Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay thanks. Should I use my savings to make the independent feature film I wanted to make in order to sell it try to break into the business then?
NO. For the love of all that's holy, don't do that. I'm begging you.
On a scale of difficulty of 1 to 10, being a sound guy on a shoot is about a 3, while creating a feature-length film is about a 77. You need a script, actors, a producer, light, cameras, scouting, wardrobe, post-production, craft services and about seven zillion other intermeshing gears before you get to the finished product. Then, assuming the final product is worth a damn, you've got about ten more flaming hoops to jump through to get it to distribution.
Dude. You've got to crawl before you walk before you run. If you're that intent on throwing your money away, I'll gladly give you my mailing address so I can put it to better use.
Last edited by MinivanDriver; 02-04-2018 at 03:52 PM..
Okay thanks. Should I use my savings to make the independent feature film I wanted to make in order to sell it try to break into the business then?
Only if you want to remake The Room. Even if you HAVE the raw talent needed to be a successful major film director (which is doubtful, as few people do), you don’t yet have the necessary mastery of craft needed to make a successful full-length picture.
Throw that dream away for now. Replace it with “I want a career in the film/television industry.” Because that dream is broader, it’s more likely to be achievable. Film directors have achieved it, but so have screenwriters, and makeup artists, and prop manufacturers, and cinematographers... you get the idea.
Right now, you’ve got just enough skill in sound mixing/editing that a few people have been willing to pay you for your work. Build on that, and see where it leads.
1) You don't have to have a passion 24/7, but you do have to like the work in a general way. I have a friend who is an electrician. To him, it's like problem-solving. He likes going to work every day. Yes, every job has its bad days or tedious parts. But if you don't like your work, don't do it. Heck, even the cashier at my grocery loves her job. She's a 65-year-old grandmother who loves talking to all her customers.
2) The Stop Dreaming thing. I'm lucky that I'm in a job that I love, even at age 55. But the only way I made it into this biz was to take risks and work relentlessly until I became really good at it. As a result, I'll have twelve-hour days that feel almost like part-time work because it is that much fun. Now, I'm working on a couple of new projects that, if successful will take me into retirement. So I still have a passion for what I do, 30 years after I started.
3) Do what you love and the money eventually takes care of itself. Of course, that means taking a real-world viewpoint. It means more than mastering your profession, but also learning how to be a businessperson about it, with learning how to manage the money and promote yourself. But the principle remains true.
This has to be the most depressing thread I've read in a while. Basically, you have a guy has a dream, has the skills to achieve that dream, has enough money to take a really good shot at it, and yet won't take the leap. On the other side of the coin, we have this chorus of people like you who are basically saying, "Don't take a shot. Be content with whatever crap you settle for. People who pursue their ambition are chumps."
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironpony
Okay thanks. Should I use my savings to make the independent feature film I wanted to make in order to sell it try to break into the business then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver
NO. For the love of all that's holy, don't do that. I'm begging you.
On a scale of difficulty of 1 to 10, being a sound guy on a shoot is about a 3, while creating a feature-length film is about a 77. You need a script, actors, a producer, light, cameras, scouting, wardrobe, post-production, craft services and about seven zillion other intermeshing gears before you get to the finished product. Then, assuming the final product is worth a damn, you've got about ten more flaming hoops to jump through to get it to distribution.
Dude. You've got to crawl before you walk before you run. If you're that intent on throwing your money away, I'll gladly give you my mailing address so I can put it to better use.
MinivanDriver, do you see now what I'm talking about? I'm talking about THIS guy, the guy who thinks his (barely) adequate savings of a year's living expenses is going to be enough to envision, plan, create, and sell a feature film as a means to break into the industry. And after everything you have told him he STILL thinks maybe that's the best idea. There is a serious difference between "following your dreams" and "following your delusions". He has a stale degree that means little today with no current, meaningful experience in the field.
What does he think he's going to live on if concentrates on making a movie in Saskatoon? How much is he going to pay himself?
Too many people like you have succeeded in their lives and think that it just takes perseverance, sweat, and drive. Newsflash - you didn't do it on your own, you were serendipitously in the right places at the right times in addition to all that. For every person who succeeds in the entertainment industry, really succeeds, there are hundreds of people, many driven and talented, who spend their lives looking for that one break that never quite materializes. There are many thousands of people who want to "make a movie". How many even get a foot in the door? A handful.
If the OP really had the drive to make his own film, he would have already tried, in his spare time with whatever money and friends he could muster.
But I wanted to make the movie anyway, since I wanted to get into directing. Plus I would have a feature to show for, instead of applying for positions without as much under my belt by comparison. I already planned on making the feature before a few years ago.
