Why do most 'indie'/low budget films fall down?

L

londonfilmmaker

No offence intended to any of the clips/films shown in the 'Screening Room' section of this forum - but 99% of them wouldn't even cut it on YouTube. So why do most 'indie' and low budget films fall down? Even those who have invested a lot of time, have decent 'professional' experience and large experienced crews seem to produce a final product that still has that amateur feel?

Most of us spend an unhealthy amount of time and money on this line of work and deep down, most of us would like some degree of success. For me, success would be nothing less than distribution with a major company and/or acceptance at one of the big festivals (TIFF, Sundance etc..). But realistically, it won't happen for most of us.

So what are the real differences between those that succeed at festivals/get distribution/attention and the majority of the films out there? Ofcourse there are the obvious elements - budget, 'big' names attached to projects (starring, endorsing or attached in some other way), "who you know" and buzz. But realistically, unless you are Spielberg, Woody Allen or Christopher Nolan, even if you have all of the above, the basic product has to meet a certain standard.

I have never completed a project. I don't believe in the old adage that completing any project no matter the quality will offer invaluable experience. I've watched literally thousands of films from every decade and genre imaginable. I would rather be 100% satisfied in my work than show something to the public that I'm just 90% satisfied with. You'll be forgiving of your work, the public/audience will not.


First thing that jumps out at me from 99% of what is posted in the 'Screening Room' section is the poor quality image and the lack of a 'filmic' look. Your GH2 or your T2i might produce a decent image - but it's not a filmic image unless you have access to ridiculously expensive primes/cinema lenses which cost 10x the cost of the body. In my opinion, the best thing anyone could do is put 30% of a 10k budget (or thereabouts) on a camera like the new BMCC (Blackmagic Cinema Camera). It shoots at 2.5k RAW. It produces stunning filmic images. You can pick one up (body only) for $2k. These really are fantastic. Otherwise, the minimum I would say is a hacked GH2 with some excellent glass or a 5d Mk2/3 with the same. It's true to say festivals will take one look at your finished project amongst hundreds/thousands and if those first few frames don't look professional, in the majority of cases they will move on.

Ofcourse, there's nothing wrong with making a film for fun with a rebel or other 'low(ish) spec' camera - but please don't try and portray it as something its not.

I fully accept that my view might be a bit ignorant, but I'd love a bit of inspiration from another indie film maker that actually produces something of quality.
 
londonfilmmaker said:
No offence intended to any of the clips/films shown in the 'Screening Room' section of this forum - but 99% of them wouldn't even cut it on YouTube. So why do most 'indie' and low budget films fall down?

But realistically, it won't happen for most of us.

I have never completed a project.

I don't believe in the old adage that completing any project no matter the quality will offer invaluable experience. I've watched literally thousands of films from every decade and genre imaginable. I would rather be 100% satisfied in my work than show something to the public that I'm just 90% satisfied with.

In my opinion, the best thing anyone could do is put 30% of a 10k budget (or thereabouts) on a camera

Ofcourse, there's nothing wrong with making a film for fun with a rebel or other 'low(ish) spec' camera - but please don't try and portray it as something its not.

I fully accept that my view might be a bit ignorant, but I'd love a bit of inspiration from another indie film maker that actually produces something of quality.
Click to expand...

You have answered some of your own questions. If you don't want to others to see you fail, don't do anything. And while your at it, don't learn anything either. Or.... Do your best, look at it in the privacy of your own screening room and then do another if your not satisfied. You don't have to share it, there's no rule. And also, is your budget 10k? Mine wasn't. I had to settle for the lamp post rather than the stars because I'm in this thing independently... As in, on my own, with no financial aid whatsoever. Will my first attempt win me an Oscar? NO. Will it get signed with a major production company? NO. But it WILL teach me more than books and webpages can, not that I haven't been reading both. I want to tell stories others can enjoy. I just haven't mastered the language yet, but if I remain silent, I'll never be understood.
:hmm:
 
The main reason.... Bad scripts.

The second reason... not having an experienced dedicated professional in virtually every role on set. A film with a "real" budget has a person whose only job is dressing the sets. They may have 10, 15, 20 years experience in dressing sets. There has been thought and discussion put into the location, color, type, etc... of every article on that table in the background of the shot you can barely even see. Multiply that out to the sound guys, DP, focus puller, dolly grip, etc... etc.... etc.... That is a LOT of skill and experience they are bringing to bear that you can never hope to duplicate.

