make a movie - even a bad one - for that little amount of money these days.
They didn't really put that much money into the making of this - only a couple of thousand dollars went toward the actual filming. I didn't know it was possible to make a movie - even a bad one - for that little amount of money these days.
by geobucks » Sun Nov 30 2008 04:29:05
It is possible to make a horrible "movie" "for that little amount of money" Here is a great example. My son makes better horror movies with his buddies and he is 21 and does it as a hobby for like $30.00, all told. Not the worst movie I have seen...the worst ever!
It is possible to make a horrible "movie" "for that little amount of money" Here is a great example. My son makes better horror movies with his buddies and he is 21 and does it as a hobby for like $30.00, all told. Not the worst movie I have seen...the worst ever!
I'm not quite this... vitriolic with animated hyperbole: http://horrorbuffgirl.blogspot.com/2012/02/johnny-sunshinemaximum-violence-2008.html
I punched out after my typical 20min mark.
Truth is my opinion is kinda mixed.
It's a p!ss poor film, no doubt.
The opening credits are waaaaaaaaay tooooooo long.
(For God's sakes, please just overlay opening credits over an introductory scene or prologue. No one really cares at this level of filmmaking.)
However, for basic skills the graphics in the opening credits are fairly interesting in execution and design.
However, as soon as the filmmaker actually gets into actual filming (and not graphics) the images instantly look like amateur rubbish. I mean the camera work is just turnip truck worthy.
But there's been a lot of effort put into planning these scenes - but they just look like cr@p. But at least I can respect that they don't appear to be expensive cr@p.
Ray's Filmmaking Corollary #1: Increased Budget does not equal Increased Value, ↑ $ ≠ ↑ V
Ray's Filmmaking Corollary #2: Increased Effort does not equal Increased Value, ↑ E ≠ ↑ V
Ray's Filmmaking Corollary #2: Increased Effort does not equal Increased Value, ↑ E ≠ ↑ V
Sometimes it does, but most often not. Not from the evidence I've seen.
The inconsistent use of quasi-classical grindhouse effects is problematic.
A: you gotta know what you're doing - and the director only kinda does here.
B: you gotta be consistent with it - and the director really isn't at all here.
B: you gotta be consistent with it - and the director really isn't at all here.
The premise and tone I find interesting.
But the actual execution I find totally dismissable.
It's like a very disjointed diary of what SHOULD BE, on paper at least, and interesting and unique dystopic future.
But this is boring.
I guess I'd have to really, really, really be into scifi torture porn to be digging this film, but it's not even really torture porn.
It TP-lite. Meh. I've seen more interesting BDSM videos at kink.com (The crazy sh!t I run across on searches is just... crazy. Believe me.)
If you like Star Wars, Star Trek, Blade Runner, Fifth Element, Total Recall, Terminator, Mad Max, The Book of Eli et al then this scifi-lite cr@p like The Adjustment Bureau, Source Code, Limitless, and the penultimate Never Let Me Go just kinda p!sses you off.
Same thing here.
And the zombie aspect isn't introduced until after the 20min mark.
And then there's some brief Max Headroom-esque video camera thing on occasion. WTH?
IDK what to make of this broken bicycle.
The frame's not bent or rusted, but the wheels are bent, the tires are threadbare, the chain is rusted, the gears slippy-worn, the coaster brake is blown, the seat's missing, and the handle bar is bent.
Whachagonnado for $7k?
Mostly I empathize with this review: http://www.soiledsinema.com/2008/08/johnny-sunshine-maximum-violence.html?zx=70ff82075ab90e73
EDIT:
Oh! I forgot to include that the music and score is actually pretty good. Perhaps one of the consistantly good things about the first 20min of the film!
Not epicly great, but pretty good.
Last edited:
I do enjoy these reviews.
I'd be quite interested in opening up the finished version of The Flight of the Flamingo to your analysis Ray. Same $7k budget, might look a little better.
I'd be quite interested in opening up the finished version of The Flight of the Flamingo to your analysis Ray. Same $7k budget, might look a little better.
I look forward to it, Nick.
I know darn good and well your images and audio will be top notch, all things considered.
That pretty much just leaves the execution of story + acting and dialog.
Please, please, please I hope you guys really pulled off a sensible story.
I'd also, at some point, like to take a legit review of Ken Willinger's and Michael Reed's 'Exhumed.'
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=48583
I know darn good and well your images and audio will be top notch, all things considered.
That pretty much just leaves the execution of story + acting and dialog.
Please, please, please I hope you guys really pulled off a sensible story.
I'd also, at some point, like to take a legit review of Ken Willinger's and Michael Reed's 'Exhumed.'
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=48583
Budget: $20,000: Platoon of the Dead (2009)
Next up...
Platoon of the Dead (2009)
Storyline
Three soldiers must fight to survive the night in a seemingly abandoned house, when a zombie platoon attacks.
Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgyH_qGBub8 Looks just like what I'd expect for $20k.
OMG.
Free film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsNiDaUBR-g
OMFG. Two minutes in and already...
God, spare me.
@ 2:20 IDK WTH some people are thinking. So... the guy's impaled on a branch and only the little bit in front of him is bloody? And what's with the obsession of centering things? Branch went through both the guy's spine and sternum?
http://www.beltina.org/pics/diaphragm.jpg
A little bit of common sense please if a mote of A&P doesn't suffice.
@ 2:50 And I like how it wiggles around, too.
@ 3:50 Ummm.... W. T. F? Izzat a Star Wars pistolio? IDK WTH is going on. Extreme anachronism?
@ 4:14 In all fairness, the SFX for the melty thingy are pretty good, all things considered
@ 4:35 ... until they fuckitup by having the sawed-off branch remain, not to mention the branch sticking out part is disturbingly gone. In-f#cking-credible.
Dialog is just unfathomably rancid.
You know, I/we can all tell from the music that this is supposed to be a funny farce, but... it just isn't.
Too bad the writer/director/producer/editor didn't have the benefit of scamming the extreme quirkiness of 2012's 'Moonrise Kingdom' before attempting this. It woulda helped a lot.
I almost feel sympathetic towards the director. It would a helped a lot. Plus some more serious work on the dialog.
@ 14:58 The beginning of a delightful fight sequence. <Ack, cough, cough, cough! I'm going to Hell for that lie.>
I'm quitting @ 16mins, I think I need to be paid to watch this to the 20min mark. Lord knows I wanted to punch out @ the 4min mark, already.
