Help Support Indie American Tokusatsu!

[planetxleader]

going to use Daikomonohashi's work as an example of why a budget isn't needed

I referenced Dai's work to show that when you strip away all the bells and whistles, you're left with the bare, important basics: storytelling and cinematography. I specifically was pointing at the two most recent films, Episode 74b and Luxembourg. Not because they show that you "don't need money," but because they show off things that are more important; things that you need in addition to a budget.

Sorta was a seat-of-the-pants experiment that ended up getting Dai a lot of praise, and we're using it as a launching board for what's coming next; something we've been working on for over two years now (I'm sure Dai will share some of what we've done). Sorta 1 was short and bare-bones compared to part 2, and likewise Sorta 3 will be much more intricate than 2. That's what you need to do: build up. Right now you're going into this with concrete huge goals and that's honestly not a wise thing to do. Again: build up.

Make some more short films, throw around some simple ideas. See what the results are, where you excel, where you need improvement, and go from there. Then, when you feel you've honed your craft, think about taking on GKaiser, which certainly will need money. By the time you get there, you may find yourself needing less than you thought, as Birdie Num Nums pointed out.

Also:

If you approach people and tell them the only way you can make your film good is with money money money and you show them a few, forgive me, poorly shot effects demos to illustrate this, you're not going to fill them with anything except dread.

^ Bears repeating.

 

[Daikamonohashi]

I'm trying my best to be patient and polite here but you're simply not getting it. At all.

At all at all.

Firstly, I will be the first to admit that the current episodes of Ultraman Sorta that are available for viewing are shoddy, haphazard pieces of work. We filmed them on a lark, never expecting that we would actually create a series out of the character, and when our fans demanded more, I immediately decided that the only reasonable way to continue the series was by majorly increasing our production values. Thus, Episode 3 has a polished, well-plotted, character-driven script and we're putting a lot more emphasis on cinematography, style, acting, etc., etc. this time around, as well as upping the ante with the special effects work we intend to present. Observe, for example, our miniatures:

[hide]

And some other miscellaneous shots:







[/hide]

For the record, the 7 or so buildings we have constructed so far have cost us well under $100.

The point I've been trying to make, however, is that you currently have nothing in your body of work that shows me that you deserve a grand to make your project. Nothing. I'm sorry I have to be so blunt with you but it's simply the truth. You have nothing to prove to us that your project is worth investing a thousand dollars in and simple things like the poor choice of framing you use when you film your reviews worry me that you don't know enough about cinematography to be able to film something of the quality you're aiming for.

When we tell you to scale back and think smaller, we're not telling you to scale back on Gkaiser but to just set it aside entirely if it's as big a dream project for you as it seems to be, work on some smaller things to hone your skills and creativity, and then come back and shape your dream with much more capable hands. The point that PlanetXLeader was trying to make by referencing our shorts (embarrassing as it feels for me to discuss them in this context) is that they were little experiments that helped us grow as filmmakers despite being little more than functional afterthoughts to the bigger projects we've been working on for the past year and a half. Luxembourg was an exercise in mood, eye-catching cinematography, and editing interesting dialogue while Episode 74b was an exercise in camera trickery and pacing. They're both right around three minutes long and took scant days to complete from concept to uploading them to the internet yet I feel they've helped us a lot with how we're approaching our bigger projects.

You need to get over this idea that more money is somehow going to make you a better filmmaker and learn that what you really need to do is be more creative. And learn to network, like Birdie said. Like him, it's gotten me a long way in my own film projects. Once you've learned how to make something excellent with no money, then go and make something mind-blowing when you get a real budget.

But if you can ignore all of our thoughts and prove us wrong then by all means go ahead. I'm all for surpassing the expectations of nay-sayers, believe me. However, I don't see any evidence right now that I should help you acquire a thousand dollars when you have no proof that you can deliver the product that you say you will.

That's my spiel. Hopefully you finally understand what I've been trying to say this whole time.

