Making a movie about people talking of the interstellar war.

[Aspiring Mogul]

Happy new year, everyone.

As stated in my recent threads, I am thinking (as always) of doing that film. One low-cost way of doing it is to have actors talking about the interstellar war, as opposed to showing the combat scenes. I have started a background fictional history of the war, with the introduction and the epilogue. The history is by the defeated Enemy General (EG), who writes it while in prison.

As I understand it, the rule of thumb is that, to adapt prose to film, one page of prose would equal one minute of film, but a history can be lengthened or shortened.

I am thinking that the film, to keep it as low as possible, should have one set of scenes where the EG talks to his counterpart, then another set of scenes where a reporter talks to survivors of the war, and so on. And, to splurge a bit, we can always have a dance scene.

The regulars here know film better than me, but many good movies have been done with inexpensive sets - examples are "Same Time, Next Year", and Hitchcock's "Rear Window".

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

Can you explain this a bit further? In what context were you asking (suggesting?) that Rear Window could be done today for $100,000?

I'm working on a movie with a target budget of $5 mil (miniscule by Hollywood standards but 10x what I've worked with before). Our draft budget has post-production at roughly $350,000. This is a "normal people" movie (for lack of a better term) with no special effects, green screens, etc.

Mara, I got that from @directorik.

I did some digging, and I found that "Rear Window" cost $1 million in 1954 dollars, while "Same Time Next Year" also cost over a million (I can't find the link for the latter movie). Rik, would you care to chime in?

 

[mlesemann]

I did some digging, and I found that "Rear Window" cost $1 million in 1954 dollars, while "Same Time Next Year" also cost over a million (I can't find the link for the latter movie).

For whatever it's (not) worth, purely adjusting for inflation, $1 mil in 1954 would be $11.7 mil in 2024. That does not, of course, take into consideration technology changes.

"Same Time Next Year" is one of my very favorite movies, although it does feel a bit like the stage play that it originally was. I see a budget of $1.1 mil listed here . This movie was made in 1979 (so a full 25 years later) and that budget adjusted for inflation would be $5.1 mil. That's certainly very low but it's not totally surprising given the minimal sets and no action pieces.

 

[directorik]

I am caught in a loop.

Comparing the budgets of specific movies made decades ago with
what could be made today is not a wise exercise.

Even comparing budget estimates between your mentor, your contacts
and me is unwise. Since we are all not in the same room we are likely
answering slightly different questions with our different experiences.
That is the reason for the discrepancy.

I have never read your script and I'm offering budget possibilities based
on my personal experiences making ultra low budget movies.
That is the reason for the discrepancy.

I don't recall discussing “Rear Window” with you, Mogul. I don't believe I
ever said a movie like that could be done for $100,000. A movie like
“Same Time, Next Year” could be done for $100,000.

I've never read your script but from my vague understanding of what you
want to do I stand by my gross generalization: a movie with less than five
actors and one set can be done for $100,000. Or for $5,000,000. Your
contact said post “can cost” $100,000. True.
It “can” cost $350,000.
It “can” cost $10,000.
There is no discrepancy.

You ask for generalizations on a message board and then wonder why my
estimates don't compare with the estimates of others. They never will.

 

[indietalk]

How much to renovate my kitchen?
Um yeah. Are we removing walls? Flooring? Installing beams? Is there mold or asbestos remediation? Drywall work? Celling work? Window or door work? Are we rerouting plumbing and electric? What fixtures do you want? Finishes? Hardware? Appliances? Lighting? What about countertops? Granite? Quartz? What about your backsplash? Slab? Tile? Your kitchen will cost between $15K and $150K. Anyone telling you that you cannot do a kitchen for $15K without asking any questions is doing you a disservice. As well as anyone telling you it will cost $150K these days.

 

[indietalk]

I am caught in a loop.

Two industry professionals answered (you and @mlesemann), and both answers were correct. The loop goes round and round, indeed.

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

Two industry professionals answered (you and @mlesemann), and both answers were correct. The loop goes round and round, indeed.

Haven't we been in a loop for the past few years, talking about talking?

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

I am caught in a loop.

Comparing the budgets of specific movies made decades ago with
what could be made today is not a wise exercise.

Even comparing budget estimates between your mentor, your contacts
and me is unwise. Since we are all not in the same room we are likely
answering slightly different questions with our different experiences.
That is the reason for the discrepancy.

I have never read your script and I'm offering budget possibilities based
on my personal experiences making ultra low budget movies.
That is the reason for the discrepancy.

I don't recall discussing “Rear Window” with you, Mogul. I don't believe I
ever said a movie like that could be done for $100,000. A movie like
“Same Time, Next Year” could be done for $100,000.

