Approaching Actors Rep

Since you will be using these actors to get financing, they become primary partners in the production. Without them, you can't get the money. So you aren't actually making an offer, you are asking for their help.

You have to remember, any actor worth having attached to your script is already getting a stack of scripts from producers and studios.

First on the list are offers at or above their "quote". A guaranteed paycheck.

Second on the list are scripts from studios and producers for less than their quote - but these are also firm offers (money is attached, they get paid when they say "yes"). These are projects like CRASH - where the script may be more important than the money - but there is still money (and often a high profile writer, producer or other actor) attached.

Third in line are pet projects. The star has a pet project they will take to the studio or producers with no money attached, but it's a story they really love.

Fourth in line are scripts from friends or friends of friends. No money attached, but at least brought to them by someone know to them personally.

Eventually we go all the way down to some total stranger with a script and no money. Imagine the odds of doing that script instead of any of the others?

Knowing that you are number five on a very long list of scripts being offered should help you decide how to approach agents. Maybe you could offer a producer credit to the actor, or a good friend of the actor. You might have to do things the old fashioned way. Get the script to a producer who can make a firm offer to a star.

But then the question remains... does one send a synopsis with an offer or the full script?

If you have a serious offer, money in an account, then send the script and the offer. If you don't have the money in the bank to make an offer, either way (synopsis or full script) will get you the same results.

I'm sure you know, but I'll mention it for anyone else who reads the thread...make sure to register the script.

Rik's right, but don't give up hope -- I secured a name actress for a project a year ago on the basis of the script (the project later folded for other, complicated reasons.)

The key to making this happen is to have an absolutely killer script and a willingness to give up control of the project to your names -- up to and including your right to direct.

The only thing I would say is that the script has to be incredible to overcome these odds, so don't send it until you've done your development work and know that it can't be improved -- and be sure that you know what your bottom line is -- if you have to direct, then the battle to sell the project increases, because it's an unfinanced project with an unknown director.

clive illustrates one of the reasons it's difficult to get a name actor to commit to an unfinanced movie. If the movie they attach themselves to doesn't get made, for any variety of reasons, it can look bad on the actor. If their "name" fails to bring in financing, the name value drops. And even if it's the fault of the producer (inexperience, poor management, lack of time, a bigger name) it can appear that the "name" was a contributing factor.

I trust no one thinks I'm suggesting you don't even try. Far from it. Try, try try! Just go in knowing where the obstacles are. I think the lack of true understanding of the actors point of view is what dooms this method.

I'm taking Rik's advice and am going to contact a few producers first, just to see if I get someone to bite. If not I'll approach actors.

Thanks for the response everyone. It's just the next step on the road to becoming a stable independent filmmaker!

clive illustrates one of the reasons it's difficult to get a name actor to commit to an unfinanced movie. If the movie they attach themselves to doesn't get made, for any variety of reasons, it can look bad on the actor. If their "name" fails to bring in financing, the name value drops.

Click to expand...

I completely agree -- the only way to get this to work is to understand the actor's perspective -- and not throwing their name about to promote the film before you've secured finance is part of that (when I attached my name, those long term member on this forum will remember that I never even hinted at who she might be -- protecting her reputation was top of my list -- as it stands today only four people in the world, including her, ever knew she was attached to the project -- which means even though the project folded, I can still go back to her)

However, one of the factors that works in a film maker's favour is that it's possible to be a "name" and still not to have had serious work for the last two years (or longer).

Names fall out of favour and even though they are still earning from previous projects, they may not currently have any offers on the table.

Where this is particularly true is with TV names, whose high profile series got canned three to four years ago.

For TV actors the transition to film is often worth something more than payment up front, providing it jump starts their flagging careers.

These kinds of people will take often take on indie projects, as a way of reinventing themselves, especially if they think the film will be Sundance fodder. But, as I said before it's all down to the script.

The flip side of this is that appearing in a "piss poor, low budget, genre film" can pretty much destroy an actor's career.

Selling yourself as a viable project is therefore about having a great script, having a great showreel and having the kind of marketing plan for the film that will benefit the actor's profile.

Mainly though, it's the script -- pretty much every actor out there is looking for a good script -- and the reason that's so important is because they are so very, very rare.

clive said:

Mainly though, it's the script -- pretty much every actor out there is looking for a good script -- and the reason that's so important is because they are so very, very rare.

Click to expand...

Yes, rare indeed. I'm wondering... is it any kind of a common practice, when approaching better known talent, to express the willingness to 'finesse' the script as the actor might see fit? That way, should they like the script, but not love it, they might take a chance with you? Knowing that the writer would perform rewrites to suit the actor's sensibilities? As an actor, I've read plenty of scripts that I see have good potential, but can also see the script needs work. Unless I know the writer well enough to feel comfortable asking if they'd be open for feedback, I won't step up. I can see that it might be a double edged sword, mentioning the willingness to rewrite. I suppose it just depends on the writer's relationship to the actor's rep?