Short vs Feature Film - Seeking advice from my peers!

[rayw]

Yes you're right. I wouldn't expect the short to make any money whatsoever, just help to raise more funds for the feature. At that point though I would be going for closer to $250k for the final budget. Thanks for the advice!

Great.
What about that $40-$70 you're looking to, essentially, blow?
And now you're looking to springboard to blowing a quarter mil.

I've seen a lotta really cheap films.
And by this industry's standards anything less than $4mil is a cheap, no-budget film.
And the overwhelming majority of them have almost zero public documentation of profitably recouping their expenses through revenues.
$40 to $70 to $250 THOU$AND! DOLLAR$! is a lotta money to be "redistributing" into the economy.
Maybe you're just a sh!tload more generous than I am, but I'd rather have a nice car for each of my family members or a house for that kind of money.



You don't expect the short to make money.
Great.
How are you going to make back that $40-70K?
Presales?
Magnet/Magnolia, Anchor Bay, or IFC going to pick it up for distro?
Please don't tell me you're going to try to make a buck offa Netflix and Apple with it.

 

[TheArtist]

Forget shorts. Never spend more than a few hundred bucks on a short. It's DOA when completed. You've already done a feature, so why even consider a short?

Dude, 1400+ posts on the forum and you still saying stuff like this ?

A "few hundred bucks" ? How can you rent equipment, hire and feed a crew with a few hundred bucks ? I'm in the process of pre-producing a short and there is no way on earth I could do anything worthwhile on a few hundred bucks.

My opinion is that you're still thinking in terms of "family films", like "hey, use your brother/sisters/cousins as actors and give the DIY boom pole to your mother while your dad fixes the light for you". Comes a point in the filmmaker's life when he needs to grow up from that.

 

[GuerrillaAngel]

Dude, 1400+ posts on the forum and you still saying stuff like this ?

A "few hundred bucks" ? How can you rent equipment, hire and feed a crew with a few hundred bucks ? I'm in the process of pre-producing a short and there is no way on earth I could do anything worthwhile on a few hundred bucks.

How about this for a response: What the heck are you doing renting equipment and hiring a film crew for a SHORT? You don't need most of these things to make a short. (You got brainwashed by your film school).

If you want to gain experience with expensive equipment and large crews, volunteer to PA on someone else's shoot.

and there is no way on earth I could do anything worthwhile on a few hundred bucks

Other people have created worthwhile films for next to nothing, why can't you? More money DOES NOT equate to better films. Creative filmmaking DOES.

My opinion is that you're still thinking in terms of "family films", like "hey, use your brother/sisters/cousins as actors and give the DIY boom pole to your mother while your dad fixes the light for you". Comes a point in the filmmaker's life when he needs to grow up from that.

And you'd be wrong. I found most of my actors for my feature films and some crew members via craigslist and screened for people who would be committed to the project. Mostly unpaid.

-------

I made an award winning feature film for less than what many people paid for their short. Indeed, you can buy a copy for yourself for a look-see: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0963781332

Moral: Make as many no-budget shorts to perfect your craft all the while saving your money for a feature.

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

What the heck are you doing renting equipment and hiring a film crew for a SHORT?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK_cdkpazjI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiikS2xRSdE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9jd6lyGvMI
http://player.vimeo.com/video/11099712
http://vimeo.com/33025640
http://www.shortoftheweek.com/2008/05/12/i-love-sarah-jane/
http://www.shortoftheweek.com/2012/04/03/mr-foley/

You know what, check out this site:
http://www.shortoftheweek.com

Other people have created worthwhile films for next to nothing, why can't you?

Very true. But some examples would be nice.

 

[GuerrillaAngel]

Chimp, that first one was an excellent example. It was great!
------
Examples would indeed be great, but we don't always know their budgets, especially when posted online. However, I've seen a number at a monthly open screen night locally, with the filmmakers in attendance.

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

Chimp, that first one was an excellent example. It was great!

Yep! Great short with some cool VFX and social commentary.

