Hypothetical question here

Hey guys,
Sorry, I am the OP and went and just forgot about my post. So many questions...all valid ones. I will clear it out:
I want to be a director, I also want to have my own production house someday. I read about Irving Thalberg and Jason Blum and want to have that kind of autonomy. I have done a 3 month direction(on hands, no theory, just practical) course and studied scriptwriting for a year in Canada.

I am good at convincing people...I am good at public speeches and all that so I would go around selling my vision to financiers, to get the money. Now here's the thing:

I have a friend whose friend owns this beautiful mansion(or bungalows as they call them here in india) in a hill station called Mussorie. The going rate to shoot in it is INR(Indian rupee; 1 INR= 65USD) 60,000/- per day. He can give me the house for a massive discount. Say 20 days for 10,000/- USD.

2ndly, I don't want to break into Bollywood per se(my tastes are very western) but financially I can work in this system to get labor and film stocks/camera(shooting it in 16mm). I got a deal from kodak here at a good rate.

Most directors start with horror: It is easily sellable, doesn't need big stars and has a strong market. Not to mention it is great to hone your technical skills. I can make the film(location, film and post) for 30k USD.

I am writing the script. I am more of an old school guy: I love Alien, any John Carpenter film, Mullholand drive...slow, atmospheric. Look, this being my first time I want to risk it....go more for technical appeal and atmosphere over story. Which is not to say I will leave any stones unturned with the story or characters...however, it is what it is....a haunted house movie.

So I asked your opinion. No, I haven't done anything except make 3 shorts one of which is here in the short film forum. But I have a vision. I want to get everything right in pre production. I am surrounding myself with beginners and a few professionals and building a team. Any of you interested in any department...we can take it further in PMs. I know I have this one chance and I have to do it. I'll take it to Cannes and Toronto and sell it. Subtitle it, movies in my country are crap. Even today retarded B grade horror movies are released every Friday and they make a million, sometimes 6-7. The market is saturated and I know I can stand out.

Sorry for the long read:rolleyes:
 
I think I know what you're getting at - you want to know if you'd be confident enough in your abilities to pull off a $60k film with only 2-3 shorts completed?

I think only you can answer that. Some people would be happy to after one short. Others would prefer to do a no-budget feature first.

My thoughts: if it's truly a donation, then why not? If it's a loan or investment, and there's an expectation that the money will be at the very least paid back, then that's a slightly different situation.

Thanks. This is what I meant. My own self belief. Its not a donation but the money will be recouped as a guarantee.
 
Perhaps I'm missing the point of this question, but if you tell me to make a film and you're paying for it, why wouldn't I?

The only reason I can think of is that one may not think the budget is enough to make an adequate film. But you make no mention of what level of quality you'd expect or how/where this film would be broadcast and distributed. I assume you wouldn't be adverse to me making a found footage film with your cash?

Some great films have been made for less than $60K, so I'd expect most would jump at the opportunity.

Yes, I'd be making it. Quality? I want the best quality which for me is 70s Hollywood. I want the look and feel of The Changeling. I have the house and location to get that and I am shooting with 16mm. But no found footage or recent craze. Old school horror film...atmospheric.
 
Merit or not if I were hypothetically given $60,000 and told to go and
make a feature film (haunted house horror) after making just 2-3 short
films I would go ahead and make the movie. And I'd write the script.

Yes...Thanks. This is what I am doing.'
 
Absolutely, provided of course the location was easily accessible by me (as in, minimum United States, preferably South/South East)

The location is India. Mussorie(google it) is around 2 hours from New Delhi. NYC-Delhi daily 16 hour non stop flights. All expense paid. Stay for the month(or however long).
 
Ah! So your question wasn't hypothetical after all!


Quality? I want the best quality which for me is 70s Hollywood. I want the look and feel of The Changeling. I have the house and location to get that and I am shooting with 16mm.

Only you know if you and the people you will be able to employ for $60,000 will be able to pull off the movie you want to create. If you can do it, go for it.



p.s.

Not that it's particularly relevant, but INR1.00 doesn't equal $65.00. INR1.00 = $0.015.
I had to check, because I seriously needed to know what this location was that was costing $3.9M per day!!! ;)
Still, INR60,000 is nearly $900.00, so you're still getting a decent discount at $10K for 20 days.
 
.............

p.s.

Not that it's particularly relevant, but INR1.00 doesn't equal $65.00. INR1.00 = $0.015.
I had to check, because I seriously needed to know what this location was that was costing $3.9M per day!!! ;)
Still, INR60,000 is nearly $900.00, so you're still getting a decent discount at $10K for 20 days.

Could be relevant if all other calculations are just as far off ;)
I hope and expect they are not :)

Why shoot on 16mm instead of digital?
(Out of curiosity)
 
Could be relevant if all other calculations are just as far off ;)
I hope and expect they are not :)

Why shoot on 16mm instead of digital?
(Out of curiosity)

Sorry guys, English isn't my first language. What I meant was 1 American dollar equals 65 Indian rupees. So yeah the mansion is a bargain. Is there anyway I can post pics here(from my desktop)?

I will be honest dude...I love the look of film. I love the feel of films like The Fly and The Terminator and I believe a lot of it has got to do with the film stock. So I want to start with 16mm because a.) Its logical and b.) its much cheaper.

One of my favorite movies is The woman in Black: Not the crappy Daniel Radcliffe version but the older 1988 TV movie...Its on youtube. I love that atmosphere...the real feel, the fog. It was shot on 16mm.
 
Fair enough motivation :)
I was wondering, as I think that if you calculate everything digital might be cheaper and easier to work with.
 
Back
Top