How much to do a test film?

A

Aspiring Mogul

I'm on a Francis Ford Coppola kick, because the Godfather I and II are two of my favorite movies - III is just OK - and I also like Apocalypse Now, though, again, I'm not convinced it's one of the greatest movies of all time.

That said, Apocalypse Now would make a great SF adaptation, so I'm wondering. Let's say I do want to make an adaptation, but I want to see how this works on video, so I can get what's in my head onto the screen. I'm going to go totally cheap and use the green screen and a handycam, and get as many volunteers as possible. So, if I was to recreate a few hours of a bunch of guys on a boat (actually a tub in front of a green screen), how little can I spend? This version is just to see how my ideas work, as opposed to making an actual movie of it. Then, once I get it right, I'll get to my masterpiece, but first things first.

Can anyone introduce me to Coppola? It would mean a great deal to get some ideas from him.
 
I can't really give you a quote as there are so many variables, but why not try an animatic to help you figure out the flow, possible *look*, and/or timing of the piece? If you can make stick figures and have access to even a simple editing graphics program I think you could manage to lay out your film that way? Just a thought.


And, perhaps Bernie Lawson has an in with Coppola? :D
 
Aspiring Mogul said:
how little can I spend?
Click to expand...

Figure $10 per person per day for food depending on how long the
day is. Another $40/$50 for "craft service" - coffee, soda, water,
some chips, maybe a veggie plate and some cookies. So you can spend
under $500.

Conrad's novel is ripe for a Sci-Fi adaptation.
 
I can spend quite a few thousand, or more accurately, a few tens of thousands. The thing is, as I understand it, the essense of writing is re-writing, and, perhaps, the essence if filming is re-filiming, again and again until you get it right. If so, that would limit my options.

I should be able to pay the actors and a small crew at least minimum wage, and I should also be able to pay some of the rental for the equipment. But, as you all know, costs escalate pretty rapidly after that.
 
Last edited:
Aspiring Mogul said:
I can spend quite a few thousand, or more accurately, a few tens of thousands. The thing is, as I understand it, the essense of writing is re-writing, and, perhaps, the essence if filming is re-filiming, again and again until you get it right. If so, that would limit my options.
Click to expand...

I agree that reworking is part of the process but you have to come to a point where you must send your creation out into the world...and hopefully each piece won't take 18 years. :D
 
I'm sorry, now I'm confused.

You mentioned shooting a test. I assumed you meant something
no audience would see - just something for you to try out. In that
case you don't need to spends thousands and you don't need to do
re-writing on the script. I clearly made the wrong assumption. What,
exactly, is your intent with the "test"?

And no; filming is not re-filming. A writer, working alone (or even
with a partner) can re-write for months without adding to costs.
A director cannot keep bringing back the cast and crew over and
over and over for "re-filming". Even if they are all volunteers.
Certainly cost prohibitive if they are being paid.

A test shoot with all volunteers is fine. But it seems from your
second post that you do not mean what I thought you meant.
If you want to spend a few thousand on a test (bunch of guys
on a tub in front of a green screen) then you can - pay the actors
and crew $100 per day. You can rent good lights or even rent
a stage with greenscreen and lights.

The possibilities - and costs - are endless.
 
That is a GREAT idea!!! Always loved Conrad. The Secret Sharer could be done as an interesting sci-fi adaptation as well!
 
directorik said:
I'm sorry, now I'm confused.

You mentioned shooting a test. I assumed you meant something
no audience would see - just something for you to try out. In that
case you don't need to spends thousands and you don't need to do
re-writing on the script. I clearly made the wrong assumption. What,
exactly, is your intent with the "test"?
Click to expand...

No, you're right the first time.



directorik said:
And no; filming is not re-filming. A writer, working alone (or even
with a partner) can re-write for months without adding to costs.
A director cannot keep bringing back the cast and crew over and
over and over for "re-filming". Even if they are all volunteers.
Certainly cost prohibitive if they are being paid.
Click to expand...

OK, I didn't know that. But, then again, I want to be a producer, not a director.



directorik said:
A test shoot with all volunteers is fine. But it seems from your
second post that you do not mean what I thought you meant.
If you want to spend a few thousand on a test (bunch of guys
on a tub in front of a green screen) then you can - pay the actors
and crew $100 per day. You can rent good lights or even rent
a stage with greenscreen and lights.