Okay.
This is just absolutely retarded.
WhereTF did they spend TWENTY THOUUUUUUSAND DOLLARS?! Where?
I hope this guy got paid: http://daydreamer-theplayground.blo...n-of-dead-video-2009.html?zx=1828c938f607883d
LMAO! You gotta read some of these: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1199558/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
Sad thing is is I HAVE SEEN WORSE!
'Pot Zombies' and 'Yeti: A Gay Love Story' are insurmountably bad.
Anyway...
F#ck me.
Why can't people at least shoot good shots with their expensive @ss cameras.
I'm bewildered.
I THINNNNK (Ouch!) the writer/director/producer/editor was actually trying to be funny bad, but he just completely failed at producing a 'Thankskilling'-esque "so bad it's good" type film. (Which, BTW, I didn't find all that good despite being certifiably bad. Just... over my head <wryly>, I guess.)
Big fat "Whateverrrrr... "
Next up...
Platoon of the Dead (2009)
Storyline
Three soldiers must fight to survive the night in a seemingly abandoned house, when a zombie platoon attacks.
4,413
Shot with a Sony HDR-FX1
Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgyH_qGBub8 Looks just like what I'd expect for $20k.
OMG.Free film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsNiDaUBR-g
OMFG. Two minutes in and already...
@ 2:20 IDK WTH some people are thinking. So... the guy's impaled on a branch and only the little bit in front of him is bloody? And what's with the obsession of centering things? Branch went through both the guy's spine and sternum?
http://www.beltina.org/pics/diaphragm.jpg
A little bit of common sense please if a mote of A&P doesn't suffice.
@ 2:50 And I like how it wiggles around, too.
@ 3:50 Ummm.... W. T. F? Izzat a Star Wars pistolio? IDK WTH is going on. Extreme anachronism?
@ 4:14 In all fairness, the SFX for the melty thingy are pretty good, all things considered
@ 4:35 ... until they fuckitup by having the sawed-off branch remain, not to mention the branch sticking out part is disturbingly gone. In-f#cking-credible.
Dialog is just unfathomably rancid.
You know, I/we can all tell from the music that this is supposed to be a funny farce, but... it just isn't.
Too bad the writer/director/producer/editor didn't have the benefit of scamming the extreme quirkiness of 2012's 'Moonrise Kingdom' before attempting this. It woulda helped a lot.
I almost feel sympathetic towards the director. It would a helped a lot. Plus some more serious work on the dialog.
@ 14:58 The beginning of a delightful fight sequence. <Ack, cough, cough, cough! I'm going to Hell for that lie.>
I'm quitting @ 16mins, I think I need to be paid to watch this to the 20min mark. Lord knows I wanted to punch out @ the 4min mark, already.
Okay.
This is just absolutely retarded.
WhereTF did they spend TWENTY THOUUUUUUSAND DOLLARS?! Where?
I hope this guy got paid: http://daydreamer-theplayground.blo...n-of-dead-video-2009.html?zx=1828c938f607883d
"The acting is unbelievably bad , tons of inconsistencies, badly shot and edited. The soldiers are TOTALLY unrealistic in apperance, carrying no field gear, clean uniforms and are armed with plastic laser toy guns, couldn´t they at least afford, rent or borrow a couple of softair guns.. And as mentioned before, they can´t freakin act!! The pacing is low, it´s overlong and boring as there's way too much talking. The soundtrack is bad, actuallyit´s pretty annoying. For a zombiefilm there ain´t many zombies... There is virtually no gore, the special fx are a joke, there are some practical fx and a few digital visual effects, such as laser fire and disintegrating bodies."
Yep. Seems about right.LMAO! You gotta read some of these: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1199558/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
Sad thing is is I HAVE SEEN WORSE!
'Pot Zombies' and 'Yeti: A Gay Love Story' are insurmountably bad.
Anyway...
F#ck me.
Why can't people at least shoot good shots with their expensive @ss cameras.
I'm bewildered.
I THINNNNK (Ouch!) the writer/director/producer/editor was actually trying to be funny bad, but he just completely failed at producing a 'Thankskilling'-esque "so bad it's good" type film. (Which, BTW, I didn't find all that good despite being certifiably bad. Just... over my head <wryly>, I guess.)
Big fat "Whateverrrrr... "
Last edited:
Budget: $70,000: The Stitcher (2007) 90 min - Horror | Thriller
Next up...
The trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNR1NF00g9U
The free film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE
Useful review remarks #1: http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/stitcher.php
I dunno how you get more culpable than that.
These IMDB User reviews are very consistent with the critics and continue to define WHAT NOT TO DO in our own lo/no budget films:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1141274/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
What I find interesting in the reviews is that this does appear to be regarded as at least two layers above the absolute bottom of the barrel cr@pfest many lo/no budget films are criticized.
It's amateur - with heart!
But it's not complete cr@p.
Well... the absence of nudity is p!sing off a lotta folks. (I'm surprised, really. I didn't know tits were the cure to sh!t filmmaking. Who knew?!)
And the off camera gore/action got flagged repeatedly. Good to know.
Bonus! The director's first feature film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORR133P-IFI Budget: $30,000
Bonus! The director's second feature film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE unknown budget
I did all that [expletive] homework on the wrong [expletive] film!
Dammit!
Whatever.
Anyways...
Watch 'Branded' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE
IDK what the budget was - yeah, I did search but came up with bumpkus.
However, since the writer/director's first film 'Toe Tags' (2003) was $30k and her third film 'The Stitcher' (2007) was $70k, and the first two films look an awful lot like what we can see in the trailer for the third film I think it's safe to infer that the budget for 'Branded' (2006) is somewhere in the ballpark between those two budget points.
There's really not a lot of reviews for 'Branded'
This one here looks a lot like those for 'The Stitcher': http://www.moviesmademe.com/movie/review/959
The two IMDB User reviews peg it juuuust below 'The Stitcher' in quality - but still pretty poor.
I feel sorry for this poor sucker:
Okay, what do I think?
All the classical mistakes amateur filmmakers make.
Seriously, I can't really peg a big production difference between $3,500 'Thankskilling' and 'Branded' which I'm going to guess from the budget of the director's other two films probably was ten times that amount.
Maybe it all went to pay for 5.1 surround sound audio mix. I dunno.
Still bad camerawork with what I'm going to assume is at least a decent camera.
Surprisingly poor audio - I won't even guess as to what they used.