 

[Scissors]

I am aware that it was not a normal fan-production, but I still think that we could use the Ibaliger show as an example of how you can make it far on low budget.
This show was mainly made by a volunteer production team, who made their own costumes, props etc. The effects in the show may not have been groundbreaking, but the creativity was there.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk6Ro4T7SS4"]YouTube - ibaliger-pv01.wmv[/ame]

 

[Darkster]

If you approach people and tell them the only way you can make your film good is with money money money and you show them a few, forgive me, poorly shot effects demos to illustrate this, you're not going to fill them with anything except dread. Through elaborate scheming and schmoozing me and my crew took over an old inn for five entire days and shot over 40 hours of carefully-planned out footage for a rather ambitious short horror film, and we were also able to acquire all of our equipment and wardrobe needs and feed the cast and crew. The only things I paid for were a pair of pants at a thrift store, a small hoard of some coffee energy drinks I was getting rather addicted to and a couple bouquets of flowers to woo the leading ladies with. My point here isn't to boast but rather to point out that there are some things money doesn't need to buy, and for everything else, you don't need Master Card. You just need to schmooze and network the hell out of people. Don't just sell your project, sell yourself (not to be confused with selling out!) and I think you'll find your enthusiasm (which you seem to have a lot of) is contagious. Everybody loves movies and television, most people want to be a part of it and live a little bit of the dream, even if it's just to see their name in the end credits, so take advantage of this and you can get a lot of whatcha need. I bet you could whittle your production costs down to half of what you think you need by finding creative ways of solving challenges, without sacrificing any quality. You might even be improving the quality it because you'll really be getting hands on in ways you wouldn't if you were just sinking wads of money into it.

This is a suspicious post. :sly:

Dai, will you stop crushing the dreams of making an unnecessaily expensive movie that will make negative profits? :shakefist

 

[DanteCWB]

Yo, real live guy with professional filmmaking experience here.

I'm one of those wackos who has worked with Dai before. But, unlike Dai, I've worked on about thirty film sets of low budget professional films, the most recent being a 5,000 dollar out of pocket feature which is the type of thing you're looking at I assume.

Firstly, with 5,000 dollars, the only thing that the crew was able to get was food. The production was scaled out over six weekends and the camera equipment (with the exception of two shooting days with rented equipment) was all out of pocket stuff that a freelancing cinematographer who happened to be the DP on set had lying around. This stuff included a Cannon SLR HD Camera used for video, about 10 good lights for indoor lighting, some cords, a boom, microphone, and sound recorder. The 5,000 was not allotted toward any of that, and even with all this stuff, my sound equipment was still better. So I wound up using that. (I was the Sound Mixer)

The subject matter of the film featured no special effects, no costumes you couldn't get at a thrift store, and only a handful of stunts. The film relied heavily on snappy comedy and a good story with real characters.

Most of your money from the looks of it is going to be going to building sets, making costumes, doing cheap special effects, and all the while you have a guy with a huge sword and no blood effects. So you'll need that. If you want a guy who is good at it, you're going to have to pay him at least $100 per hour + the costs of special effects makeup and apparatuses. If you already have someone who has skill in your party, your test footage didn't show it. Also, you're dealing with martial arts, you need to be talking about the fighting aspect of your film. What experience is coming to the table and how are you paying for it? Safety is a concern as well.

If you're going to start making films, you should be concentrating on look and script. Nothing else. Make pretty pictures with good writing (big surprise, this is what Dai is doing). That will build you a portfolio, and maybe get you noticed in a local film community and maybe you'll get to work on bigger productions and learn from them before you try to tackle the idea of a feature.

Features are big, nasty, grueling, complicated, and no one has the time for them. And that's when you're filming a quiet drama with a lot of static shots.

Lastly, and most importantly, your pitch. In your pitch, you basically said, "Hi, I don't have any money. Here's some shoddy costumes fighting, I think I can make a movie out of it." I don't think that's the image you want to give to investors on the real world market.