You could take a really really good script, a top notch professional crew, hire Roger Deakins as DP, give him a circa 1999 Hi-8 video camera, and their film would crush anything any of us is likely to do if you gave us an Alexa and 100K worth of cinema glass.
 
londonfilmmaker said:
I have never completed a project. I don't believe in the old adage that completing any project no matter the quality will offer invaluable experience.
Click to expand...

Who are you to judge others work when you yourself have never even completed a project? What makes you an expert on cameras? You're touting a 3k camera that has a crazy amount of startup cost to even make it feasible to use. You go on to talk about how great that camera is. Have you used one personally? On top of that the cinematic look doesnt come from 2.5k resolution, it is from the FPS (23.97 being the standard) that the film is shot in as well as the contrast in the video itself.

Also you talk about how a person will be forgiving of their work. I haven't met anyone yet that has been 100% satisfied with their work. There will always be something that you want to change and there will be things you think look good but others don't. When people give your criticism of what doesn't work you take that and improve the next film you make.

Not all primes are expensive. You can get a 50mm prime lens from Canon with f/1.8 for under $150 with shipping.
 
Last edited:
Mine are online on my website, full history of them. Some "fall down" last few are much better, still not FANTASTIC... but watchable. We've been learning as we go and that journey is there to see.

Here, the screening room is often used as a place to get feedback on the films people are making to help them improve (not all - and not all of them are FANTASTIC either).
 
The equipment doesn't make you a professional, as stated above. Even if you get the best camera out there, say a Sony f65, you still have to know how to operate it, and then practice with it enough to get an image worth looking at. Filmmaking is an art. It takes years and years of practice to start to hone your craft, and develop the necessary skills to move forward as an artist.

You mentioned--in essence--not wanting to make a film until you know it'll be perfect...do you think professional athletes take that same approach? You need to learn how to lose in order to know how to succeed. Every film you make, even if it is garbage, will teach you something, and often times more than one lesson. Every film teacher I've had in school thus far--cinematography, editing, lighting, sound, etc, all have said no matter what the project or story is, KEEP SHOOTING. When starting out, it's important to learn the ropes before you can sail the ship...

Metaphors aside, it's an industry and an art where experience is gained from practical, hands on work. Books can teach you wonderful knowledge, but that knowledge is useless if you never put it to the test.
 
londonfilmmaker said:
I have never completed a project. I don't believe in the old adage that completing any project no matter the quality will offer invaluable experience. I've watched literally thousands of films from every decade and genre imaginable. I would rather be 100% satisfied in my work than show something to the public that I'm just 90% satisfied with. You'll be forgiving of your work, the public/audience will not.


First thing that jumps out at me from 99% of what is posted in the 'Screening Room' section is the poor quality image and the lack of a 'filmic' look. Your GH2 or your T2i might produce a decent image - but it's not a filmic image unless you have access to ridiculously expensive primes/cinema lenses which cost 10x the cost of the body. In my opinion, the best thing anyone could do is put 30% of a 10k budget (or thereabouts) on a camera like the new BMCC (Blackmagic Cinema Camera). It shoots at 2.5k RAW. It produces stunning filmic images. You can pick one up (body only) for $2k. These really are fantastic. Otherwise, the minimum I would say is a hacked GH2 with some excellent glass or a 5d Mk2/3 with the same. It's true to say festivals will take one look at your finished project amongst hundreds/thousands and if those first few frames don't look professional, in the majority of cases they will move on.

Ofcourse, there's nothing wrong with making a film for fun with a rebel or other 'low(ish) spec' camera - but please don't try and portray it as something its not.

I fully accept that my view might be a bit ignorant, but I'd love a bit of inspiration from another indie film maker that actually produces something of quality.
Click to expand...


to be honest you sound like your scared of criticism, also the key to a good film is the script/audio/action most indie people try to do it all on their own, you should if possible have a person for each role

also you keep mentioning the black magic.. its not the worlds best camera, iv seen some shorts shot on gh2 and t2i/t3i that are shot beautifully.

do you think an expensive camera will make a shit film look good? nah its just polishing the shit.
 