Frankly, after watching some of all three of these films, it appears the director knows marketing best (although an interview* with her indicates she feels otherwise) and she hasn't really learned how to collect good images or audio.
And she still can't write a good story fer sh!t.
Some more gem comments here by Captain Insanity! http://www.amazon.com/Branded-Jamie-Sworski/dp/B000HXDWQO
Next up...
4,463
The StitcherStoryline
Something strange is happening in this eerie backwoods town. Inspired by true events, a group of friends must survive the weekend in order to escape the terror that is beyond their imagination. Desperate and fearing for their lives, the horror surges when a legendary killer wants something they all possess. They soon find out the town is not what it seems, and with no hope of rescue, they must find their way out before they fall victim to the Stitcher's obsession. This blood curdling story will make you never want to wear certain pieces of clothing again.
Something strange is happening in this eerie backwoods town. Inspired by true events
, a group of friends must survive the weekend in order to escape the terror that is beyond their imagination. Desperate and fearing for their lives, the horror surges when a legendary killer wants something they all possess. They soon find out the town is not what it seems, and with no hope of rescue, they must find their way out before they fall victim to the Stitcher's obsession. This blood curdling story will make you never want to wear certain pieces of clothing again.The trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNR1NF00g9U
The free film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE
Useful review remarks #1: http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/stitcher.php
"If this synopsis sounds generic and derivative it's because the movie's generic and derivative. While not quite horrible or unwatchable, director Darla Enlow's spin on the slasher genre fails to differentiate itself from the slew of similarly slashstastic thrillers vying for your valuable time. Basically, it's a serviceable entry into the crowded genre, ultra low-budget and sporting that home-grown look so common to straight-to-DVD horror releases.
The acting is passable, with a cast of no-names really giving it the old college try. Some fare better than others (the protagonists are significantly less intrusive to the viewing experience than some of their other cohorts, particularly those tasked with generating comic relief), but really all you're looking for here is a group of people willing to be coated in fake blood and laying down a decent shriek or two. In that regard, everyone delivers."
Useful review remarks #2: http://moviemet.com/review/stitcher-dvd-review#.UhWFy5LVB8EThe acting is passable, with a cast of no-names really giving it the old college try. Some fare better than others (the protagonists are significantly less intrusive to the viewing experience than some of their other cohorts, particularly those tasked with generating comic relief), but really all you're looking for here is a group of people willing to be coated in fake blood and laying down a decent shriek or two. In that regard, everyone delivers."
"While "The Stitcher" is a fairly amateurish, standard-issue slasher film, you have to hand it to Ms. Enlow for at least injecting a little new life into the old genre, despite the budgetary limitations. Her camera work is reasonably inventive, her pacing is relatively quick and smooth, her minimal make-up techniques are crude but minimally effective, and her largely first-time actors put in largely yeoman work. So what if the results resemble a student production; it only serves to make the movie that much more fun."
Useful review remarks #3: http://www.gutmunchers.com/TheStitcher.html"I recommend that anyone interested in making a short independent movie take the time to watch the Stitcher. It is an excellent illustration of the mistakes that you will want to avoid.
First of all if you are going to shoot at night or shoot a lot of dark interiors then you need to know how to handle the lighting. There are so many scenes in this movie where you can’t see a damn thing. Seriously the entire screen is black with some noises on it. Kind of makes it hard to watch and know what is going on.
Secondly loud alternative rock music isn’t appropriate for every goddamn scene. Just because you have friends that are in a band doesn’t mean their crappy music has to be blaring behind and sometimes over the dialogue. Not that hearing the dialogue would have helped, but I digress.
Thirdly shooting footage isn’t enough, you need to have someone that knows how to edit. Characters seem to appear out of nowhere, vehicles move by themselves, and the transitions between some of the scenes are awful. This is all because your editor didn’t keep the movie cohesive. Though to be fair I’m assuming that the editor cut the scenes establishing the first two and not that the director just didn’t shoot them.
Finally if you are going to make a slasher flick you need to have some blood and boobs. Not trying to be crude, but that is what these movies are about. The Stitcher has no good kills scenes and all the violence happens off screen. All we get to see are people lying on the ground covered in fake blood. Not a single knife or axe hitting flesh at all! The movie doesn’t even make up for it by giving us any nudity. In fact the only nudity comes in what is clearly an insert shot that has nothing to do with the cast. I’m thinking someone must have asked for it or suggested it to spice things up. Sadly it didn’t’ work."
Ouch! The editor is also the writer and director and DP! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1141274/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_smFirst of all if you are going to shoot at night or shoot a lot of dark interiors then you need to know how to handle the lighting. There are so many scenes in this movie where you can’t see a damn thing. Seriously the entire screen is black with some noises on it. Kind of makes it hard to watch and know what is going on.
Secondly loud alternative rock music isn’t appropriate for every goddamn scene. Just because you have friends that are in a band doesn’t mean their crappy music has to be blaring behind and sometimes over the dialogue. Not that hearing the dialogue would have helped, but I digress.
Thirdly shooting footage isn’t enough, you need to have someone that knows how to edit. Characters seem to appear out of nowhere, vehicles move by themselves, and the transitions between some of the scenes are awful. This is all because your editor didn’t keep the movie cohesive. Though to be fair I’m assuming that the editor cut the scenes establishing the first two and not that the director just didn’t shoot them.
Finally if you are going to make a slasher flick you need to have some blood and boobs. Not trying to be crude, but that is what these movies are about. The Stitcher has no good kills scenes and all the violence happens off screen. All we get to see are people lying on the ground covered in fake blood. Not a single knife or axe hitting flesh at all! The movie doesn’t even make up for it by giving us any nudity. In fact the only nudity comes in what is clearly an insert shot that has nothing to do with the cast. I’m thinking someone must have asked for it or suggested it to spice things up. Sadly it didn’t’ work."
I dunno how you get more culpable than that.
These IMDB User reviews are very consistent with the critics and continue to define WHAT NOT TO DO in our own lo/no budget films:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1141274/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
What I find interesting in the reviews is that this does appear to be regarded as at least two layers above the absolute bottom of the barrel cr@pfest many lo/no budget films are criticized.
It's amateur - with heart!
But it's not complete cr@p.
Well... the absence of nudity is p!sing off a lotta folks. (I'm surprised, really. I didn't know tits were the cure to sh!t filmmaking. Who knew?!)