Examples would indeed be great, but we don't always know their budgets, especially when posted online. However, I've seen a number at a monthly open screen night locally, with the filmmakers in attendance.

I see what you're saying.

The point I am trying to make is that it is very possible to make a feature (and it could be successful), but shorts can be profitable/successful as well.

Chimp

 

[itarumaa]

I am sure those shorts ChimpPhobiaFilms are great and so on but does anyone know what was the result of those? If you do great short film, what happens after that? Do you get a change to work in the business full time or do you just do another great short and so on.

I cannot think too many examples of short films that would eventually mean the person would work in longer films and get paid doing those. Of course there are couple of them but it does seem like a winning a lottery type of change.

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

I am sure those shorts ChimpPhobiaFilms are great and so on but does anyone know what was the result of those?

Sight

Becoming very popular online. Has been mentioned on sites Huffington Post and Short of the Week.

The Raven:

http://screenrant.com/the-raven-sci-fi-short-film-clip-pauly-56349/

The Guilt:

Filmmaker won 500 grand.

a Culpa, translated as The Guilt, is an accomplished and absorbing short film from Spanish director David Victori and a worthy winner to one of the most high profile short film contests ever. YouTube partnered with the airline Emirates, as well as with Scott Free, a production company founded by Ridley Scott and his late brother Tony, to offer a $500,000 prize to one talented filmmaker. The contest began in January, and through a public voting process was whittled down to 10 finalists. The 10 finalists were flown to the Venice Film Festival where their films were exhibited in a special gala screening, and last night star actor Michael Fassbender presented Victori as the winner.

Don't Move

The latest film from the successful UK based filmmaking group "Bloody Cuts". They now have a large following willing to fund their shorts. They seem to be doing well

I Love Sarah Jane

Praise from Sundance and many other festivals. The director has wrote and directed a fairly successful feature, and the main actress is doing well in Hollywood

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1127632/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

His "big" feature.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1403177/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1985859/

Mr. Foley

I'm not sure about this one. Haven't heard much about them.

If you do great short film, what happens after that? Do you get a change to work in the business full time or do you just do another great short and so on.

It depends who sees it

 

[itarumaa]

Ok I have to admit that results are great, specially the I Love Sarah Jane short and it would not be a bad thing to win 500 000 dollars either

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

Ok I have to admit that results are great, specially the I Love Sarah Jane short and it would not be a bad thing to win 500 000 dollars either

Yeah, I don't think I'd be complaining about 500 grand either

 

[GuerrillaAngel]

Chimp, Other than a short used as a stepping stone to something bigger, can you suggest how someone can earn back some of the $25,000 spent on a 15 minute short?

 

[sfoster]

Chimp, Other than a short used as a stepping stone to something bigger, can you suggest how someone can earn back some of the $25,000 spent on a 15 minute short?

I realize this is redundant, but win a contest for $500,000
I was laughing my ass off when that guy from American Movie thought he was going to sell 3,000 copies of his 30 minute short for $15 a pop

Then when they win a scratch off for $20 what do they do.. blow it on a case of beer. Amazing they didn't find someone elses short film to go buy with that money

 

[jax_rox]

Chimp, Other than a short used as a stepping stone to something bigger, can you suggest how someone can earn back some of the $25,000 spent on a 15 minute short?

What is the purpose of your short? If the purpose is to be kick-ass, a great calling card, to get you noticed... Then do you really need to earn the money back? If the film gets you noticed, was it worth the $25k? Only you can answer that.

I mean, if all you wanted to do is make money then there are a lot better and safer ways to do so than make a film, even if it is a feature.

 

[rayw]

I mean, if all you wanted to do is make money then there are a lot better and safer ways to do so than make a film, even if it is a feature.

+1!

So only put in money that you can absolutely afford to lose.

There is a slim chance you'll hit it big but your eyes need to be wide open - that chance exists but is very very slim.

I'd love to hit it big but creating a great (in my view) short or feature is probably enough for me. That's why I do this. That's also why I try to keep my costs to the minimum.

+1

Bingo.

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​

 

[IndiePaul]

Lots of great advice on this thread.

