What are some techno thrillers shot for under $50K

By SWAT training I mean I take the training, and then I teach it to the actors later, so they can perform SWAT moves on the movie.

I brought up now cause I got two actors who have been in shorts and TV shows before and are good actors. They are wanting to do this script so I thought maybe in the next couple of years I could convince them to hold on, but want to know what I am up against.
 
harmonica44 said:
By SWAT training I mean I take the training, and then I teach it to the actors later, so they can perform SWAT moves on the movie.
Click to expand...

Don't hurt anyone ;)

Also, it would probably be better for the actors to do fake fighting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWwlxaqvFtc


I brought up now cause I got two actors who have been in shorts and TV shows before and are good actors. They are wanting to do this script so I thought maybe in the next couple of years I could convince them to hold on, but want to know what I am up against.
Click to expand...

How about making a short film with them? It seems like from past threads and posts that you struggle to find people that will work with you. Now you have two film and television actors. Shoot something!
 
One of the actor lives near me, the other I would have to pay for travel expenses. I did mention turning the feature into a short but the guy near me, got turned off, and thought it was a complete let down to to take my really good script as he called it, and reduce it to a short out, cutting out practically most of the plot, and twists that make it good. I don't think he'd do it as a short based on his reaction. Maybe another short though.

The fight scene from LOSSES is a great example. LOSSES is what actually inspired me. Aside from the fight, it's also got a shootout, done with computer effects instead of real guns. In the video Ryan Connelly says you don't need a big budget to do those things, just creativity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viA2HRh1vHo


After I watched that video like two years ago, I was inspired and didn't think I need millions of dollars. I bet even he didn't spend more than $50,000 on LOSSES but I could be wrong. He had to shoot that movie all in 12 hours though cause of location restrictions, and that is true with most locations, it seems from my experience that most owners don't want to go over a few hours unfortunately. I bet he also did not have a whole team of 40 people for sound either and his sound is actually better than some movies that have gotten distribution. Primer for example?

But I figure if Ryan Connolly can shoot a movie with some action scenes in for real cheap, than why can't I and a few good crew members?
 
Last edited:
harmonica44 said:
One of the actor lives me, the other I would have to pay for travel expenses. I did mention turning the feature into a short but the guy near me, got turned off, and thought it was a complete let down to to take my really good script as he called it, and reduce it to a short out, cutting out practically most of the plot, and twists that make it good. I don't think he'd do it as a short based on his reaction. Maybe another short though.

The fight scene from LOSSES is a great example. LOSSES is what actually inspired me. Aside from the fight, it's also got a shootout, done with computer effects instead of real guns.

In the video Ryan Connelly says you don't need a big budget to do those things, just creativity. After I watched that video like two years ago, I was inspired and didn't think I need millions of dollars. I bet even he didn't spend more than $50,000 on LOSSES but I could be wrong. He had to shoot that movie all in 12 hours though cause of location restrictions, and that is true with most locations, it seems from my experience that most owners don't want to go over a few hours unfortunately. I bet he also did not have a whole team of 40 people for sound either and his sound is actually better than some movies that have gotten distribution. Primer for example?

But I figure if Ryan Connolly can shoot a movie with some action scenes in for real cheap, than why can't I and a few good crew members?
Click to expand...

Losses was shot for $200, but he got the Red Epic and a bunch of actors for free, and he preowned tons of lighting equipment, fake guns, and other props. Losses is also a short film, not a feature.

Ryan Connolly is right, you can create great things on a low budget, but you have to understand what you're doing, and what the reality of the situation is.

I know I'm going to get some IndieTalkers mad at me for saying this, but to me Primer isn't as good as people say it is. The budget is impressive, but the film... :no:
 
ChimpPhobiaFilms said:
I know I'm going to get some IndieTalkers mad at me for saying this, but to me Primer isn't as good as people say it is. The budget is impressive, but the film... :no:
Click to expand...

+1

I thought the movie was boring as hell... But for the budget, amazing effort.

harmonica44 - shoot an ultra low budget action short (use part of your script), take the advice here on-board, ensure safety etc - see how that goes. If you want feedback on it, post it for us to see.
 
Last edited:
harmonica44 said:
By SWAT training I mean I take the training, and then I teach it to the actors later, so they can perform SWAT moves on the movie.
Click to expand...