And the off camera gore/action got flagged repeatedly. Good to know.
Bonus! The director's first feature film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORR133P-IFI Budget: $30,000
Bonus! The director's second feature film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE unknown budget
AWWWWWW!!!!!
F##########CK!!!!!!!
MEEEEEEEEE!!!!
F##########CK!!!!!!!
MEEEEEEEEE!!!!
I did all that [expletive] homework on the wrong [expletive] film!
F##########CKIN
MUTHER
F#######CKER!!!!!!!
MUTHER
F#######CKER!!!!!!!
Dammit!
Whatever.
Anyways...
Watch 'Branded' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNGbLm9SYE
IDK what the budget was - yeah, I did search but came up with bumpkus.
However, since the writer/director's first film 'Toe Tags' (2003) was $30k and her third film 'The Stitcher' (2007) was $70k, and the first two films look an awful lot like what we can see in the trailer for the third film I think it's safe to infer that the budget for 'Branded' (2006) is somewhere in the ballpark between those two budget points.
There's really not a lot of reviews for 'Branded'
This one here looks a lot like those for 'The Stitcher': http://www.moviesmademe.com/movie/review/959
The two IMDB User reviews peg it juuuust below 'The Stitcher' in quality - but still pretty poor.
The biggest problem with this movie was that i didn't know what genre this movie was going for. it wasn't really a horror...it wasn't gory, it wasn't psychological....it was....just THERE. um... so it's hard to really despise a movie where you don't know what they were going for. So i'm just going to go with saying it was pointless. That's the word for this movie. Pointless. The motivation was nonsensical, the acting for a lot of the actors was pretty meh, and the attempt at vision artistry just confused me more than anything. While it isn't the worst movie i've seen on this set so far, I hope to GOD it won't be the best.
I feel sorry for this poor sucker:
The script is fool, nonsense and goes to nowhere. The acting seems very amateur and the production is just terrible. I think that even FILMING STUDENTS would have done a better job - by far - . I'm really disappointed with myself for buying this title!. I mean, I paid almost USD$40 for it, now I can't just throw it out to the trash can, and giving it as a gift to anyone would be just EMBARRASSING.
$40?! Goodness. Whattamoron. Dumb@ss.Okay, what do I think?
All the classical mistakes amateur filmmakers make.
Seriously, I can't really peg a big production difference between $3,500 'Thankskilling' and 'Branded' which I'm going to guess from the budget of the director's other two films probably was ten times that amount.
Maybe it all went to pay for 5.1 surround sound audio mix. I dunno.
Still bad camerawork with what I'm going to assume is at least a decent camera.
Surprisingly poor audio - I won't even guess as to what they used.
Frankly, after watching some of all three of these films, it appears the director knows marketing best (although an interview* with her indicates she feels otherwise) and she hasn't really learned how to collect good images or audio.
And she still can't write a good story fer sh!t.
* FWIW, this is a decent enough interview that most any of us should be proud to have produced anything that would warrant such ourselves.
It contains a lot of the writer/director/producer's experiences which just reinforce a lot about the things we routinely discuss around here.
It's not a comprehensive interview and answer session, but somewhat worthwhile.
I respect her business-mindedness MUCH more than her filmmaking.
I don't know how much her prod co makes in revenue, but I hope she's at least making enough to keep the lights on after expenses.
It contains a lot of the writer/director/producer's experiences which just reinforce a lot about the things we routinely discuss around here.
It's not a comprehensive interview and answer session, but somewhat worthwhile.
I respect her business-mindedness MUCH more than her filmmaking.
I don't know how much her prod co makes in revenue, but I hope she's at least making enough to keep the lights on after expenses.
Some more gem comments here by Captain Insanity! http://www.amazon.com/Branded-Jamie-Sworski/dp/B000HXDWQO
"Oh, Cover Art ......How I Loathe you. February 11, 2008
By Captain Insanity VINE VOICE
Ok before I start bashing this film,
let me just list everything that was entertaining about this experience.
- The art on the cover of the DVD...................
That is all.
It's a movie about a corny rock band,
staying at a managers cabin, where murders start taking place.
That's it.
Nothing deeper or more profound.
The flashbacks into the lead singers past do little to enrich the already hopelessly mundane story.
And the uninspired story being the only grace that COULD have saved this flick, falls desperately flat.
The dialogue seemed like it sort of wanted to be witty, (I guess)
but when jokes are being delivered by meat-puppets,
no ones laughin'.
You ever watch a movie that felt more like a trial in self-masochism than entertainment?
You ever curse yourself for not turning a movie off?
Waiting forever for that one redeeming death scene that you know has to be coming.
The glorious scene that will make the unbearable wait worth the effort.
But before it ever arrives,
the credits roll.
And frustration burns it's way deep into your scalp?
Essentially;
If I were to put a handful of razors on my tongue,
duct-tape my mouth shut,
pour boiling water on my face,
and bite down, to ease the pain,
it would pretty much be the be equivalent of watching 20 minutes,
none the less, a feature length film of this mind-numbing, brutally-amateur, souless effort.
Amateur porn actually has better production values than this horror flick did.
I can't believe I had to type that.
The acting is sooooooooooo bad,
(the leading man is the worst actor I've seen, in my soon to be short life)
it actually takes you out of the film.
You are very aware that you are watching people "try" to "act".
And I use that term loosely.
This movie, if little else, has created a new term for me,
"Murphys Horror"
"Everything that could be wrong WAS wrong with this movie."
Just a thought:
I've noticed,
The best low-budget horror movies, are the ones that are wildly over the top.
The ones that are acutely aware of their low-budget,
and instead of letting that be their limitation,
they use it to their advantage,
to instead focus on other aspects of a movie that are regularly absent from bigger budget horror flicks
(ie: Oh, I don't know.........Style, Soul).
Usually the best ones are horror-comedies, but that's not always the case.
They're usually unique in scope,
And now-a-days, more often than not, unique means wildy bizarre, or viciously hilarious.
MORAL OF THE STORY:
Have a suicide counselor on speed dial, if you actually bought flick."
Re the bolded part, I believe I may have made similar observations and remarks myself.By Captain Insanity VINE VOICE
Ok before I start bashing this film,
let me just list everything that was entertaining about this experience.
- The art on the cover of the DVD...................
That is all.
It's a movie about a corny rock band,
staying at a managers cabin, where murders start taking place.
That's it.
Nothing deeper or more profound.