Why do most of us write and direct movies? A lucky few are industry pros and get paid for their work. Most have a passion for it and don't get paid. Many want to be one of the lucky 0.0001% and create that hit short/feature that gets them noticed (and generates paid-future work or funding for their next gig). The exceptional exceptions find themselves with a 'Saw', 'Paranormal Activity' etc - all box office/financial hits.

If you are going to put $10k, $20, $30k, whatever into a short/feature ensure you do your research ( rayw's has some great posts on the topic ). The sad reality is that you will likely see zero financial return, hell the cost will be negative to you.

So only put in money that you can absolutely afford to lose.

There is a slim chance you'll hit it big but your eyes need to be wide open - that chance exists but is very very slim.

I'd love to hit it big but creating a great (in my view) short or feature is probably enough for me. That's why I do this. That's also why I try to keep my costs to the minimum.

 

[CraigL]

So only put in money that you can absolutely afford to lose.

Good advice for any sort of gambling, which is basically what this is.

CraigL

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

Chimp, Other than a short used as a stepping stone to something bigger, can you suggest how someone can earn back some of the $25,000 spent on a 15 minute short?

The director of "The Guilt" won 500 grand. I think he's covered.
Th guy who made "The Raven" is going to be directing a major feature film (most likely based upon his short film). He's covered.
The director of "Sight" will probably be making a feature film. And considering the praise he got from other filmmakers, festivals, and websites,channels, and papers, he/she is probably getting discovered by major studios or could raise a lot of money on a crowd-funding site like Kickstarter. He's covered.
The directors of "Don't Move" raised money through Kickstarter for that short. They began doing short films, and began doing bigger projects. After doing some professionally done short films, they began getting a large following. Their shorts are now crowd-funded by their followers and they are going to be moving onto bigger projects soon. They seem to be doing well financially. They're covered.
The director of "I Love Sarah Jane" is making high-budgeted feature films and is fairly wealthy. The actress in it is doing very good as well They're covered.
Not sure about the directors of "Mr. Foley". I heard they shot a short film on RED last year. That's all I know.

 

[rayw]

The director of "The Guilt" won 500 grand. I think he's covered.

Yeah, but you have to acknowledge that was a pretty long shot for any single entrant toward a guaranteed payout irregardless of merit.

http://www.youtube.com/user/yourfilmfestival/about

"This is Your Film Festival. Created, watched, and judged by you. From 15,000 entries down to just one -- the winner of Your Film Festival has now been announced."​

Lettuce consider a probable range of sum creative resources that went towards that single $500k payout.

15,000 entries. Possibly rounded up some, but likely rounded down, so lettuce call it between 14,500 and 15,500 actual entries.

Max entry is 15min in length, but from the average finalist entry range time let's calculate the 14.5k to 15.5k to average in that range.

10.52 - 15min
x 14,500 - 15,500 entries
= 152,540 - 232,500min of finished product submitted
= 2542 - 3,875hrs of finished product submitted

And lettuce guesstimate using personal rudimentary experience that for every minute of finished product that it takes about four to twenty times that amount of time to actually plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro.

2542 - 3,875hrs of finished product submitted
x 4 - 20 multiple of plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro
= 10,168 - 77,500hrs of plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro

The lettuce figure out the combined cast & crew hours estimating that most of these shorts had one to four people in front of the lens and the same behind it = 2 - 8 people per submission.

2 - 8 cast & crew
x 10,168 - 77,500hrs of plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro
= 20,336 - 620,000hrs of labor

Now we gotta figure out the value of that whopping range of hours.
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/entertainment-and-sports/producers-and-directors.htm#tab-5

" The lowest 10 percent earned less than $32,140, and the top 10 percent earned more than $166,400 in May 2010."​

Now, lettuce be sensible and assume a lotta no pay and low pay went on in these productions.
Let's call it the low end of professional pay minus 20%.

$32,140
x 0.8 (80% pay)
= $25,712
/ 2080 work hrs per year
= $12.36/hr
x 20,336 - 620,000hrs of labor
= $251,384 - $766,3200 in total labor hours

How much you wanna guess went into materials such as props, costumes, & consumables?
About equal to the value of the labor?