The possibilities - and costs - are endless.
Click to expand...

Your first impression is correct, but, as you know, I've never done a movie, so I don't know. I presume the team writes and rewrites again and again until they get it right, and then they start filming. I would have thought they would have tried some test shots to see how their scenes play out on film - didn't Jerry Lewis try something like that?

So, paying the actors and crew $100 per day, how much for renting the greenscreen and stage et al?
 
There is no, correct, path to take to your first feature. If you
feel you want to spend several months shooting test after test
after test you can do that. You are the producer - you can spend
the money where ever you feel it’s best spent. If hiring a cast
and crew and stage several times to shoot tests will make you
more comfortable, then that is certainly a possibility.

Or...

Once you have the script you like you hire a director you trust,
excellent actors and an experienced crew and you producer your
masterpiece. Let them do what they do - make a movie.

I have heard that Chaplain and Keaton and even Lewis shot some
comedy bits over and over. Kubrick is notorious for shooting well
over 50 takes of each scene and working for 24 to 30 months on a
movie. Allen has two to three weeks in each shooting schedule for
re-shoots - after he has finished his first cut.

All these things are added expenses. If that’s the way you want to
set up your production, you can. You are the producer. If you want
to shoot over and over and over for months and are willing to pay
for it - you can do that.

Here in LA you can rent a small, fully equipped greenscreen stage
for between $800 and $1,400 per day.
 
directorik said:
There is no, correct, path to take to your first feature. If you
feel you want to spend several months shooting test after test
after test you can do that. You are the producer - you can spend
the money where ever you feel it’s best spent. If hiring a cast
and crew and stage several times to shoot tests will make you
more comfortable, then that is certainly a possibility.

Or...

Once you have the script you like you hire a director you trust,
excellent actors and an experienced crew and you producer your
masterpiece. Let them do what they do - make a movie.

I have heard that Chaplain and Keaton and even Lewis shot some
comedy bits over and over. Kubrick is notorious for shooting well
over 50 takes of each scene and working for 24 to 30 months on a
movie. Allen has two to three weeks in each shooting schedule for
re-shoots - after he has finished his first cut.

All these things are added expenses. If that’s the way you want to
set up your production, you can. You are the producer. If you want
to shoot over and over and over for months and are willing to pay
for it - you can do that.
Click to expand...

I guess I'll have to try and find out. But I don't want to be a Kubrick; I want to be a George Lucas - who is better as a producer than director - or an Aaron Spelling. I guess the director decides that. But don't the actors and all that have practice runs??? I find it hard to believe they don't have to practice together - I mean, how do you get to Carnegie Hall?


Here in LA you can rent a small, fully equipped greenscreen stage
for between $800 and $1,400 per day.
Click to expand...

I can do that. Does California have sales taxes? Let's vary it a little - if, instead of a green screen, we were to go into the jungles of Vietnam - read, Pacific Northwest, how much to get the cast and crew trampling in the woods for a week?


BTW, when I say, "$100 a day", I mean $100 per day per person, not for the whole crew - I'm willing to spend some money.
 
Last edited:
Aspiring Mogul said:
But don't the actors and all that have practice runs??? I find it hard to believe they don't have to practice together - I mean, how do you get to Carnegie Hall?
Click to expand...
Called a “rehearsal” the director and the actors often do a table
read - they all sit around a table and read directly from the
script. No crew, no set, no locations. Also under the “rehearsal”
banner some directors will work one on one with each actor during
the preproduction period. Then on set there will be a rehearsal -
the director works with the actors, blocking them and running
lines before the lights are set.

Not unlike the adage you refer to, actors and directors have already
done their practice before you hire them. The actors come to the
set with their lines memorized and the director has a shot list.
That’s how you get to Carnegie Hall. You do not stand in front of
the Carnegie Hall audience and try one thing, not like it, try something
else, figure you can improve on that a bit so try again.


Aspiring Mogul said:
Does California have sales taxes? Let's vary it a little - if, instead of a green screen, we were to go into the jungles of Vietnam - read, Pacific Northwest, how much to get the cast and crew trampling in the woods for a week?
Click to expand...
Yes, California has sales tax. Now you are asking a completely
different question than how much is a test film. A week long shoot
is not a “test”, it’s making a movie. Asking people to give up
their job for a week will cost more per day than asking people for
a quick, one day favor. I see no advantage to spending a week with
a cast and crew doing a “test” - very expensive even if you are
paying below minimum wage. As the producer you should hire a
director, actors and crew who do not need to practice making a
movie.