The flashbacks into the lead singers past do little to enrich the already hopelessly mundane story.
And the uninspired story being the only grace that COULD have saved this flick, falls desperately flat.
The dialogue seemed like it sort of wanted to be witty, (I guess)
but when jokes are being delivered by meat-puppets,
no ones laughin'.
You ever watch a movie that felt more like a trial in self-masochism than entertainment?
You ever curse yourself for not turning a movie off?
Waiting forever for that one redeeming death scene that you know has to be coming.
The glorious scene that will make the unbearable wait worth the effort.
But before it ever arrives,
the credits roll.
And frustration burns it's way deep into your scalp?
Essentially;
If I were to put a handful of razors on my tongue,
duct-tape my mouth shut,
pour boiling water on my face,
and bite down, to ease the pain,
it would pretty much be the be equivalent of watching 20 minutes,
none the less, a feature length film of this mind-numbing, brutally-amateur, souless effort.
Amateur porn actually has better production values than this horror flick did.
I can't believe I had to type that.
The acting is sooooooooooo bad,
(the leading man is the worst actor I've seen, in my soon to be short life)
it actually takes you out of the film.
You are very aware that you are watching people "try" to "act".
And I use that term loosely.
This movie, if little else, has created a new term for me,
"Murphys Horror"
"Everything that could be wrong WAS wrong with this movie."
Just a thought:
I've noticed,
The best low-budget horror movies, are the ones that are wildly over the top.
The ones that are acutely aware of their low-budget,
and instead of letting that be their limitation,
they use it to their advantage,
to instead focus on other aspects of a movie that are regularly absent from bigger budget horror flicks
(ie: Oh, I don't know.........Style, Soul).
Usually the best ones are horror-comedies, but that's not always the case.
They're usually unique in scope,
And now-a-days, more often than not, unique means wildy bizarre, or viciously hilarious.
MORAL OF THE STORY:
Have a suicide counselor on speed dial, if you actually bought flick."
Last edited:
These are very entertaining and informative. Thanks for posting Ray
Thank you, CPF.
I just try to earn my keep around here.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Oh, I gotta go digging through these: http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member..._pdp_rev_all?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Went digging through these: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0281939/?ref_=ttco_co_2
And found these:
Budget: $1,000,000 : Exit 33 (2011) 89 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1772850/
http://video.jampo.tv/19469.htm
Budget: $150,000 : Jingles the Clown (2009) 83 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1584708/
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmmuid_jingles-the-clown_shortfilms
Budget: $10,000 : An American Ghost Story (2012) "Revenant" (original title) 95 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE5ZvR3oLaI
Budget: $500,000 : Queen of the Lot (2010) 120 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1342122/
http://www.hulu.com/watch/521068
Budget: AUD 1,000,000 : The Makeover (2009) 90 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1471342/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4QedPq5B58
I just try to earn my keep around here.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Oh, I gotta go digging through these: http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member..._pdp_rev_all?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Went digging through these: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0281939/?ref_=ttco_co_2
And found these:
Budget: $1,000,000 : Exit 33 (2011) 89 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1772850/
http://video.jampo.tv/19469.htm
Budget: $150,000 : Jingles the Clown (2009) 83 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1584708/
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmmuid_jingles-the-clown_shortfilms
Budget: $10,000 : An American Ghost Story (2012) "Revenant" (original title) 95 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE5ZvR3oLaI
Budget: $500,000 : Queen of the Lot (2010) 120 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1342122/
http://www.hulu.com/watch/521068
Budget: AUD 1,000,000 : The Makeover (2009) 90 min
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1471342/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4QedPq5B58
Last edited:
I started watching "platoon" at the 20:00 Mark where Ray dropped out. Ha. A minute was all I could take.
Thanks for the good work, Ray.
Thanks for the good work, Ray.
Budget: $150,000: Storm of the Dead (2006) 88 min - Horror
Next up...
Storm of the Dead
Watch the free film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9EoCPdwNHk
First critic review: http://www.crankedoncinema.com/reviews/2006/storm-dead
$150,000 was a lot of money to be p!ssing away for only having this to show for it.
A very incongruous review: http://www.roguecinema.com/article654.html
Pretty consistent grievance: you gotta have more than one zombie in your zombie feature.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365789/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
The story is like a very lousy '3:10 to Yuma.'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeroJ1BK6GQ
Now, I didn't give this plot and story much time to work it's <cough, cough> "magic" on me.
I honestly just skipped ahead every four or five minutes and let it run for ten twenty seconds while I reviewed the camera work, dialog, and audio collection (yes, I am more concerned with the technical execution than the story - not my weak hand) and this $150,000 2006 film doesn't look like it's any better or worse than many of the 2007 - 2012 lo/no budget films I've/we've seen.
> First, I still don't know where the h3ll all that money was spent.
> Second, I honestly wish I could find out what revenue these sort of schlock films bring in.
> Third, there's obviously a huge difference between amateur and professional camera work and audio collection - and it's always surprising/disturbing that multi-feature directors still make sh!t-looking films.
> Fourth, story seems to stymie just waaaaaaay too many writer/director/producer/editors.
> Fifth, you gotta make your kills on screen.
> Sixth, tits are... the tits! I'm a big fan of 'em, but while I don't think tits can save a lo/no budget film, the overwhelming majority of reviewers seem to believe that tits are the saving grace of them.
Next up from the same director: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2831038/
Budget: $164,000
Next up...
Storm of the Dead
Storyline
The Florida Militia guns down a looter during a major hurricane. All hell breaks loose when the looter's grandmother turns out to be a Voodoo Queen and seeks revenge for the murder of her grandson.
The Florida Militia guns down a looter during a major hurricane. All hell breaks loose when the looter's grandmother turns out to be a Voodoo Queen and seeks revenge for the murder of her grandson.
4,532
The trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhBp2MMEnUsWatch the free film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9EoCPdwNHk
First critic review: http://www.crankedoncinema.com/reviews/2006/storm-dead
See, glaringly obvious is that if two decades in the biz has taught him anything, it’s that title is key to distribution. Doesn’t matter if the title has anything to do with the film, just that it sounds cool and looks sweeet headlining a poster. For that, I’ll give him nothing but props as “Storm of the Dead” sounds kinda cool and if I had that on my resume, I’d be like “Yeah, bitch, yeah!”. Sadly, the film, which features a grand total of one zombie in its 88 minute running time, doesn’t necessarily oblige such a designation. Not even close. Heck, the film’s sole zombie remains without a single kill, at least not on screen. Sorry, munching on a mutilated arm doesn’t cut it.
