Like yeah I am sure winning the grand jury award at Sundance doesn't hurt. But #1 I didn't get into this for awards (though I do believe that my short is good enough to win. #2 there are many great directors who didn't get into any of those big festivals. #3 there are people who have had their shorts get into Sundance who did nothing.
#1 You're the one who referenced directors who succeeded via the route of top festivals, so now you're saying the list of examples YOU gave was not representative of the route to success you wish to take? Can you list any directors who are good examples of success via the route you're suggesting?
#2 There are indeed several other routes to making it as a director, all of them as far as I'm aware, consisted of hard work via the long game, rather than expecting a 7 figure budget for their first feature.
#3, Yes, the vast majority in fact.
And one of the people who read my script was my producing partner.
If s/he really is a producer, then s/he already knows how to fund a feature and there was no point in starting this thread!
What is so special about an industry guy reading it unless he gets me money?
Nothing whatsoever! Again though, you're the one looking to get into the industry, you're the one looking for those in the industry to supply you with a million dollars and you're the one who is going to have to work with industry guys.
I make films for my family, friends, people who think like me, and myself. And in the end of the day it's my opinion that matters. No one else. If I think it's worth making I will make it.
Fine, no problem with that approach at all, except of course that if you're making the film for yourself and your friends and family then you, your friends and family are going to have to fund it! Why would an investor give you a million dollars to make something for you and your family? If you want an investor to give you THEIR money, it's obviously THEIR opinion "that matters", not yours!
How many filmmakers have made their first feature without their family?
Plenty, tens of thousands probably, but that's irrelevant to your stated situation. How many have made their first feature with a 7 figure budget supplied by unrelated investors to someone with no prior directing experience? So far you've failed to name a single example!
You MUST dream big. It may sound delusional to others.
No one here thinks that dreaming big is bad or should be avoided. It's only delusional when trying to make that dream reality and expecting reality to conform to your dream rather than the other way around!
Audio: All I am really reading are a lot of limiting beliefs that you are trying to get me to believe. But that's not my way of thinking.
Your "way of thinking" or my personal beliefs (limiting or otherwise) have absolutely no influence whatsoever on how the film industry actually operates in reality. To believe otherwise is truly delusional!!!
But those people I mentioned thought it was possible to get $1 million or $2 million to make their film and they did just that.
You now seem to be resorting to outright lies to support your delusion! All the people you mentioned: Studied formally for years and built a network of influential industry pros to aid them. Made truly exceptional shorts or nano/micro budget films first. Achieved significant success in a closely related field first. Worked their way through the professional ranks first. Or, any combination of the above. Not one of them did "just" that, they all did a considerable amount before the "that" you're referring to (being given a 7 figure film budget)!
That's why you go and find someone who wants to roll the dice. It happens.
Does it? You've failed to give one single example of "it happening".
Sure, investing in film is somewhat of a gamble but NO ONE invests 7 figures in a film without trying to stack the odds in their favour. Investing 7 figures in a film and engaging a complete novice to make it, is doing the exact opposite and stacking the odds against their favour. Why would investors deliberately stack the odds against themselves for no gain? When you can answer that question (to the satisfaction of investors), you will have answered your thread's question!
But I am into the the laws of attraction and visualization. It's already worked in my life as far as getting jobs (acting and not acting) and even getting my last short done.
Have any of your jobs or your last short involved someone giving you a million dollars to complete something you've never attempted before?
I am taking action and everyday getting closer to making this film happen. But having any limitations will be the death of it.
No film that I'm aware of has ever been made without "any limitations". As the budget gets bigger so does the expectation of the investors (and the consumers). If creating without limitation is your goal, you should look at philosophy or some other conceptual art, you won't find what you're looking for in the film industry.
And in the end if I get only $100,000 then I will find a way to make a great film with that.
If you can find a way to make a great film for $100k, why are you looking for $2.5m? Or more appropriately, why would anyone give you 2.5m to make a great film if it could be done for $100k?
I just don't want to work with ultra low budgets. It is extremely stressful. The budget will allow us to make this film comfortably ... It's just not fun and I haven't found anyone that I can trust.
These statements are not why you should get your funding, they are in fact exactly the reason why no one will give you the funding you're after!! Having a bigger budget certainly solves some of the difficulties faced by no budget filmmakers but it introduces a whole bunch of new ones. The aforementioned higher expectation of investors and consumers, higher technical specifications to meet and higher earnings to break even, just to name a few. Filmmaking doesn't get less stressful as the budget increases, it gets more stressful! That you don't even appear to know this basic fact, let alone have experience of it or a proven record of excelling under those conditions is precisely why you won't find anyone in their right mind to fund your film! Again, NO ONE is going to give you $500k - $2.5m so that you can make a $100k film and use the rest to have "fun". ALL investors want a film which is better than the budget indicates, regardless of whether the budget is $200k, $200m or anywhere in between!
The very fact that you asked this thread's question (essentially; "how can I raise $500k - $2.5m to make/direct my film"), indicates that you won't get it and that you wouldn't know what to do with it, even if by some miracle you did get it! Finding out how to raise a 7 figure film budget just requires a few hours with google and a modicum of research ability, it's a pathetically easy task compared to either; 1. Actually fulfilling the conditions required to attract that level of funding OR 2. Actually making a successful film with that budget. If you can't figure out this first "pathetically easy" task, how much chance is there that you'll succeed with the subsequent, infinitely more difficult tasks?
In short, your question indicates a level of ignorance which precludes you from achieving your goal! You have essentially 3 options going forward: 1. Cling to your ignorance, rail against/insult all those who point out that your ignorance is what's holding you back, hope for a miracle and in all likelihood be forced to give up your goal, 2. Voluntarily give up your goal, go and make a ton of cash doing something else and fund your own films in a decade or so or 3. Put in the time and effort to cure your ignorance and develop the skills and experience to take advantage of that new found knowledge. #1 has zero or virtually zero chance of success, #3 has a slim chance of success, as does #2 but, #3 gives you a much better chance of making a good film if/when you do acquire a significant budget.
I'll take a slim chance over essentially no chance every single time, if it's something I'm serious about. The question is, are YOU serious?
G