$251,384 - $766,3200 in total labor hours
x 2 materials
= $502,768 - $1,5326,400 labor & materials

That comes' out to be...

$502,768 - $1,5326,400 labor & materials
/ 14,500 - 15,500 entries
= $35 - $988 per entry

Sound about plausible?

Okay. I think that's about all the economic activity that waggled $500,00 carrot generated.


Hmm... That's a whole lotta people that cumulatively spent a whole lotta money for a pretty slim chance at winning that whopping prize.

Pretty good payout.
Pretty slim odds.

And that was for a guaranteed payout, whereas in the open marketplace where merit carries a considerable more weight than "winner of the tallest midget contest", and marketing goes even farther than merit. Considerably farther.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?p=267880#post267880

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

Yeah, but you have to acknowledge that was a pretty long shot for any single entrant toward a guaranteed payout irregardless of merit.

http://www.youtube.com/user/yourfilmfestival/about

"This is Your Film Festival. Created, watched, and judged by you. From 15,000 entries down to just one -- the winner of Your Film Festival has now been announced."​

Lettuce consider a probable range of sum creative resources that went towards that single $500k payout.

15,000 entries. Possibly rounded up some, but likely rounded down, so lettuce call it between 14,500 and 15,500 actual entries.

Max entry is 15min in length, but from the average finalist entry range time let's calculate the 14.5k to 15.5k to average in that range.

10.52 - 15min
x 14,500 - 15,500 entries
= 152,540 - 232,500min of finished product submitted
= 2542 - 3,875hrs of finished product submitted

And lettuce guesstimate using personal rudimentary experience that for every minute of finished product that it takes about four to twenty times that amount of time to actually plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro.

2542 - 3,875hrs of finished product submitted
x 4 - 20 multiple of plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro
= 10,168 - 77,500hrs of plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro

The lettuce figure out the combined cast & crew hours estimating that most of these shorts had one to four people in front of the lens and the same behind it = 2 - 8 people per submission.

2 - 8 cast & crew
x 10,168 - 77,500hrs of plan, pre-pro, shoot, and post-pro
= 20,336 - 620,000hrs of labor

Now we gotta figure out the value of that whopping range of hours.
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/entertainment-and-sports/producers-and-directors.htm#tab-5

" The lowest 10 percent earned less than $32,140, and the top 10 percent earned more than $166,400 in May 2010."​

Now, lettuce be sensible and assume a lotta no pay and low pay went on in these productions.
Let's call it the low end of professional pay minus 20%.

$32,140
x 0.8 (80% pay)
= $25,712
/ 2080 work hrs per year
= $12.36/hr
x 20,336 - 620,000hrs of labor
= $251,384 - $766,3200 in total labor hours

How much you wanna guess went into materials such as props, costumes, & consumables?
About equal to the value of the labor?

$251,384 - $766,3200 in total labor hours
x 2 materials
= $502,768 - $1,5326,400 labor & materials

That comes' out to be...

$502,768 - $1,5326,400 labor & materials
/ 14,500 - 15,500 entries
= $35 - $988 per entry

Sound about plausible?

Okay. I think that's about all the economic activity that waggled $500,00 carrot generated.


Hmm... That's a whole lotta people that cumulatively spent a whole lotta money for a pretty slim chance at winning that whopping prize.

Pretty good payout.
Pretty slim odds.

And that was for a guaranteed payout, whereas in the open marketplace where merit carries a considerable more weight than "winner of the tallest midget contest", and marketing goes even farther than merit. Considerably farther.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?p=267880#post267880

Great post Ray.
You broke that down well

 

[Cracker Funk]

It's very well established that a short film can lead to a director being hired for a bigger-budget feature film (rare though it may be, it does happen). I'm not sure why we're even having this discussion.

I do, however, think it's worth noting which types of short films have had this effect, and unless there are some that I've missed, they're all SFX-driven sci-fi. I think that's worth noting.