Plus every director I know, said they had to make their first feature on their own with their money. It seems normal to them in the industry. I have worked with actors before and have worked with crew before so I thought I could do it and that was the plan still. I would just do a feature here, before moving anywhere. Plus, it's easier to shoot on here, compared to Vancouver or Toronto, cause where I live, no one cares about filming permits, as long as you're not bothering anyone. In Vancouver, even shooting in a pub for example, you need a permit, which is costly. But here, you can totally do it with the owner's permission, not during business hours for example.
The last feature I worked on, the guy directed it here in this city, all by himself. The current one I am working on is being directed by another director, all by herself here. So is it really that bad? Plus I have already made two short films on my own, and working on my third and fourth. So I thought I had some drive.
As for having skill in sound mixing, I have gotten away with a few jobs here, cause here, my equipment is impressive. But I don't think I could get a job in Vancouver or Toronto with my equipment, cause their, they make studio films a lot more than independent, so I think they would expect me to have much better, and much more costly equipment than what I have. But I don't want to invest in much more costly equipment unless I want to make a career out of being a production sound mixer only, when I really would like to broaden into other areas, such as directing.
As for the whole crawling before I can run thing, I have done other people's movie shoots for the past 6 years, and made some short film projects on my own, as well as in film school. So I feel that I have done a lot of crawling and would like to achieve a higher goal than just crawling more.
Plus when I asked people on here way before, as well as people I know in real life, they said that I should make my first feature, since every director has had to do it at one point and that I should just go for it. So what changed now?
But I wanted to make the movie anyway, since I wanted to get into directing. Plus I would have a feature to show for...
You’ll have a 2 hour long piece of sh*t to show off. How is that going to help you?
Until you can make a short film that impresses people actually working in the industry, there’s no point in trying to make a longer feature. Shorts are cheaper to make, which means you can make a lot more of them for the same amount of money. And that matters, because even the most talented artist has a steep learning curve to climb. No one starts out producing good work (much less excellent work) right away. Just as writers learn to write by writing, film makers learn their craft by making films.
Quote:
Plus every director I know, said they had to make their first feature on their own with their money.
Are any of those directors actually making their living directing films? Or are they the cinematic equivalent of writers “publishing” their novels with a vanity press?
Quote:
The last feature I worked on, the guy directed it here in this city, all by himself. The current one I am working on is being directed by another director, all by herself here.
See my comment above. How well did that guy’s film do commercially? How well did it do critically?
Anyone (and I do mean anyone) can make a movie. That’s hardly an accomplishment. What counts is making a good, commercially successful and/or critically successful movie.
Quote:
As for the whole crawling before I can run thing, I have done other people's movie shoots for the past 6 years, and made some short film projects on my own, as well as in film school. So I feel that I have done a lot of crawling and would like to achieve a higher goal than just crawling more.
And how have those projects been received?
You sound like someone who’s climbed a few hundred feet up the slope of Mount Everest, and feels the summit should surely be in sight be now (and if not, it ought to be possible to don a pair of spring-heeled boots and just jump over the rest of the slope to reach the top).
There’s no shortcut to the summit, and the odds are stacked against you making it. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try, but it does mean you shouldn’t stake everything on a single high-cost project.
GOOD, SUCCESSFUL directors are using other people’s money to fund their feature films. If you can’t get that funding, you’re not ready to direct a feature film.
Okay thanks. Well the directors I asked said they were making projects so I took their word for it, but didn't ask me to see any of their past works.
I am making another short film right now, so we'll see how that goes. My other shorts recieved mixed to negative comments, with a few positives. The biggest thing being locations not looking as good, and I got to find better looking locations for the camera.
As far as not possibly not having enough experience, I think a lot of it has to do with the resources I have and because of lack of money, I have to skip a few steps in good faith. I don't want to keep making to many more shorts cause the goal was to make a feature before, and I want more money for it, compared to spending it on several little short films. But I am going to make at least one more I already have a script for.
I know other directors are using other people's money and the plan was to get some of that too, but I want to use my own, cause I feel bad spending other people's money without throwing some of my own into the pot.
Plus two other directors I work are making their first features. One just finished there's and the other one is just starting now, who I am working under, so I feel that, is it really so bad when the ones I know are doing it as well?
There's a great book on finding what you love and figuring out how to make a living at it, "Wishcraft" by Barbara Sher. It appears to be available as a free download hereWelcome to the home of Barbara Sher's WISHCRAFT!
The webpage says it's 30 years old, but was first published in 1979. That makes it, um---math math math--39 years old.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