In a pitch, you introduce yourself (check) talk about your experience (not check) and then talk about the STORY of the film you want to make. The first thing out of your mouth after introducing yourself and showing your expertise should have been "I want to make a film about X" and then give what is called a Logline, which is a one to two sentence summery of the film, such as, "A man enters the world of his dreams and finds himself within his mind." Something like that. Then go into the plot giving a certain amount of time to each act of what should be a three act outline.

I'm impressed with the editing footage visually of your ghost thing. But the sound design is an issue. You need to start looking for better sound effects and learn how to feel sound. Start working with backgrounds and stronger effects to improve the feel of the film. Everyone wants someone who is good with sound, as I've learned. I've been 'the sound guy' for about a year now and it's getting me a lot of work.

I hope you take this advice to heart as I've saved you about $12,000 worth of Film School and a lot of trouble.

 

[jfreedan]

If you approach people and tell them the only way you can make your film good is with money money money and you show them a few, forgive me, poorly shot effects demos to illustrate this, you're not going to fill them with anything except dread. Through elaborate scheming and schmoozing me and my crew took over an old inn for five entire days and shot over 40 hours of carefully-planned out footage for a rather ambitious short horror film, and we were also able to acquire all of our equipment and wardrobe needs and feed the cast and crew.

40 hours of footage? I want to ask why but I really don't want to get into some kind of, "I can do this and that" kind of contest, which is what this thread is basically becoming. I will simply say that using a 3:1 shooting ratio an 89 minute film (the precise runtime of the first horror film I picked up, Bogeyman) comes to 267 minutes (about 4 hours). I use a 3:1 ratio, and I don't consider 40 hours in the can to be a well planned shoot for a short film (and on that note, nor one where all the production funds was spent on food, let alone 5 grand on a two week indie shoot). I know that doesn't sound nice but I don't know what else to say. Whatever film you made is not what I'm making.

You're trying to use a film that doesn't sound like it was well planned or the particular genre or visual style of the film I want to do to justify why I don't need what my detailed planning tells me I need.

Otherwise...I appreciate the advice everyone but I'm not a complete newbie to film-making. What I am is a newbie to the whole, "trying to convince people to donate money thing". I'm not a terribly good salesman, which is why my last Kickstarter project had a bad pitch video. I've since told myself to stop trying to be a salesman and just do what I do best: making a story.

The promotional video will be a story that, I hope, will satisfy what you expect to see in a promotional video.

I'm impressed with the editing footage visually of your ghost thing. But the sound design is an issue.

I agree; sound was awful in that student film. But I didn't do the sound on that project. I directed, edited, wrote and shot several scenes (I also acted, poorly, but I originally wasn't supposed to and it was the desperate act of someone who needed the darn film shot that weekend). And that set was decorated for the shoot; the room didn't normally look like that at all.

I've thought of trying to re-master that short but I felt that, in the end, it wouldn't achieve anything. We ended up having to cut several shots due to time constraints, so I'll never be happy with it anyway. I'd rather devote my time and energy to my next video.

I'm trying my best to be patient and polite here but you're simply not getting it. At all.

I like your miniatures and that you're still moving forward with your series. However, I think you're the one who isn't understanding. We might both be working on tokusatsu inspired web shows, but they aren't the same show. We both have different needs.

 

[Daikamonohashi]

You're trying to use a film that doesn't sound like it was well planned or the particular genre or visual style of the film I want to do to justify why I don't need what my detailed planning tells me I need.

As Dante pointed out, money IS a big deal on big shoots like the sort you want to do. I don't think anyone here has ever denied that. We're not telling you to do something as gigantic and elaborate as Gkaiser is in your head for no money, we're telling you to work on other, smaller projects to hone your skills before tackling a much bigger one like this. Build up a portfolio of impressive shorts to show people that you really deserve their money.