You're making it sound like you are going to become an expert at it. If you do fine, but more than likely not since I do not think that you will be utilizing your training for its intended purpose and probably will not practice every day in order not to forget. It just seems like a waste of money, and another distraction that will keep you from finishing a project.

harmonica44 said:
I brought up now cause I got two actors who have been in shorts and TV shows before and are good actors. They are wanting to do this script so I thought maybe in the next couple of years I could convince them to hold on, but want to know what I am up against.
Click to expand...

So, are these the only two actors in close proximity to you? Have they seen any of your previous work or did they just read the script? Why are you willing to compromise nearly everything that has been pointed out in this thread so far in order to appease these two actors? It sounds like you are setting yourself up for failure.
 
this has been a great thread to read. thanks guys keep it up

Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection was an estimated $20k budget with one guy as the "sound department"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2006801/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Admittedly not a good film, but the script wasn't bad actually and the production values were very watchable at home on my big screen. I didn't know whether to blame the acting or the director.. maybe they both sucked. all i know for sure was that it was bad :lol:

I'd like to think it's possible to make an action thriller of this production quality, but better directing and acting.

for the action scenes do a knife fight.. but like, a real one. you kill people very fast, it's not long and drawn out. should be easier on the budget.
 
Last edited:
H44 how about writing a short prequel to your "really good script" and use the actors that you have available now in that. You can post and share the short to establish support for the feature that you will shoot later.
 
sfoster said:
Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection was an estimated $20k budget with one guy as the "sound department"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2006801/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Admittedly not a good film, but the script wasn't bad actually and the production values were very watchable at home on my big screen.
Click to expand...

Watched the trailer. Looked pretty damn bad to me - like an extended mediocre-quality 48 hours entry.

I saw an action DVD (can't remember the name unfort) that was shot for just under $20k - it was even worse. Totally sucked. It was so bad I watched it till near the end - why? I was laughing so much - yeah, it was that bad. But the director did manage to get a DVD release - no idea how he managed it given the F-grade quality, terrible acting, laughable "stunts" and awful dialogue.
 
Primer was okay, I could go either way on it. I recorded live dialogue for a TV episode with my equipment and it sounds better than Primer in the finished product. So if I can beat Primer's sound, is that a good start?

Lucky Hardwood said:
H44 how about writing a short prequel to your "really good script" and use the actors that you have available now in that. You can post and share the short to establish support for the feature that you will shoot later.
Click to expand...

I can try that. The one actor who lives near me didn't seem interested when I told him that I want to turn the feature into a short for now. But perhaps when I show him it, he will change his mind hopefully.

So how do I take a section of the script and turn it into a short? I mean the plot will not make sense or hold together if I just take 10 minutes of the script as a stand alone.
 
harmonica44 said:
I recorded live dialogue for a TV episode with my equipment and it sounds better than Primer in the finished product. So if I can beat Primer's sound, is that a good start?
Click to expand...

Primer is probably just about acceptable as far as technical standards are concerned although artistically the sound was poor. As you don't seem to know much about sound in general and audio post in particular, I'm dubious that your live recorded dialogue was better than Primer's completed sound. Audio post-production is a great deal more than just editing the production sound! Also, do you realise that Primer spent roughly 2 years in post-production?

G
 
harmonica44 said:
By SWAT training I mean I take the training, and then I teach it to the actors later, so they can perform SWAT moves on the movie.

I brought up now cause I got two actors who have been in shorts and TV shows before and are good actors. They are wanting to do this script so I thought maybe in the next couple of years I could convince them to hold on, but want to know what I am up against.
Click to expand...

Why would you do SWAT training? I thought you just finished your script? You should take a break, then work on basic pre-production processes (if the film is going to be made by you), or you should be looking around for people wanting original scripts. By the way, you should hire a stuntman or a professional to teach them. Or you could take the LOSSES route, and have the actors doing slow, safe movements made to look amazing with choppy editing and fast camera movement.

I don't know if you should wait a few years. Unless they are tight buddies of yours, they'll most likely forget about the project. What are you up against? Competitive filmmakers.

harmonica44 said:
One of the actor lives near me, the other I would have to pay for travel expenses. I did mention turning the feature into a short but the guy near me, got turned off, and thought it was a complete let down to to take my really good script as he called it, and reduce it to a short out, cutting out practically most of the plot, and twists that make it good. I don't think he'd do it as a short based on his reaction. Maybe another short though.