Overall, not a bad film but a bottom runger as there’s lots of puerile T and A juvenility and some creepy music to remind us that this is a horror movie… Better yet, it’s a zombie movie with no zombies. Yes!
I didn't care for it, myself. Overall, not a bad film but a bottom runger as there’s lots of puerile T and A juvenility and some creepy music to remind us that this is a horror movie… Better yet, it’s a zombie movie with no zombies. Yes!
$150,000 was a lot of money to be p!ssing away for only having this to show for it.
A very incongruous review: http://www.roguecinema.com/article654.html
Storm Of The Dead is well acted, the locations are beautiful and slightly claustrophobic and the story is one of the most original that I’ve seen in ages. Bob Cook, the writer/director has crafted a low budget movie to be proud of! The only issue I had with the whole movie was that it seemed like some of the ‘searching’ scenes dragged on a little bit, other than that this is a top shelf movie.
Pretty consistent grievance: you gotta have more than one zombie in your zombie feature.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365789/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt
The story is like a very lousy '3:10 to Yuma.'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeroJ1BK6GQ
Now, I didn't give this plot and story much time to work it's <cough, cough> "magic" on me.
I honestly just skipped ahead every four or five minutes and let it run for ten twenty seconds while I reviewed the camera work, dialog, and audio collection (yes, I am more concerned with the technical execution than the story - not my weak hand) and this $150,000 2006 film doesn't look like it's any better or worse than many of the 2007 - 2012 lo/no budget films I've/we've seen.
> First, I still don't know where the h3ll all that money was spent.
> Second, I honestly wish I could find out what revenue these sort of schlock films bring in.
> Third, there's obviously a huge difference between amateur and professional camera work and audio collection - and it's always surprising/disturbing that multi-feature directors still make sh!t-looking films.
> Fourth, story seems to stymie just waaaaaaay too many writer/director/producer/editors.
> Fifth, you gotta make your kills on screen.
> Sixth, tits are... the tits! I'm a big fan of 'em, but while I don't think tits can save a lo/no budget film, the overwhelming majority of reviewers seem to believe that tits are the saving grace of them.
Next up from the same director: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2831038/
Budget: $164,000
Last edited:
Very informative rayw.
Thanks for taking the time to write these reviews/analyses. I learnt a lot from reading them.
Yep, so much can be learned from critical analysis of these movies and their budgets.
Watching 'An American Ghost Story'/'Revenant' (original title) @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE5ZvR3oLaI
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/?ref_=nv_sr_1
95 min - Horror
Ratings: 3.9/10 from 338 users
Budget: $10,000
EDIT! Ho-LEE sh!T! http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1380586/?ref_=tt_cl_t2
I thought I recognized that nose!
The Scream of the Screaming Screamer! (Video short) 2011
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cedq1t52bA
Will be watching 'Evidence' next @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ9l8pHZOY4
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1640218/?ref_=nm_flmg_edt_3
78 min - Horror
Ratings: 4.9/10 from 2,175 users
Budget: $12,464
Followed by 'Fundamental' @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TgagKrY5vE
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2386229/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
80 min - Horror | Thriller
Ratings: 5.1/10 from 17 users
Budget: $4,700
And maybe 'The Slender Man' @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZenAmqM09W4
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2811690/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
78 min - Horror
Ratings: 3.6/10 from 119 users
Budget: $10,000
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
'An American Ghost Story'/'Revenant' (original title) @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE5ZvR3oLaI
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/?ref_=nv_sr_1
95 min - Horror
Ratings: 3.9/10 from 338 users
Budget: $10,000
Official Website! http://revenant-themovie.com/
FB page: https://www.facebook.com/revenant.movie
ProdCo page: http://2manproduction.com/2manindex/
Being an adrenaline junkie this molasses-paced film bored the puddin outta me.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that with a 2012 budget of $10k that I've seen a lot worse - A LOT WORSE.
In fact, I wish more circa $10k films looked this good, and this is about where I expect a $10k film to be at.
It's slow.
The camera work is sometimes good but mostly blah.
The audio is mostly good but sometimes meh.
The story is meh. Beats me how THIS represents "American" ghost stories. "Just Another American Ghost Story" seems a more appropriate title. Whatever.
The pacing is wonderful if you've the brain of a turtle.
The acting is spotty bad to good.
The dialog is killing this.
The soundtrack is just a albatross around the released work's neck.
I watched the first half hour, 1/3 of the film, was bored to death, then skipped the middle third, then watched the remaining 1/3. Yeah, yeah, yeah I didn't miss much.
Glad I didn't pay for this. Buy maybe you can: https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...3&sa=X&ei=l5VTUorMJobatAbB44GQCQ&ved=0CDMQ6SQ
Hope for $10k I could shoot something better.
Can't wait to see what this did on the festival circuit...
Oh! Lookee at what I found:
http://horrorbug.com/news/news-derek-coles-an-american-ghost-story-coming-to-dvd-august-20th/
Impressive.
On the IMDB review page I found this interesting:
Jon Gale ... executive producer / producer<[$]2k?! WhereTH did the other >$8K go?
Now, if this was ACTUALLY shot for >$2k (which makes a lotta sense) and the remaining was spent on post + marketing THEN I can appreciate this a wee more, and in which case I'd applaud everyone involved even more.
I like this total cast & crew sheet a lot: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast
This is what I'd expect for the money spent.
Anyways...
Here we go with more comments:
The award for the most backhanded compliment goes to:
I'd hate to have a friend write somethign like that about my film.
Yeouch!
Oh, and this review pretty much nails it spot on:
Okay, okay, okay.
Enough of what the ignorant audience thinks.
Lettuce see what the informed reviewers think who (don't) get paid to review this rubbish for blog-filler...
http://lownobudgetreviews.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/an-american-ghost-story-2012/
LOL! I liked this one → http://www.drbloodsvideovault.com/2013/08/an-american-ghost-story-2012.html
Charitable → http://horrornews.net/54961/film-review-revenant-2012/
LOL! → http://dorkswithoutfaces.com/newmicroshock/?p=2280
The level-headed nice guy review → http://hellnotes.com/an-american-ghost-story-dvd-review
Yup → http://culturecrypt.com/movie-reviews/an-american-ghost-story-2012
Ho-LEE sh!T! DO people get PAID to write these reviews?! → http://lahorror.com/2012/10/06/la-horror-review-revenant/
WTH film was he watching?!