I like your miniatures and that you're still moving forward with your series. However, I think you're the one who isn't understanding. We might both be working on tokusatsu inspired web shows, but they aren't the same show. We both have different needs.

Again, you aren't understanding because I'm not telling you to make GKaiser in the same way we're making Sorta, just that you should learn to do more with less before you take on something so big. Maybe you're not a filmmaking newbie but, again, what work of yours we have seen doesn't inspire confidence that you'll be able to work magic with a couple grand. I have big projects like that in mind too, you know - Sorta is one of my smaller, experimental projects (I have about six going on in some form or fashion at any one time) that will eventually get me to that stage. I'm not there yet and I suspect that neither are you.

Like I said though: If you can prove us wrong then do it.

 

[DanteCWB]

40 hours of footage? I want to ask why but I really don't want to get into some kind of, "I can do this and that" kind of contest, which is what this thread is basically becoming. I will simply say that using a 3:1 shooting ratio an 89 minute film (the precise runtime of the first horror film I picked up, Bogeyman) comes to 267 minutes (about 4 hours). I use a 3:1 ratio, and I don't consider 40 hours in the can to be a well planned shoot for a short film (and on that note, nor one where all the production funds was spent on food, let alone 5 grand on a two week indie shoot). I know that doesn't sound nice but I don't know what else to say. Whatever film you made is not what I'm making.

You're trying to use a film that doesn't sound like it was well planned or the particular genre or visual style of the film I want to do to justify why I don't need what my detailed planning tells me I need.

Otherwise...I appreciate the advice everyone but I'm not a complete newbie to film-making. What I am is a newbie to the whole, "trying to convince people to donate money thing". I'm not a terribly good salesman, which is why my last Kickstarter project had a bad pitch video. I've since told myself to stop trying to be a salesman and just do what I do best: making a story.

Are you saying that for an 87 minute production, you're only going to get 4 hours of footage? I think I misunderstood you.

Also, I think that it's a little odd that you don't realize that 40 hours of footage is pretty good if you're looking at making something that is about an hour or hour and a half long. You said you're not a newbie, and then you bashed getting 40 hours of footage like it was bad or something. For a feature, you're going to have anywhere between 40 to 100 hours of footage, unless you didn't shoot it right. 40 hours of shooting in five days is pretty rad, and is the result of a well planned shoot (I assume you were on digital or miniDV). To put this in perspective, I've never been on a shoot of a five minute film that didn't get at least 40 minutes of footage. Most of the time it's at least an hour of footage.

I've seen that most of the time, if you're getting good coverage of a script, you're going to be filming about 5 pages per day, with around 2-3 hours of footage if you're moving at a good pace and not shooting on real film. I've been on a set where 14 pages was finished in one day, and we finished early (early meaning less than 12 hours of work). But the director had to sacrifice some of the coverage he wanted in order to get all the material. And all the shooting was in a single room, so he didn't have to worry about lighting changes or completely relocating the crew in the middle of the day.

Also, about you scoffing at this food thing. 50 people on a set, plus 10 bucks per day per person on food for two meals per day times ten days of shooting is about 5,000 dollars. Cut the people down to about 35 and you have 3,500 dollars going to food. The rest (1,500 dollars) goes to crew transportation, lighting equipment rental, and wardrobe. Not saying that's how the show was actually set up (I wasn't involved with the budgeting on that one, but talked to the guy who was about it for a while), and sometimes you can get food donated, but MOST OF YOUR MONEY will go to food on independent shoots until you start working on budgets of over 1 million. Then only a large portion of your money will go to food. Because when you actually have a budget, people have higher expectations for the food on a set.

 

[planetxleader]

We might both be working on tokusatsu inspired web shows, but they aren't the same show. We both have different needs.

Your need right now is most definitely not $1,000 and and all the resources and man-power required to make GKaiser.

Please, focus your energy on more short films, like we're saying. I know it sucks to hear discouraging words about something you're pouring your heart into, but rest assured when you hear the same thing from several people, it means you need to step back and re-consider things.