The fight scene from LOSSES is a great example. LOSSES is what actually inspired me. Aside from the fight, it's also got a shootout, done with computer effects instead of real guns. In the video Ryan Connelly says you don't need a big budget to do those things, just creativity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viA2HRh1vHo


After I watched that video like two years ago, I was inspired and didn't think I need millions of dollars. I bet even he didn't spend more than $50,000 on LOSSES but I could be wrong. He had to shoot that movie all in 12 hours though cause of location restrictions, and that is true with most locations, it seems from my experience that most owners don't want to go over a few hours unfortunately. I bet he also did not have a whole team of 40 people for sound either and his sound is actually better than some movies that have gotten distribution. Primer for example?

But I figure if Ryan Connolly can shoot a movie with some action scenes in for real cheap, than why can't I and a few good crew members?
Click to expand...

If you do not have the money to pay for travel expenses, use the one actor! And I would go with what that guy wants to do. Cut it down to a short. You do not have the experience to make a feature yet. You said by making this a short, all of the best parts will be taken out and the film won't be as good. That's okay! When directors have to send out their final cut, sometimes they have to do a thing called "killing their baby", which is basically taking out the most expensive scene, the best scenes, that one twist, and that cool shot. You have to learn to do that to if you want to be a filmmaker. It seems like you were mentioning El Mariachi a lot in previous threads (maybe even this one). Even thought it is not a good example for budget, there were a few good pieces of advice in that book. When his movie was going to go to theaters, he cut out 15 minutes (including a scene he liked, a bloody gunshot effect, and a crap load of filler). Kill yo' babies.

Losses is not a good example. Ryan Connolly is right about one thing: You can create awesome stuff on a low budget. But do you know what the budget of Losses would be if he did not have the gear and connections he had? He had some Lowel DP lights, a Red Epic, cinema lenses, a shoulder rig, Premiere Pro, After Effects, ADR and Foley mice, and other crazy expensive sound equipment. Props as well. Over 15 (expensive) fake guns, and costumes. Ryan had a good sized crew, and a large cast. He didn't make LOSSES for cheap. If he did not have the connections he did, he would have spent A LOT of money.

harmonica44 said:
Primer was okay, I could go either way on it. I recorded live dialogue for a TV episode with my equipment and it sounds better than Primer in the finished product. So if I can beat Primer's sound, is that a good start?
Click to expand...

Sure? Primer had OK sound, but nothing very good.
 
Last edited:
harmonica44 said:
I can try that. The one actor who lives near me didn't seem interested when I told him that I want to turn the feature into a short for now. But perhaps when I show him it, he will change his mind hopefully.

So how do I take a section of the script and turn it into a short? I mean the plot will not make sense or hold together if I just take 10 minutes of the script as a stand alone.
Click to expand...

Don't try to adapt the story you already have into a 10 minute short. Create the story before the story. If your main characters already know each other at the beginning of your screenplay, tell the story of how they met. If they were strangers at FADE IN:, tell the story of how all of the main players got to the beginning of the movie. Consider it the Prologue. You can then use that short to develop support for the larger story and perhaps secure funding when the time is right.
 
AudioPostExpert said:
Primer is probably just about acceptable as far as technical standards are concerned although artistically the sound was poor. As you don't seem to know much about sound in general and audio post in particular, I'm dubious that your live recorded dialogue was better than Primer's completed sound. Audio post-production is a great deal more than just editing the production sound! Also, do you realise that Primer spent roughly 2 years in post-production?

G
Click to expand...

No I didn't know that. I was shown the pilot after it was completed and it sounded better, actually pretty good. I don't know what they did in the mixing, all I know is that it sounded good when I heard it.

ChimpPhobiaFilms said:
Why would you do SWAT training? I thought you just finished your script? You should take a break, then work on basic pre-production processes (if the film is going to be made by you), or you should be looking around for people wanting original scripts. By the way, you should hire a stuntman or a professional to teach them. Or you could take the LOSSES route, and have the actors doing slow, safe movements made to look amazing with choppy editing and fast camera movement.

I don't know if you should wait a few years. Unless they are tight buddies of yours, they'll most likely forget about the project. What are you up against? Competitive filmmakers.