No offence intended to any of the clips/films shown in the 'Screening Room' section of this forum - but 99% of them wouldn't even cut it on YouTube. So why do most 'indie' and low budget films fall down? Even those who have invested a lot of time, have decent 'professional' experience and large experienced crews seem to produce a final product that still has that amateur feel?

Most of us spend an unhealthy amount of time and money on this line of work and deep down, most of us would like some degree of success. For me, success would be nothing less than distribution with a major company and/or acceptance at one of the big festivals (TIFF, Sundance etc..). But realistically, it won't happen for most of us.

So what are the real differences between those that succeed at festivals/get distribution/attention and the majority of the films out there? Ofcourse there are the obvious elements - budget, 'big' names attached to projects (starring, endorsing or attached in some other way), "who you know" and buzz. But realistically, unless you are Spielberg, Woody Allen or Christopher Nolan, even if you have all of the above, the basic product has to meet a certain standard.

I have never completed a project. I don't believe in the old adage that completing any project no matter the quality will offer invaluable experience. I've watched literally thousands of films from every decade and genre imaginable. I would rather be 100% satisfied in my work than show something to the public that I'm just 90% satisfied with. You'll be forgiving of your work, the public/audience will not.


First thing that jumps out at me from 99% of what is posted in the 'Screening Room' section is the poor quality image and the lack of a 'filmic' look. Your GH2 or your T2i might produce a decent image - but it's not a filmic image unless you have access to ridiculously expensive primes/cinema lenses which cost 10x the cost of the body. In my opinion, the best thing anyone could do is put 30% of a 10k budget (or thereabouts) on a camera like the new BMCC (Blackmagic Cinema Camera). It shoots at 2.5k RAW. It produces stunning filmic images. You can pick one up (body only) for $2k. These really are fantastic. Otherwise, the minimum I would say is a hacked GH2 with some excellent glass or a 5d Mk2/3 with the same. It's true to say festivals will take one look at your finished project amongst hundreds/thousands and if those first few frames don't look professional, in the majority of cases they will move on.

Ofcourse, there's nothing wrong with making a film for fun with a rebel or other 'low(ish) spec' camera - but please don't try and portray it as something its not.

I fully accept that my view might be a bit ignorant, but I'd love a bit of inspiration from another indie film maker that actually produces something of quality.
Click to expand...

lol ze troll :lol:
 
The more of a "gear-whore" you become (as has happened to me a little bit, admittedly), the more you realize that buying this next piece of hardware won't make you a better storyteller. Sure it may make the process easier, but it is not a replacement for the art side of it.

I'll buy new equipment when I have become a better filmmaker, not to become a better filmmaker.
 
Last edited:
Jsthompson79 said:
Who are you to judge others work when you yourself have never even completed a project? What makes you an expert on cameras? You're touting a 3k camera that has a crazy amount of startup cost to even make it feasible to use. You go on to talk about how great that camera is. Have you used one personally? On top of that the cinematic look doesnt come from 2.5k resolution, it is from the FPS (23.97 being the standard) that the film is shot in as well as the contrast in the video itself.

Also you talk about how a person will be forgiving of their work. I haven't met anyone yet that has been 100% satisfied with their work. There will always be something that you want to change and there will be things you think look good but others don't. When people give your criticism of what doesn't work you take that and improve the next film you make.

Not all primes are expensive. You can get a 50mm prime lens from Canon with f/1.8 for under $150 with shipping.
Click to expand...

Just because I can't cook Michelin star quality food doesn't mean I don't know what tastes good (not the best comparison but you get it...). I can guarantee I have the smallest knowledge base when it comes to cameras in this thread. Ofcourse the look doesn't come from the resolution alone, apart from the obvious elements, my praise for it is that for the money, it's unrivalled and really for a 'low' budget film maker, is probably the best dollar to quality ratio piece of kit out at the moment. Every single piece of footage I've seen from it has knocked the socks off any DSLR I've seen. But this thread isn't about me trying to sell a camera.