Don't abandon GKaisker, but at the same time don't make it your priority right now. Otherwise things aren't gonna look good for it. It'll be worth it in the long run.

 

[ryuuseipro]

As Dante pointed out, money IS a big deal on big shoots like the sort you want to do. I don't think anyone here has ever denied that. We're not telling you to do something as gigantic and elaborate as Gkaiser is in your head for no money, we're telling you to work on other, smaller projects to hone your skills before tackling a much bigger one like this. Build up a portfolio of impressive shorts to show people that you really deserve their money.

Again, you aren't understanding because I'm not telling you to make GKaiser in the same way we're making Sorta, just that you should learn to do more with less before you take on something so big. Maybe you're not a filmmaking newbie but, again, what work of yours we have seen doesn't inspire confidence that you'll be able to work magic with a couple grand. I have big projects like that in mind too, you know - Sorta is one of my smaller, experimental projects (I have about six going on in some form or fashion at any one time) that will eventually get me to that stage. I'm not there yet and I suspect that neither are you.

Like I said though: If you can prove us wrong then do it.

JFreedan, if you're reading this, listen to him. He's making perfect sense.

That said, I'll show you one such classic way to not make a tokusatsu fanfilm:

(This is Part 1 of 6; follow the rest on YouTube... if you can.)
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJdgZ_Kch4c"]YouTube - Godzilla X The Kaiju Killer part 1 of 6[/ame]

I. Thought. This. Was. AWFUL!

The extent of this filmmaker's ambition was to make this one fanfilm, and when met with the slightest criticism, constructive or negative, he goes ballistic on his critics in the most childish way imaginable. He never matured as a filmmaker.

You don't want to end up the same way. Trust me. I'm speaking from past experience. If you go with GKaiser as you are now, you'll be a one-trick pony with future regrets.

Daikamonohashi is making perfect sense when he says you should save GKaiser for later. First, you have to build yourself up as a filmmaker. This way, you can get the funding you need for your film, as well as any potential manpower, especially with friends. There is no different way of doing this. Because if you want to do something truly serious right now, you'd better be a really good businessman, too. It's not easy. Especially not as easy or as fun as being an experimenting amateur.

I schooled myself as a filmmaker, animator, and cartoonist through the years, though I've gotten some filmmaking education at ITT Tech for that, too, and found it very useful. The digital age has made filmmaking very luxurious for me, compared to the painstaking manual work I had to do back in the mid-to-late 90s! (I used two VCRs to edit videos, and used three tapes: Source footage, rough edit, and final edit.) I enjoyed doing the films I made, though I'm not going to pretend they're my best work. The following video, Rekira, is based on a work-in-progress comic-book project that has consumed my life.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgrR7m2Js-c"]YouTube - ????????????? - REKIRA - Pilot (Improved HD Version)[/ame]

I loved doing this. I want to do more of Rekira, something even better! (I dream of doing it in live-action.) But, I want to do other things, too. There's more experiments I want to do. More genres I want to cover. (I have a second comic project in the works besides Rekira.) Filmmaking was one of my ambitions, and I want to express myself through art. Same goes for my other objects of affection; animation and comics.

So definitely do more experimenting before you go on to GKaiser. You'll be much more rewarded later on. And who knows? With the acclaim and funding you'd get, you'd do more GKaiser videos, even challenge yourself with new ideas!

Even Eiji Tsuburaya didn't do just monster movies and superhero shows...

Your need right now is most definitely not $1,000 and and all the resources and man-power required to make GKaiser.

Please, focus your energy on more short films, like we're saying. I know it sucks to hear discouraging words about something you're pouring your heart into, but rest assured when you hear the same thing from several people, it means you need to step back and re-consider things.

Don't abandon GKaisker, but at the same time don't make it your priority right now. Otherwise things aren't gonna look good for it. It'll be worth it in the long run.

Seconded.