Aspiring Mogul said:
BTW, when I say, "$100 a day", I mean $100 per day per person, not for the whole crew - I'm willing to spend some money.
Click to expand...
Yes, so do I. I do not think you can expect a cast and crew of 8
to 10 to work for $100 total. And even $100 per day per person is
very, very low. For unskilled labor the California minimum wages
is $8.00 per hour. The typical shooting day is 12 hours. At
minimum wage that would be $112 - so you wouldn’t even be paying
minimum wage.

Seems to me if you are going to pay a cast and crew for a week you
should just make a movie - not do a "test" no one but you will see.
In the low budget world the biggest expense is labor and labor support.
Kind of silly in my opinion to practice making a movie.
 
directorik said:
Called a “rehearsal” the director and the actors often do a table
read - they all sit around a table and read directly from the
script. No crew, no set, no locations. Also under the “rehearsal”
banner some directors will work one on one with each actor during
the preproduction period. Then on set there will be a rehearsal -
the director works with the actors, blocking them and running lines before the lights are set.

Not unlike the adage you refer to, actors and directors have already
done their practice before you hire them. The actors come to the
set with their lines memorized and the director has a shot list.
That’s how you get to Carnegie Hall. You do not stand in front of
the Carnegie Hall audience and try one thing, not like it, try something
else, figure you can improve on that a bit so try again.
Click to expand...

Oh, OK. So a test for me would be more like a table rehearsal? Perhaps with a green screen?


directorik said:
Yes, California has sales tax. Now you are asking a completely
different question than how much is a test film. A week long shoot
is not a “test”, it’s making a movie. Asking people to give up
their job for a week will cost more per day than asking people for
a quick, one day favor. I see no advantage to spending a week with
a cast and crew doing a “test” - very expensive even if you are
paying below minimum wage. As the producer you should hire a
director, actors and crew who do not need to practice making a
movie.
Click to expand...

OK. Actually, I would have thought someone like Francis Ford Coppola or Steven Spielberg would do a real screen test, but I know nothing of this.



directorik said:
Yes, so do I. I do not think you can expect a cast and crew of 8
to 10 to work for $100 total. And even $100 per day per person is
very, very low. For unskilled labor the California minimum wages
is $8.00 per hour. The typical shooting day is 12 hours. At
minimum wage that would be $112 - so you wouldn’t even be paying
minimum wage.
Click to expand...

$8 per hour for 12 hours would be $96.00 per day. But I can pay $112 a day if it makes them happy. Actually, you'd be surprised how many "bosses" and "managers" think they can get away with paying nothing, because working for them is such a privilege.


directorik said:
Seems to me if you are going to pay a cast and crew for a week you
should just make a movie - not do a "test" no one but you will see.
In the low budget world the biggest expense is labor and labor support.
Kind of silly in my opinion to practice making a movie.
Click to expand...

OK. I'll do a test. Out of curiosity, how much would a low-budget cost, if we were to go trampling in the woods? I've been making notes on something similar, and there will be quite a SF background. For this hypothetical movie, we'd be a squad of four soldiers going on foot looking for Marlon Brando, a talented actor who has gone berserk and wants to kill the Vietcong. There would also be an office scene, when the squad leader receives his orders from a Indiana Jones, a retired archaeologist who specialized in killing Nazis. There will probably, there may be a mob scene, for reasons more to do with my story background that with Joseph Conrad's story.

So $500 to $1000 for a test?
 
Aspiring Mogul said:
Oh, OK. So a test for me would be more like a table rehearsal? Perhaps with a green screen?
Click to expand...
No. A table read does not need a green screen. It is literally exactly
as it sounds; the actors sit at a table with the script in front of them
and read their lines out loud.

Aspiring Mogul said:
$8 per hour for 12 hours would be $96.00 per day.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. After 8 California law requires employer to pay time and
a half so we are talking about 14 total paid hours - 8 hours at straight
time and 4 hours at time and a half. While I do not think a producer
needs a "practice" or "test" shoot, I think a producer needs to fully
understand how payroll works.

Aspiring Mogul said:
But I can pay $112 a day if it makes them happy.
Click to expand...
It will not make anyone with even a little bit of experience happy.

