Hey everyone, Producer of "No Tomorrow" Chris Pluchar here.
As you're all likely aware, it's rather expensive to shoot a feature length film. As a filmmaker, you're left with only two basic choices. A.) You get a studio to back your project. B.) You secure independent financing. With the economic downturn, studios are choosing to greenlight less films and are increasingly relying on established material with a built in audience to (supposedly) help guarantee some kind of return at the box office. Financing independently has also grown more difficult as investors remove their money from the risky game of film and either save it or put it into more reliable, but lower performing investments.
So what's a guy (or girl) to do?
In October of 2009, a short five minute film was posted on YouTube by a group of filmmakers in Uruguay. "Panic Attack". It was a labor of love that they worked on during their downtime and for which they found themselves calling in all the favors they could to get it done. Just a week or two later, the video had received tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of views. Within a month, they broke the one million mark. Another month goes by and a bidding war starts between several entities in Hollywood. The winner? Sam Raimi's production company with an offer to the filmmakers to finance a$30,000,000 feature film. Not only did they get the cash, but they also are getting Sam Raimi's support and guidance throughout the process. That alone is priceless.
Fast forward to Summer of 2010. The same thing has happened to at least a half a dozen filmmakers ("Azureus Rising", "Cup of Tears", "Nuit Blanche", "The Raven", "Pixels"). Some are getting their films picked up to be adapted into features, others are being offered representation, etc.
It used to be that you never wanted to post your short online until you had exhausted every film festival and screening option you could find. Now, films like the ones mentioned above are invited to screen at festivals because they were popular online first. The process, which is particularly volatile at the moment, has flipped entirely on its head.
So rather than trying to eek out a feature film with no money, we decided to strike while the "iron of short films succeeding in getting Hollywood's attention" is hot. We can drop a few hundred dollars or a few thousand dollars on a project and shoot it on the Red over a couple of days (similar to the strategy for "The Raven") and create something dynamic enough to go viral and get some attention. It requires a fairly minimal time commitment for the bulk of the crew, it costs significantly less, and it's easier to focus on a five minute proof of concept film as opposed to a feature.
Worst case scenario, we have a solid five minute piece that we can use to pitch the concept to investors when the time comes.
That's the basic logic behind why we're pursuing this strategy. Stay tuned for "No Tomorrow" Marketing Strategy - Part 2 of 2, where I'll discuss how we are attempting to make sure we're one of the success stories for small films doing big things.
It's great. I love your philosophy... except, why attract Hollywood? Why be dependent on those old gatekeepers? Make it, produce, sell it yourself.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. I should clarify that I focused on Hollywood when I wrote this because so far that's who usually steps in and finances projects that go this route.
ReplyDeleteTruth be told, we're open to studio or independent financing and will pursue both - whichever will help us get the story told.