Whatever...
Oh, Efffff meeeee! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxUk1ox4M-o
Okay, enough flogging, lettuce see what was on the interview circuit...
http://www.searchmytrash.com/cgi-bin/articlecreditsb.pl?derekcole(11-12)
http://dailygrindhouse.com/interviews/spooky-american-ghost-storys-derek-cole/
Quote of the day:
Shoot for center mass, people.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/?ref_=nv_sr_1
95 min - Horror
Ratings: 3.9/10 from 338 users
Budget: $10,000
5,154
EDIT! Ho-LEE sh!T! http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1380586/?ref_=tt_cl_t2
I thought I recognized that nose!
The Scream of the Screaming Screamer! (Video short) 2011
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cedq1t52bA
Will be watching 'Evidence' next @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ9l8pHZOY4
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1640218/?ref_=nm_flmg_edt_3
78 min - Horror
Ratings: 4.9/10 from 2,175 users
Budget: $12,464
Followed by 'Fundamental' @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TgagKrY5vE
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2386229/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
80 min - Horror | Thriller
Ratings: 5.1/10 from 17 users
Budget: $4,700
And maybe 'The Slender Man' @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZenAmqM09W4
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2811690/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
78 min - Horror
Ratings: 3.6/10 from 119 users
Budget: $10,000
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
'An American Ghost Story'/'Revenant' (original title) @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE5ZvR3oLaI
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/?ref_=nv_sr_1
95 min - Horror
Ratings: 3.9/10 from 338 users
Budget: $10,000
Official Website! http://revenant-themovie.com/
FB page: https://www.facebook.com/revenant.movie
ProdCo page: http://2manproduction.com/2manindex/
Being an adrenaline junkie this molasses-paced film bored the puddin outta me.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that with a 2012 budget of $10k that I've seen a lot worse - A LOT WORSE.
In fact, I wish more circa $10k films looked this good, and this is about where I expect a $10k film to be at.
It's slow.
The camera work is sometimes good but mostly blah.
The audio is mostly good but sometimes meh.
The story is meh. Beats me how THIS represents "American" ghost stories. "Just Another American Ghost Story" seems a more appropriate title. Whatever.
The pacing is wonderful if you've the brain of a turtle.
The acting is spotty bad to good.
The dialog is killing this.
The soundtrack is just a albatross around the released work's neck.
I watched the first half hour, 1/3 of the film, was bored to death, then skipped the middle third, then watched the remaining 1/3. Yeah, yeah, yeah I didn't miss much.
Glad I didn't pay for this. Buy maybe you can: https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...3&sa=X&ei=l5VTUorMJobatAbB44GQCQ&ved=0CDMQ6SQ
Hope for $10k I could shoot something better.
Can't wait to see what this did on the festival circuit...
Oh! Lookee at what I found:
http://horrorbug.com/news/news-derek-coles-an-american-ghost-story-coming-to-dvd-august-20th/
"‘An American Ghost Story’ was a favorite on the festival circuit, playing the Living Dead Festival and Shriekfest Film Festival. At the Buffalo Screams Festival, the film took home the award for Best Editing, while Stephen Twardokus won Best Screenplay. Cole was nominated for Best Director and Best Cinematography."
Very nice!Impressive.
On the IMDB review page I found this interesting:
"After seeing some of the comments about "An American Ghost Story". Which I had funded , I am extremely happy with the film considering we had two and sometimes three people in the entire crew. Along with doing all the post production ourselves. Stephen Twardokus and Derek Cole I feel did an amazing job for the budget they had and it just goes to show what these two could do with a larger budget.
I did expect people to speak their mind but thought more film makers would appreciate the limitations and really give theses guys pats on the back for what they did for under 2K. "
I did expect people to speak their mind but thought more film makers would appreciate the limitations and really give theses guys pats on the back for what they did for under 2K. "
Jon Gale ... executive producer / producer
Now, if this was ACTUALLY shot for >$2k (which makes a lotta sense) and the remaining was spent on post + marketing THEN I can appreciate this a wee more, and in which case I'd applaud everyone involved even more.
I like this total cast & crew sheet a lot: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2241471/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast
This is what I'd expect for the money spent.
Anyways...
Here we go with more comments:
"I read some good review on the movie so I decided to give it a go. But after 90 minutes of boredom I believed that some user(s) may have been "paid" to write good review, on a poor film."
"This film epitomizes a couple of guys who really want to make a horror movie but don't have the patience to hone their craft into creating a well written script that is deftly acted. It's distracting how bad the lead guy is in this (not to mention that he's also the writer). In the hands of a better actor this would have been really effective."
"While it is true that spectacular technical effects and a big budget does not automatically make a good movie, it is however not so that a low budget and few and cheap technical effects automatically make a sublime movie either. Yes, you can build up suspense without much technology. But if the apparition is to be seen at all, it must be much better than in this movie. The ghosts here were so obviously only solid, heavy-moving, and very much alive ordinary people beneath sheets... The actors did not compensate for this flaw either. They were not very good, and none of them were attractive or interesting in anyway."
For really!"This film epitomizes a couple of guys who really want to make a horror movie but don't have the patience to hone their craft into creating a well written script that is deftly acted. It's distracting how bad the lead guy is in this (not to mention that he's also the writer). In the hands of a better actor this would have been really effective."
"While it is true that spectacular technical effects and a big budget does not automatically make a good movie, it is however not so that a low budget and few and cheap technical effects automatically make a sublime movie either. Yes, you can build up suspense without much technology. But if the apparition is to be seen at all, it must be much better than in this movie. The ghosts here were so obviously only solid, heavy-moving, and very much alive ordinary people beneath sheets... The actors did not compensate for this flaw either. They were not very good, and none of them were attractive or interesting in anyway."
The award for the most backhanded compliment goes to:
"Of course, Revenant is far from perfect, the acting may sometimes make you cringe. But the director does his best to scare you with literally nothing. And sometimes he succeeds! Which is no little feat. When I saw that the main actor was also the scriptwriter, everything became clear. This movie is just one big statement to the establishment: look what we can do with nothing, give us the possibility to shoot a real feature! Personnaly, I have been seduced. I like Revenant, even for its weaknesses. No. Especially for its weaknesses! It's a work of love and passion, done by two talented guys. If ever you have tried to make a short film for your family, you know how hard it can be to make something coherent and interesting."
