• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Question about marketing a quadrilogy.

H

harmonica44

I have an idea for series, and make a movie to get some hopeful success to brake into the business. I was thinking of making the second one in the series first, since it has a much more original and unique plot than the others. They are action movies but the second one is written in a way that the action will be much cheaper to film on a microbudget. So for those two reasons I think making the second one first is the way to go.

But since it continues off the first I was thinking of starting out with a re-cap right at the beginning of the film, done TV show style. The thing is would producers or audiences find it too odd, that I am recaping another hypothetical movie that hasn't been made? If the movie gets finished and released and makes money, then I can make the second one, and even splice in the re-cap scenes with the same actors and all. I need to have some sort of recap or explanation for the movie to be understood though since I wanna do the second story first.

Now Quentin Tarantino can get away with doing a faux recap and making it stylish but would that come off as amateurish for a newcomer? This script is not at all lighthearted and deals with extremely dark controversial subject matter in it's plot, so would a faux recap also seem out of place perhaps? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Which Tarantino film uses a ‘faux recap’?

Honestly, I think this is a bad idea. It wouldn’t make sense. If it’s a sequel, keep it as a sequel. I assume the title wouldn’t be “AWESOME ACTION MOVIE: PART 2!”, or something similar, because that would get really confusing.

Of course, if you want to show the events that took place immediately before this story began, incorporating it into this new story would probably work best. Condense the original script into a short prologue and tag it onto the start. You could then flashback to these events during the film, to give reference to it. This prologue could then be expanded in the future, to act as a prequel. But if too much reference is made to the original, non-existent film, as I assume would need to be as this would be a continuation of that film, this still probably will not work.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just 'write' part two stand alone - ultimately ALL four will need to do so individually.

It'll prob take six months to get it completely in shape - all the best, Jim.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lucas did it with Star Wars with the preroll text in the beginning. It was a fantastic script and production though, so u less you can match that in modern standards I wouldn't try to.

Can you introduce the characters and backstory like you would in any other movie that stood alone?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well there is a lot more backstory than usual, which is why it would be very difficult for one character to explain it all to another, hence the recap idea.

Tarantino never used a faux recap, I'm just saying he could get away with it and come off cool, if he wanted to.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't want to stray too far off-topic, but I think you're getting ahead of yourself here - am I right in thinking that you've never made a film? The chances that the general public will want to watch your first film are slim enough already; the idea that it's going to be bought up and distributed giving you the funding for a prequel and two sequels is verging on ridiculous. My only advice is to get out there and make a film - it'll probably be crap, but everyone has to start somewhere. Instead of getting hung-up on trivial details like presenting the back story of a non-existent quadrilogy in a Tarantino-esque fashion or how to pay for your more expensive sequels, just make something. You may one day be a brilliant filmmaker, but for the time being you seem to be far more interested in talking about making films than actually making them.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
When I read your first post, I’m assuming you want to shoot several scenes from the first movie and edit them together to form a kind-of montage, to recap viewers on what has happened previously, in a non-existent film? Is this correct?

To me, this would really put me off. You’d be skipping out on the development of protagonist and antagonist. In a sequel, if it’s a continuation of the story, you’ll just be jumping in and giving us these characters that we already know and love/hate. In your film, we won’t know these characters, we’ll just have to make a lot of assumptions on who they are and why they’re doing the things that they are.

It could work, it’d just be confusing. Imagine all the people who watch your film and think “This is awesome! I really need to see that first film! Where can I get it?” And you have to tell them “Well... I haven’t made it yet.”

I, for one, want to watch a series of films in order, not backwards. I don’t think I’d bother watching any sequel, when the original hadn’t even been made. I’d just wait for you to make the original, then watch the second film, well… second.

I’d say rewrite your film. Plan it so that you can film it on a reduced budget. The parts of your first script that cost too much, the car crashes, the explosions, either get rid of them, or figure out how to do them cheap (i.e. digitally! miniatures!). Incorporate any back story into your movie. Allow us to see your characters develop.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
But since it continues off the first I was thinking of starting out with a re-cap right at the beginning of the film, done TV show style. The thing is would producers or audiences find it too odd, that I am recaping another hypothetical movie that hasn't been made?
Click to expand...
Yes, distributors, producers and audiences would find it odd. And doing
this might make a difficult process even more difficult. But since the story
you want to tell first will not stand on its own, the re-cap idea seems to
be the only way to do.

Maybe you'll be the first to pull it off and start a new trend. I think you
should give it a shot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well I don't know now after reading the comments. The only reason why I wanna make the second one first is because I have one shot at one movie, and it's by far the best plot I have. I could make the first one first, but the second one, because it's all set in confined spaces, has no room for a car chase. The first one however takes place in highway territory and would be perfect for it. What if I used CGI software to create the car chase? If I found someone willing to work for very low pay on it, could I have a whole 10 minute car and police helicopter chase, that is all CGI, for say... $2000? And can the CGI look convincing enough that people can exit wracked up vehicles even though the vehicles are CGI and not really surrounding them?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Don't CGI an entire car chase unless you're making an animated movie. There's no way someone for cheap could pull thus off realistic. ILM might even have problems doing it. It takes a team of animators and modelers and riggers and more to pull off smaller scenes, much less a 10 minute chase. Render time alone for that will cost thousands.

There's a reason why most all fo the big directors shoot this stuff as practical as possible.