Ofcourse criticism is mostly subjective, for the majority of mainstream films. I think the point I am trying to make is, as someone who is by no means an expert, someone relatively new to this, I just don't understand how apparently semi-professional film makers are happy enough with a finished product to submit it to festivals etc and are suprised when not a single festival picks it up. A lot of lay people, regular audiences would be able to tell them that beforehand and save them submission fees. I just don't get it - which is why I made my comment about film makers being forgiving of their own work. Perhaps it's because they've invested so much time and money in a project, they feel it justifies them trying to sell or promote their work as a serious product.

This isn't ofcourse directed at people who do this purely for fun and experimentation, only for those who are spending money with an intention of eventually selling their film for profit.
 
As a few have said I've never made a film that I'm 100% satisfied with. Every film is a learning curve and I'm pretty confident that I've improved with each one. And that's because I've tried harder and harder and learnt from my mistakes. That's why I post on the screening room here for the advice and criticism from others with potentially more experience than me.

Yes indie films aren't as good as Hollywood, but you know to be honest you have to start somewhere. You can't expect your first film to have the film look, or to be perfect. Everyone must start somewhere. If you get the chance look up the films of young Nolan, and JJ Abrams all those big guys. They started making crappy super 8 films, they had the passion, now look where they are
 
MileCreations said:
As a few have said I've never made a film that I'm 100% satisfied with. Every film is a learning curve and I'm pretty confident that I've improved with each one. And that's because I've tried harder and harder and learnt from my mistakes. That's why I post on the screening room here for the advice and criticism from others with potentially more experience than me.

Yes indie films aren't as good as Hollywood, but you know to be honest you have to start somewhere. You can't expect your first film to have the film look, or to be perfect. Everyone must start somewhere. If you get the chance look up the films of young Nolan, and JJ Abrams all those big guys. They started making crappy super 8 films, they had the passion, now look where they are
Click to expand...

Although not my personal choice (as I am overly critical of my own stuff and won't post anything I'm not totally happy with), I agree on your point that posting something for advice/improvement is an excellent learning tool and is one of the reasons this site is so useful. My point is that there are several 'semi professional'/'professional' film makers on this site who post finished products which are so obviously of a poor quality they are suprised when they get criticism or knock-backs from festivals.
 
londonfilmmaker said:
You'll be forgiving of your work, the public/audience will not.
Click to expand...

I've found just the opposite - the audience is much more forgiving of my work than I ever am. One of the things you learn by continuously putting things out for an audience is exactly what they're forgiving of, and what they aren't. Most of the things a lot of filmmakers here worry about - like which camera to use - turn out to have very little to do with whether the audience likes it or not. Story, acting, pacing, etc completely trump production quality once you hit the level of basic competency.

I would rather be 100% satisfied in my work than show something to the public that I'm just 90% satisfied with.
Click to expand...

I don't anticipate ever being 100% satisfied with my work - for that to happen I'd either have to be perfect, or have given up. Nobody's perfect, so to me when you're 100% satisfied it means you're done growing and just aren't trying any more.
 
londonfilmmaker said:
A My point is that there are several 'semi professional'/'professional' film makers on this site who post finished products which are so obviously of a poor quality they are suprised when they get criticism or knock-backs from festivals.
Click to expand...

Care to point out a few? I have not seem many who come on here with that attitude. Sometimes they are surprised at certain elements of criticism simply because they had overlooked that fault, I can almost guarantee that every single one of them will at least take that criticism into some kind consideration when they make their next film
 
Well not everyone can make good films but they may think their film is good in their eyes it's a seller, which is why we make films, 100% satisfied can never happen, I would hate to even think like that, for me it's about wether it's acceptable enough for me to watch I of course have a bit of a reputation for being extra harsh and critical when reviewing people's films because I say what I see and don't accept nothing else than entertainment, but what's my opinion ?

Have you got any films that you are working on that you care to share with us?

Also the black magic camera isn't all that great, for me it wouldn't be a sensible purchase..

Maybe to rent but not purchase
 
Originally Posted by Zensteve
lol ze troll
Click to expand...

I make a thread with a critical tone and I'm automatically a troll. Or shall I post a satirical version of this thread praising every indie film/clip shown on this site asking why they haven't been nominated for an academy award?
Click to expand...

No, you're absolutely right. My bad.

Using a Black Magic camera means your film will be incredible, and using anything else is a waste of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top