If you do not have the money to pay for travel expenses, use the one actor! And I would go with what that guy wants to do. Cut it down to a short. You do not have the experience to make a feature yet. You said by making this a short, all of the best parts will be taken out and the film won't be as good. That's okay! When directors have to send out their final cut, sometimes they have to do a thing called "killing their baby", which is basically taking out the most expensive scene, the best scenes, that one twist, and that cool shot. You have to learn to do that to if you want to be a filmmaker. It seems like you were mentioning El Mariachi a lot in previous threads (maybe even this one). Even thought it is not a good example for budget, there were a few good pieces of advice in that book. When his movie was going to go to theaters, he cut out 15 minutes (including a scene he liked, a bloody gunshot effect, and a crap load of filler). Kill yo' babies.

Losses is not a good example. Ryan Connolly is right about one thing: You can create awesome stuff on a low budget. But do you know what the budget of Losses would be if he did not have the gear and connections he had? He had some Lowel DP lights, a Red Epic, cinema lenses, a shoulder rig, Premiere Pro, After Effects, ADR and Foley mice, and other crazy expensive sound equipment. Props as well. Over 15 (expensive) fake guns, and costumes. Ryan had a good sized crew, and a large cast. He didn't make LOSSES for cheap. If he did not have the connections he did, he would have spent A LOT of money.


Sure? Primer had OK sound, but nothing very good.
Click to expand...

I am up for making the a short of it, but it's hard when their is only one actor and no one for him to interact with. Is he suppose to narrate and just walk around? Since their are no other characters, their is nothing for him to do really.

I am doing the SWAT training now, cause I was able to get a deal with the instructor since he thought he didn't mind teaching an aspiring filmmaker for cheap, along with the rest of the class.

And I'm not saying I am ready for a feature now. Just in the next couple of years maybe. Or at least I want to do something actors will want to do. I shopped around for actors for a couple of shorts before, and didn't get enough people. I show around a feature, and actors say they really want to, and have gotten others interested too. So I want to make something people will want to make too of course, since I need help.


As far as making a short of how the characters, meet, that is just not very interesting or compelling really, compared to the main plot that comes later. I could make it interesting but their will not be an ending at all, and people I show it to, to make an impression on, will find it anti-climatic or not wrapping much up. As long as that's okay. I recently watched the original Saw short film, and that too didn't really wrap much up, or explain much.

I'm actually very surprised that no one on here was able to name one techno thriller, shot for that much. Not one. I guess it is that tough, or low budget indie filmmakers are just not interested in the genre, compared to others.
 
Last edited:
harmonica44 said:
I'm actually very surprised that no one on here was able to name one techno thriller, shot for that much. Not one.
Click to expand...
Post #56: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1240540/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

A. I'm surprised that after I HANDED YOU ALL OF THOSE RESOURCES you've failed to go do your own research!
But I'm even more disappointed that you didn't.

B. Furthermore, you're looking for an ACTION thriller, not a techno thriller.


I guess it is that tough, or low budget indie filmmakers are just not interested in the genre, compared to others.
Click to expand...
I think the wheels on your wagon are seriously loose, H.

C. Everyone here has been telling you that it's too d@mn expensive to shoot a action or techno thriller.
There is no such thing as a GOOD & CHEAP feature length action or techno thriller.
Here're some GOOD(ish) & CHEAP(ish) shorts: http://www.youtube.com/user/USNFilms/videos
But I think you'll just be wasting your $50k producing a feature length film of that caliber. Just saying.

"Not interested in the genre"?!
W?
T?
F?

D. You might as well ask for Elizabethan Vampire vs. Zombie Epic Romance shot for under $50k!
Random any?


H (and his posse) after SWAT training:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0hMp8tajJo
 
Last edited:
Okay thanks for the links. I will do my own research more for sure. I have just been busy with work and helping out with a short film lately.

A lot of people on here seem to want to do zombie and slasher movies though. They are pretty popular in the microbudget world. But don't those movies require stunts, chases and fights, just like a suspense or action thriller?

I am not denying that I can't do it. It's just I don't know what I can and can't do, when people are making movies of other genres that require chases and fights anyway. What's the difference? People still have a chance of getting hurt. Therefore wouldn't the police and permits be just as expensive? I don't see how those genres are totally do-able on microbudgets and popular, but no one can do the same things, or similar things, outside of the popular horror genre.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top