I feel for you man. You have a story you want to tell and limited means. Take the challenge and make it great. There's no reason why this had to bet our one and only chance, regardless of budget now or in the future. Get out there and make something.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks. Well I need to know what I can make before I start. CGI won't do that then. Well I might somehow be able to get a car and paint it temporarily to look like a cop car. What about split screening and things like that? So instead of seeing one cop car, on the screen you actually see two or more, but it's all the same car? Instead of seeing two making a road block, it's actually the same one on two takes put together? Some directors have used electric powered toy cars in their movies but I have no idea how I would make that look convincing. What about speeding a real car, but adding blue screen background as oppose to CGI?

And when I ever I want a car to crash I could film it from the inside of a car and shake the cam as if the car is rolling over, like one guy did on a microbudget film I saw. I could use a toy helicopter instead of CGI, and I could only show it for a second each take or as short as it needs to be. Perhaps I could shake the point of view when it's on screen, in order to convince the audience that it's not an obviously fake chopper. Is that at all do-able?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yeah, when I say ‘digital’, I’m referring not only to fully rendered CGI, but also to the sneaky little effects you can do in post. Your road block example is an excellent idea, shoot the scene once with a car on the left, then again with car on the right, edit in a split screen in post and there you have it, a two car road block! This would need to be shot with a perfectly static camera though, so if you’re going hand held, this would cause problems. I’m not a big fan of the whole “POV shaky-cam, to make it as though the car has crashed” type of thing, although I’ve seen it used quite a lot. If you can see the outside world through the windows of your car, it’s going to be difficult to trick the audience using this technique.

If you want to use CGI, do it sparingly. A few seconds on screen may be enough to fool the audience. Give them any longer and they’ll start to notice the flaws in your cheap, amateur model.

Not sure on the legalities, but I’ve got a feeling it would be illegal to paint a car up as a police car and cruise around the streets in it!

I’ve mentioned it a few times on this forum, but I think Stu Maschwitz’s “DV Rebels Guide: An all-digital approach to making KILLER ACTION MOVIES on the cheap” would be a perfect read for you!

This is all off topic now, so back to the original point… I still think having a recap of a film that doesn’t exist would be odd!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Do you have any of said 4 part movie written?

Or is it all in your mind, yet to see the page?

It ALL starts with a script - no script no shoot - unless it's a short but even then it must be very tight and story boarded.

All the best, Jim.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well most movies that have police cars, look like cop cars on the outside but are civilian cars on the inside. So I thought they probably painted them. I can find out from cops what the laws are if I'm shooting a movie. And yes, I use to hate the shaky cam effect but now I am more accepting of it, seeing as how it's sometimes required for low budget effects.

I have the first almost finished and the second one is in progress but know what I wanna do. The third and fourth I have treatments for but that's it. The problem with making the second one first is that there is a twist that happens in it with a certain character, but if I make the second one first, then the audience is robbed of that twist for a prequel afterwords, since already know what happens. That's a downside. It would be easier to decide which one to film based on what audiences will more likely want in a thriller.

Are there any good books out there on how to film microbudget car chases, and action scenes, using digital effects, green screen and whatever works to make it look good?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Looks like a good read, but I read that book is only useful if you are using Adobe After Effects Pro. My DP has final cut pro, and not sure if he's familiar much with Adobe. I heard Adobe is not near as professional quality as Final Cut though, if that's true.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
Looks like a good read, but I read that book is only useful if you are using Adobe After Effects Pro. My DP has final cut pro, and not sure if he's familiar much with Adobe. I heard Adobe is not near as professional quality as Final Cut though, if that's true.
Click to expand...

Final Cut Pro is a non-linear editor like Adobe Premiere; After Effects (there isn't a "Pro" version) is a compositing program. They do totally different things, and both are popular amongst professionals. To do the compositing for a CG heavy movie in FCP instead of something like AE would be absolute lunacy.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
And FCP is not as professional as AVID. These kinds of discussions are more a distracter from making movies than an enabler to help make movies. My guess is that provided the editor is proficient in the software, no one can tell the difference between something cut in FCP, Premiere, Vegas, or AVID.

And the choice of editing application really has no impact on how the film is shot, or how the story is told.

I've seen people spend months and years wrapped around the technology of fimmaking and often become crippled by it. I've also seen filmmakers produce movies that seem to offend me in their complete lack of understanding of the "proper" way to produce a movie, and more often than not, their films are created, completed, and very well recieved while the people focusing on all the tech side of things never finish their project.

This topic started with how to make the story work. The choice of editing and compositing software is irrelevent to story-telling.

harmonica44 said:
I heard Adobe is not near as professional quality as Final Cut though, if that's true.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
True, I am much more confident in the storytelling, than the technical. So is it true that more newcomers make a whole feature for their first movie, instead of s short, in order to break in? Because there are several directors who have done shorts and then got funding for a feature, to be made from the short. It seems more than rare, but what do I know. I have heard of directors making short films to get funding, but almost never heard of any who have shot a movie themselves, on all their own money. It has happened but it doesn't seem near as common, unless it's really the other way around.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well I decided to make the first story first, cause that way the original surprises will still remain surprises. Instead of a recap, at the beginning though, I will put a to be continued preview at the end for what's to come in a possible sequel. That is if the first is successful enough for a sequel to get made of course. Is this an okay idea? It's been done before with some movies, not knowing if there was going to be a sequel.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top