I've never read your script but from my vague understanding of what you
want to do I stand by my gross generalization: a movie with less than five
actors and one set can be done for $100,000. Or for $5,000,000. Your
contact said post “can cost” $100,000. True.
It “can” cost $350,000.
It “can” cost $10,000.
There is no discrepancy.

You ask for generalizations on a message board and then wonder why my
estimates don't compare with the estimates of others. They never will.

Rik,

OK, my bad. Of course, movies can be made for any price. I just met my mentor in law, who is, again, pushing me to follow my dream, and he knows of our recent conversations. By the way, I understand "Rear Window" was so expensive because they built virtually a block on stage. I think we can do "Peeping Tom", with the same idea, by just honing in on the apartment in question. IOW, cut out expensive sets, and you can do the same story.

With this in mind, can ultra low-budget movies, costing several hundred thousand dollars, be of good quality? My sense is that, if the cast and crew are smart about it, the final product can be as good as any tent pole.

 

[sfoster]

I am caught in a loop.

I stand by my gross generalization: a movie with less than five actors and one set can be done for $100,000.

Haven't we been in a loop for the past few years, talking about talking?

With this in mind, can ultra low-budget movies, costing several hundred thousand dollars, be of good quality?

 

[sfoster]

The Foot Fist Way had a $79,000 production budget in 2006

The Foot Fist Way - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My sense is that, if the cast and crew are smart about it, the final product can be as good as any tent pole.

The foot fist way isn't as good as Rush Hour.
Don't watch it expecting a 35 million dollar film with jackie chan and a team of stun men, that's apples to oranges.

Success is measured differently for low budget indie films.
For Danny McBride, this launched his career and afterward he's sold three different television series to HBO that I know of.

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

The Foot Fist Way had a $79,000 production budget in 2006

The Foot Fist Way - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The foot fist way isn't as good as Rush Hour.
Don't watch it expecting a 35 million dollar film with jackie chan and a team of stun men, that's apples to oranges.

Success is measured differently for low budget indie films.
For Danny McBride, this launched his career and afterward he's sold three different television series to HBO that I know of.

That's interesting to me. I'm not interested in just being another producer, given my achievements in law, so it's going to be all or nothing - either I become a mogul or I crash. And, at this stage of my life, it wouldn't matter if I do crash, because I've got everything else that I've wanted.

By the way, I've wanted to do a (low-budget?) movie based on the Last Dragon's Shonuff. Perhaps I should start a thread on that - @indietalk, how about talking about talking about a martial arts movie?

 

[sfoster]

That's interesting to me. I'm not interested in just being another producer, given my achievements in law, so it's going to be all or nothing - either I become a mogul or I crash. And, at this stage of my life, it wouldn't matter if I do crash, because I've got everything else that I've wanted.

I'd love for you to be famously successful, or for anyone from IT for that matter, I wish you the best of luck.

After we all make our first film, most of us are horrified at how bad it is, and how difficult it actually is to make something good.
Film is funny like that.

If we were talking about painting, or playing the piano, it's assumed that you need years of practice - if not decades - before reaching the quality that people will begin to appreciate you. Yet with movie scripts or film production everyone thinks they just hit the ground running and be masters without the years of failure and hard work and experience.

 

[mlesemann]

it's going to be all or nothing - either I become a mogul or I crash.

What, exactly, would that entail? I'm not trying to be a wise ass, but mean it as a serious question.

Does that mean that (a) the movie earns X times its budget, whatever X is to you or (b) it's widely lauded by viewers and/or critics or (c) something else?

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

What, exactly, would that entail? I'm not trying to be a wise ass, but mean it as a serious question.

Does that mean that (a) the movie earns X times its budget, whatever X is to you or (b) it's widely lauded by viewers and/or critics or (c) something else?

When I started out, that meant being the next George Lucas, with Lucasfilm. Now that I'm older and have a fairly large law firm, I'm not so enamoured with an empire, and I'm not sure I want a Lucasfilm, with all its divisions. That said, I haven't shot a single frame of film, and I may never do it, so I'll just make Lucasfilm as my goal. Or to put it another way, create a billion-dollar franchise.

I'd love for you to be famously successful, or for anyone from IT for that matter, I wish you the best of luck.

After we all make our first film, most of us are horrified at how bad it is, and how difficult it actually is to make something good.
Film is funny like that.

If we were talking about painting, or playing the piano, it's assumed that you need years of practice - if not decades - before reaching the quality that people will begin to appreciate you. Yet with movie scripts or film production everyone thinks they just hit the ground running and be masters without the years of failure and hard work and experience.

Agreed. But I will presume no one will want to fund my delusion of grandeur, so I'll have to prepare to crash. My (latest) plan is to write everything out, the way I want it, then have some quality Youtube videos and use them to pitch for funding. Along the way, I can afford a few low-budget movies, so I can do those and get it out of my system. If they're awful, so be it, because I have enough accomplishments that it won't matter.

