The low-budget bubble has well and truly burst

[David Peterson]

The low-budget bubble has well and truly burst

In 2010, 63% of all films shot in the UK cost under half a million pounds. Just seven years later, that figure has plummeted to 34%.

https://stephenfollows.com/big-changes-in-uk-film-production/

 

[Wayne Morellini]

What about 5000 pounds?

You have to decide what sort of film you want ultimately, and aim for a budget that suites that. The economy also affects how much money you can get and how much that money buys. But half a million pounds l, instead of 5, 15, 50, 100, 250 thousand pound steps, may seem relatively low budget to megalomaniacs.

Thanks.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

What about 5000 pounds?

Doesn't cover the food on the set.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

It's happening everywhere... and a thing I've noticed is that production companies and producers push peoples fees down while newcomers in the industry come in and do stuff for a fraction of what it should cost. There are too many filmmakers, too many with dreams of becoming big directors and not enough real competence in their field, while producers try to get enough juice out of them paying as little as possible. The global industry is stuck in a capitalistic downward spiral that will make far worse before we see any kind of improvements.

 

[Zeb B]

It's happening everywhere... and a thing I've noticed is that production companies and producers push peoples fees down while newcomers in the industry come in and do stuff for a fraction of what it should cost. There are too many filmmakers, too many with dreams of becoming big directors and not enough real competence in their field, while producers try to get enough juice out of them paying as little as possible. The global industry is stuck in a capitalistic downward spiral that will make far worse before we see any kind of improvements.

In a creative business based on technology, there exists a Innovator's Dilemma growth curve series whereby we need to reinvent while trying to maximize what is currently paying the rent. Like trying to paint an airplane while flying it. A career is a series of small curves linked together which represent anyway or anything you do as a job function. There is no linear line where you graduate from University, plug-into a single occupation or methodology and cruise for the next 40 years.

 

[Christopher S Johnson]

There are too many filmmakers, too many with dreams of becoming big directors.

Hmm... Any suggestions on how to fix that?

 

[Marc Wielage]

Hmm... Any suggestions on how to fix that?

Do what I do: if their rate is too low... just say no.

 

[Craig Parkes]

The reality of the low budget bubble is that it was likely mostly funded by people who HAD been doing co productions, found they could no longer put those together, and funded low budget films instead. Also no doubt some of the low budget films through 2010 were funded by hedge fund growth and the money spilling out of those arenas pre GFC. You can presume if the films were released/made public in 2010 the funding for them came into place up until about 2008 - one of the reasons there is the dip in BOTH co productions AND low budget productions in 2011 is likely the squeeze on finances from the GFC - it took about two to three years to be reflected through the system.

I was told very clearly at AFM in 2010 that the film making 'bubble' at the time had not been driven by demand - it was a glut because of ridiculous levels of film investment in the run up to the GFC - basically hedge funds thought they were rich and the gravy train would go on forever and they diversified into films.

The reality is there is a minimum amount you can spend on a film and expect it to have remotely good odds of making money. You can spend almost nothing on a film and make money with it, but the number of very low budget films that lose money are incredibly high as a percentage - the decrease in low budget movies being made reflects mostly I think, 15 odd years of people who had no idea how to make movies pouring money down a drain eventually collectively figuring out that they had no idea how to make movies.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Like I say, don't make a film till you can do it really well (at whatever price). In other words, spend time making a lot less films unless you are really good at it. Otherwise practice and work on other people's films. Wait until you got your act together with the particular production.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Doesn't cover the food on the set.

Caviar Hrvoje? Bring your own, role out mum with the sandwiches. Where did you think low budget started from, somebody in a learjet Hrvoje?

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Caviar Hrvoje? Bring your own, role out mum with the sandwiches. Where did you think low budget started from, somebody in a learjet Hrvoje?

No caviar. Do the math.

 

[paulcurtis]

I think a point that's often missed is that it's not about how much can you make a movie for it's about how do you distribute and market a movie. There is a huge gulf between low budget (under 2m and big budget over say 50m). A P&A on a cinema release will run into the 10s of millions and more. So big budget movies are 'safer' from that perspective and will get wide releases. A typical low budget indie movie that is very critically successful will be looking at P&A of hundreds of thousands and very low mg's and it's theatrical run will be tiny (i am skewing towards my knowledge of the UK more but i'm sure the same is true in most countries).

We focus on how good we can make a movie for X, which is perfectly valid. But the reality of commercially getting X back is way more complicated than 'i can make a hollywood movie for next to nothing' because the P&A is the same.

Stephens report (and have spent some time looking at other analysis from him and his team) has been the case for decades. The industry in mostly broken, always has been. There are only a few countries i can point to that have a sustainable market (india being a good example and to a less degree the states in fact). But ever since the rise of the UK film industry it's never been profitable. I can't remember the guys name (Green i think) but in the 70s used tax loop holes to make a fortune on indie movies that we made but never to see the light of day...

Now we're seeing major studios dumping product on SVOD services when they're unsure about it. Cloverfield being a perfect example but also Annihilation which won't see a theatrical release outside of the US because its too high brow (FFS)

cheers
Paul

 

[Wayne Morellini]

No caviar. Do the math.

I have. But do you know how low low goes?

 

[Wayne Morellini]

YouTube.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Seriously. If somebody is going to do something $5k or less, free talent, and has not got much of a hope of lining something up.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

The global industry is stuck in a capitalistic downward spiral that will make far worse before we see any kind of improvements.

That's the price of digital technology. Like Judgement Day, this sort of thing was inevitable.

Hmm... Any suggestions on how to fix that?

It won't be fixed, but maybe RED could double the price of their cameras? ;-)

Like I say, don't make a film till you can do it really well (at whatever price). In other words, spend time making a lot less films unless you are really good at it. Otherwise practice and work on other people's films. Wait until you got your act together with the particular production.

Or, even better, make lots of crappy films but don't show them. Use them as experience to make the next one better.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Lol Karim. That's funny.

Yes, so get experience on other's movies, and simply make 10x less films 10x better.

A lot of good stuff here, like the pre gfc investment boom. I remember a show in England which was a office like comedy about the making of an Australian style beach side soap opera drama. Then afterwards they have the seperate show of the episode of the beach soapy, less comedy, they were supposedly making in the comedy. Those poor bikini girls must have been freezing their tits off.

 

[David Ellison]

Oops

 

[David Ellison]

It's happening everywhere... and a thing I've noticed is that production companies and producers push peoples fees down while newcomers in the industry come in and do stuff for a fraction of what it should cost. There are too many filmmakers, too many with dreams of becoming big directors and not enough real competence in their field, while producers try to get enough juice out of them paying as little as possible. The global industry is stuck in a capitalistic downward spiral that will make far worse before we see any kind of improvements.

Cant like this enough.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Unfortunately, on the other side, some of us believe if we are going to do it, do it well.

But the more I see of Kubrik the more weird it is. He is sort of like a legend for going the extra 100 miles, but watching his stuff is off putting, like if a Barbie doll was a real person, just unnatural. But that's the trick, doing it naturally and going forwards. Some people know what that means and other's probably don't. But it does mean aswell is, when the time is right you just go forth and do it.

Room 237, is an interesting documentary referring to his references to taking the moon landing in the shinning. The film itself freaky. In a comic way you may consider horror. Then there was his sudden death after he rapped his final film. I can virtually garrantee there is a lot more to Kubrik's life than we know. There seems weird stuff going on.