Sure, you can find people with little or no experience to work for $8/hr.
But is that really your best option for this "test"? Is that a good usage
of money? Paying a crew of inexperienced people to shoot a test for you?
If it is, then I am wrong. Perhaps that's what you're thinking? You want
to see what an inexperienced but dedicated crew, director and actors can
do?
Aspiring Mogul said:
Actually, you'd be surprised how many "bosses" and "managers" think they can get away with paying nothing, because working for them is such a privilege.
Click to expand...
You are wrong. I have been in this business for decades. I have run into
more producers who think that than you have. And frankly, I would put
a producer who asks me to work for the same wage as a McDonalds employee
in that category. I am NOT putting down a fast food employee or ANYONE
making minimum wage. Skilled crew make more than that. But clearly you
would not be working with someone like me, so that wage may be privilege
to the people you would hire.



Aspiring Mogul said:
OK. I'll do a test. Out of curiosity, how much would a low-budget cost, if we were to go trampling in the woods? I've been making notes on something similar, and there will be quite a SF background. For this hypothetical movie, we'd be a squad of four soldiers going on foot looking for Marlon Brando, a talented actor who has gone berserk and wants to kill the Vietcong. There would also be an office scene, when the squad leader receives his orders from a Indiana Jones, a retired archaeologist who specialized in killing Nazis. There will probably, there may be a mob scene, for reasons more to do with my story background that with Joseph Conrad's story.

So $500 to $1000 for a test?
Click to expand...
$500 will get you three people and some food for one day. $1,000 will get
you five people and some food for one day. And that's if you hire people
who own the camera and audio equipment.

On the other hand (and there are so many variables I cannot go into even
a tenth of them) you could get people to do this test for you for free. Spend
$10 per person per day for food and ask everyone to donate their time, talent
and equipment for your test.
 
A “test” movie will cost exactly the same as a “real” movie. I
suggest you make a movie - not a test movie.
 
Expanding on directorik's last statement, what you want is a short film that a) serves as proof-of-concept for your idea, b) lets you see and revise ideas you have for this adaptation and c) lets you see if you want to be in this industry. Sort of like the original Saw short film that was made and used to pitch the feature, right?
 
Okay, let’s run some numbers:

A producers biggest expense on a ULB (Ultra Low Budget) is food,
insurance and labor. You have said you want to pay people so we’ll
start there.

As discussed if you pay everyone CA minimum wage for a 12 hour day
you will be paying $112 per day. If you have four actors and five
crew that’s $1,008 per day in labor. At $15 per person food will
cost $135 per day. General “craft service” Will add another $30
per day. So right off, with a cast and crew of 10 you are looking
at $1,173 per day.

Okay, you do a test on a stage with a tiny crew the above is fine
- you can get 9 people to take a huge pay cut to help you for two
days.

A week is a different story.

First; you will be paying $5,865 in labor and food. This is before
insurance, location fees and rentals.

Second; a crew of five will be run ragged for very little money.
Five is a tiny, tiny crew. Everyone will be pulling triple duty
for one third of the money they usually get. You should have a
crew of 12 to 15. A bare minimum of 10.

Third; for such a low rate you will attract enthusiastic,
dedicated, talented but less experienced people - people who do
not make their living as crew or actors. So they will need to
leave their jobs for a week. This is a hard sell for anyone making
more than minimum wage - they will be taking a pay cut for a week
and they will have to arrange taking off work. And they will know
this isn’t for a “real” movie but for a “test” so you can see if
what’s going on in your head will make a good movie. It’s a very
different mindset to cast and crew.

I’ll ballpark the rest of the costs based on my experience and
your hypothetical week in the woods scenario. This will cost
$8,000 to $9,000. For a test.

As Josh suggests, put together a great short, get people to donate
their time for a really good project they think will see some kind
of life and shoot a movie for $5,000 to $7,000. Sorry to belabor
the point but this is what I - and several others - suggested to
you over a year ago.
 
Last edited:
if i were to run a test film, which i am actually going to do, i'm going to do it like this.

Grab a hand held tiny video camera.
Invite a few friends to spend the weekend with me and the script.
Shoot the film, with whomever people i got, reading from the script.
Doing mostly master shots.

Voila, a fun weekend, trying it out...

If you are to do it any other way than this, expect to pay people, as it would start being work and not fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top