 

[indietalk]

Haven't we been in a loop for the past few years, talking about talking?

Yeah, I think actually the interstellar was is over, might wanna check.

 

[directorik]

With this in mind, can ultra low-budget movies, costing several hundred thousand dollars, be of good quality? My sense is that, if the cast and crew are smart about it, the final product can be as good as any tent pole.

Yes, a movie costing several hundred thousand dollars can be of good quality.

My (latest) plan is to write everything out, the way I want it, then have some quality Youtube videos and use them to pitch for funding. Along the way, I can afford a few low-budget movies, so I can do those and get it out of my system. If they're awful, so be it, because I have enough accomplishments that it won't matter.

This is essentially the plan you and I spoke about - what is it now? 10 years ago? 15?

Make one movie. Maybe make a second. Even if they are not as good as you want them to be.

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

This is essentially the plan you and I spoke about - what is it now? 10 years ago? 15?

When we met, we talked about making a movie; now we're talking about talking ....... you know.

So there's progress.

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

Yeah, I think actually the interstellar was is over, might wanna check.

We've been in this loop for about two years, and many wars have been finished in less time, so that makese sense. But people are still talking about those wars, so there's nothing to stop us from ...... you know.

In that regard ......

@directorik, we met about 15 years ago, and I can still remember you said you would be at the door of the restaurant wearing an "Empire Strikes Back" baseball cap. Little did you know that the movie is one of my all-time favourites, and the franchise was my inspiration for wanting to get into the business.

Since that time, however, a paradigm shift may have occurred. Streaming is now the norm, as opposed to cable. Furthermore, increasingly, the Youtube shorts can go viral and be the basis for a franchise - Skibidi Toilet is one of the latest one. Statistically speaking, if no one knows anything, then the chance of a cheapo Youtube video succeeding is exactly the same as a tent pole, so it may make sense to go that way. This is, of course, nothing new, because low-budget films like Paranormal Activity did become successful franchiese. But the difference now is that Youtube has offered an even more cost effective (cheap?) way to roll the dice.

In a similar vein, online fiction can also go viral and receive funding - Martin Weir's "The Martian" is one such example.

If so, then I can definitely do quite a bit. I will ask some other contacts, those above the line, about this.

 

[mlesemann]

For the nickel it's (not) worth: make a movie NOW that's as good as you can make it, given whatever your limitations are (story, budget, cast, whatever). Then put it out in the world in whatever ways are available: YouTube, other streamers (there's plenty available these days for very low budget projects), etc. See what people think of it and what (if any) traction it gets. And then decide whether or not you have the stomach to do it again.

I made 2 features in (roughly) 4 years, each for a few hundred thousand dollars. Between (mental & physical) exhaustion + family stuff, it's been a dozen years since I released the 2nd but I'm making headway with the 3rd and I think (hope) the 4th isn't too far behind it. We all have lives and all sorts of shit going on. I'm eager now for these next 2 but wasn't ready a few years ago.

Do it. Don't do it. Whatever you want. But don't leave things undone that you want to do and actually CAN do, and don't spend so much time figuring out what you can do that life takes over and it's no longer possible, because that happens eventually to all of us.

Speech over

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

We all have lives and all sorts of shit going on. I'm eager now for these next 2 but wasn't ready a few years ago.

Mara,

Agreed. But I'm not the most efficient worker, so that's more of an issue for me. That said, Arnold said it best - when he was distracted during his body building days, his weights seemed heavier and harder to lift, so he decided to focus on his goal. I read biographies, and I know the late Larry Flynt, who build the Hustler empire, said that a person had to have "laser like vision" in his quest. That's especially poignant for me, because I'm also a member of Mensa, the high-IQ organization, and we tend to dissipate our efforts everywhere, not focusing on what's important. I've made this mistake many times, so I've learned my lesson.

As you rightly said, making a film (or anything) will be exhausting. Even writing, my creative passion, will be exhausting. So I can't do it, except to dabble, which I've been doing with my writing - you've seen some of that.

The other issue is that I've built a law firm, which is expanding quite rapidly. I would like to see this run its course - if this course takes my lifetime, then I will not want to do that, but nothing expands forever, so I would want to finish this journey before starting on the next.

That's my perspective.

 

[Aspiring Mogul]

@mlesemann, thanks for your encouragement. Same for everyone.

To elaborate, the staff, students, and lawyers in my firm need my guidance, and everyone knows that I'm holding it together. We are occupying a sweet spot that others cannot occupy, and we're occupying more of those sweet spots in our jurisdiction and, possibly in the future, the US. So I can't quite leave now.

That said, I have been writing bits and pieces, and I wouldn't mind doing a few videos to get it out of my system. But I can only pay so much attention to it, because I have to keep my priorities straight.