Efffffff meeee.I'd hate to have a friend write somethign like that about my film.
Yeouch!
Oh, and this review pretty much nails it spot on:
"*Spoiler Alert* My Summery of this movie goes a little something like this: A male and a female character move into a house where a whole family was murdered, a house that is known to be haunted.(cliché) Cue spooky music (cliché) A Ball rolls in from seemingly nowhere and stops(cliché) A chair slides across the room by itself(cliché) Drawers and kitchen cabinet doors open and close(cliché) Chairs pile themselves into an abstract structure(cliché) The female character is too freaked out and removes herself from a horrible project in the still of the night(smart move), bye bye(cliché) A radio turns itself on and moves through the stations but can not find one descent station even with ghost power(cliché) Cue spooky child's laughter from nowhere, Hee Hee Hee(cliché) A sheet gets filled out with a human form while the male character is sleeping(so cliché) The landlord comes over and acts suspicious(cliché) Wind up toy walks out of nowhere(cliché) Large Teddy Bear under the bed, now on top of the bed!(cliché) The male character seeks out a previous tenant who says "Get out of there! the house wants to kill you!"(super cliché) The male character continues to taunt the sheet people(ghosts),stating "Just talk to me! give me a sign!"(cliché)(cliché)(cliché)(Blah, Blah, Blah) The sheet fills up in the bed again, this time in a female form, but it disappears when he pulls at it (No not that,(the sheet))(cliché)
Now the male character being so angry at the sheet people (Ghosts) for not killing him or at least trying to, has an epiphany, He Will Sheet The Ghosts. Which he does by running around his house (throwing his sheet everywhere with fury)(not cliché but very, very idiotic) When he finally does catch a ghost with his sheet of fury, the ghost is angry and chases him, so he hides behind a bedroom door. And everyone knows a ghost can't pass through solid matter, what? no cliché here? really? OK, Well it turns out the ghost is a Jedi Master anyways and proceeds to place his hand upon the door from the other-side, literally and figuratively and moves all of the furniture in the room after the poor protagonist. Once out of the bedroom the male character is forcefully held onto the ceiling (cliche) and then thrown pushed and pulled about the house like a rag-doll (Again by way of Jedi Master Ghost Sheet (cliche) until he is tossed with a crash out of his own house through the sliding glass door and passes out. *(He wakes to the realization that it was all a fever dream from acute Epstein Barr Infection and too much late night cable TV in the the 1980's) * This last part is fantasy because I don't give away endings. The directing, cinematography, and acting were quite good though for this level of sheet script writing"
Now the male character being so angry at the sheet people (Ghosts) for not killing him or at least trying to, has an epiphany, He Will Sheet The Ghosts. Which he does by running around his house (throwing his sheet everywhere with fury)(not cliché but very, very idiotic) When he finally does catch a ghost with his sheet of fury, the ghost is angry and chases him, so he hides behind a bedroom door. And everyone knows a ghost can't pass through solid matter, what? no cliché here? really? OK, Well it turns out the ghost is a Jedi Master anyways and proceeds to place his hand upon the door from the other-side, literally and figuratively and moves all of the furniture in the room after the poor protagonist. Once out of the bedroom the male character is forcefully held onto the ceiling (cliche) and then thrown pushed and pulled about the house like a rag-doll (Again by way of Jedi Master Ghost Sheet (cliche) until he is tossed with a crash out of his own house through the sliding glass door and passes out. *(He wakes to the realization that it was all a fever dream from acute Epstein Barr Infection and too much late night cable TV in the the 1980's) * This last part is fantasy because I don't give away endings. The directing, cinematography, and acting were quite good though for this level of sheet script writing"
Okay, okay, okay.
Enough of what the ignorant audience thinks.
Lettuce see what the informed reviewers think who (don't) get paid to review this rubbish for blog-filler...
http://lownobudgetreviews.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/an-american-ghost-story-2012/
LOL! I liked this one → http://www.drbloodsvideovault.com/2013/08/an-american-ghost-story-2012.html
Charitable → http://horrornews.net/54961/film-review-revenant-2012/
LOL! → http://dorkswithoutfaces.com/newmicroshock/?p=2280
The level-headed nice guy review → http://hellnotes.com/an-american-ghost-story-dvd-review
Yup → http://culturecrypt.com/movie-reviews/an-american-ghost-story-2012
Ho-LEE sh!T! DO people get PAID to write these reviews?! → http://lahorror.com/2012/10/06/la-horror-review-revenant/
WTH film was he watching?!
Whatever...
Oh, Efffff meeeee! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxUk1ox4M-o
Okay, enough flogging, lettuce see what was on the interview circuit...
http://www.searchmytrash.com/cgi-bin/articlecreditsb.pl?derekcole(11-12)
"Any interesting behind the scenes stories to tell with this movie?
Well the one thing that comes to mind is the fact that this movie was done in my house and I have a family so almost every nighttime shot in the film was done without sound because in the raw footage you can hear my wife or kids laughing and talking in the living room or bedrooms. We did all the sound FX later cause I didn’t want to force them into different rooms and on top of that make it so they couldn’t do anything while we shot scenes of Stephen walking through halls and rooms. It was a lot of work for sound but we knew we would have to make more notable sound FX anyways."
Well the one thing that comes to mind is the fact that this movie was done in my house and I have a family so almost every nighttime shot in the film was done without sound because in the raw footage you can hear my wife or kids laughing and talking in the living room or bedrooms. We did all the sound FX later cause I didn’t want to force them into different rooms and on top of that make it so they couldn’t do anything while we shot scenes of Stephen walking through halls and rooms. It was a lot of work for sound but we knew we would have to make more notable sound FX anyways."
http://dailygrindhouse.com/interviews/spooky-american-ghost-storys-derek-cole/
Quote of the day:
"[Q]: You’ve been working in the entertainment industry for over a decade, and have been helming your own features for years now. What advice would you have for young or inexperienced directors looking to tackle their first feature?
[A]: The only advice I can give is make movies you like. Persistence is key, and don’t listen to the negative reviews because you will never please everyone."
And somewhere to the left of those two perspectives is about where I stand: Make movies you like, and make 'em to please as many people as possible.[A]: The only advice I can give is make movies you like. Persistence is key, and don’t listen to the negative reviews because you will never please everyone."
Shoot for center mass, people.
Last edited: