ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

10 years, 6 months ago - Stephan George

Thanks everyone, interesting comments. Looking at The Battery, it raises the question if success requires a theatrical release or just a nice DVD run (as The Battery didn't seem to had a theatrical release).

10 years, 5 months ago - Ray Brady

My first feature "Boy Meets Girl" 1994 was shot on film for £13,000 which was about as micro budget you could get before the advent of digital camera's.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109324/?ref_=nv_sr_2

10 years, 6 months ago - Ty HuFF

Nadin is right and wrong micro budget films success is a dying breed. The monetary side of it that is.

But as a calling card it is more useful than a short film. Like the film Monsters a low budget Sci-fi film that led to the Godzilla gig for the director.
I'm a take a look at Battery it sounds interesting.

10 years, 6 months ago - Andrew savage

"Paranormal Activity" made for $15k i think. Was proper independent, of course it got picked up by a bigger company and money was then spent on advertising etc. Clerks and El Mariachi were also bought by big companies and further money spent on the marketing.

There's no such thing as a huge success that had only £10k spent on it in total. Money has to be spend getting the word out and also getting it physically into theatres.

10 years, 6 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin

Just a note about nanobudget stuff - the direct cash spend might be £x,000 however the film is subsidised to the tune of £y0,000 by everyone involved.

10 years, 6 months ago - Kays Alatrakchi

I agree with what's been said above, and a lot depends on your definition of success. I think the closest thing to a repeat of the 90's tiny budgets, with huge successes which culminated with The Blair Witch Project, in our decade has to be Paranormal Activity. If you start to notice an emerging pattern, it has mainly to do with the fact that horror fans tend to be more accepting of lower production values which in both of those cases worked stylistically with the film. Additionally, horror crowds don't seem to be particularly displeased when a film has no name actors attached (although they are director-loyal). Most importantly, it should be mentioned that those breakaway hits are more rare than people winning the lottery or getting struck by lightning. This type of star-alignment typically only happens once per decade and nobody can predict how and when, but in all cases it's a result of a major studio flexing their marketing muscle to bring what would have been an unknown film to the masses.

There are of course a bunch of examples of more modest successes which resulted in opening doors for the director and even made a bit of profit after all was said and done. Primer, Another Earth, Dead Snow, Frances Ha, Tiny Furniture, and on and on. It should be noted however that only a handful of directors with a very specific skill set and circumstances can typically manage to pull off anything watchable on a sub-$500k budget. Primer is the only one on that list that falls in that category, and it relied on the director not only writing and co-starring in the film, but also editing, scoring, sound deigning, VFX-ing, and color grading the film himself (which took him years)...not easy or common for sure.

10 years, 6 months ago - Nadin Hadi

Microbudget success is a dying breed. The most recent example I can think of that fits the bill is The Battery. It's an indie zombie movie made for $6K which had some festival success that help to translate into distribution deals.

Raven Banner did sales and I know there were deals for the UK, US, Australia, Germany, Japan, Greece and Portugal and possibly more.

Trailer's here for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO3_WO2YfGo

It was a smart fresh take on the genre. The director did an AMA on Reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1fkr0v/the_battery_6000_zombie_movie_that_has_won_many/) that talks a little bit about their budget which went mostly to food and lodgings. Relationships, favours and your own skillset are crucial at this budget level.

It's the exception rather than the rule. There's so much content out there and the standards of production quality and cast are so high in traditional distribution that very few make it. Direct/self distribution might provide more opportunities for micro budget success - making niche content for a passionate niche audience.

10 years, 6 months ago - Marlom Tander

@stephan It depends what you mean by success.

I'd consider a low budget film of mine a great success if :-

EITHER it actually made revenues (from ANY source - I'm not going to be sniffy about DVD or TV or turn down studio marketing money) in excess of costs

OR it opened doors to bigger, better, properly funded, projects.

Whether or not that fitted anyone elses definition well frankly my dear....

10 years, 6 months ago - Tony Oldham

Paranormal Activity as mentioned above, and Tarnation (although that's a documentary feature). Most micro budgets often tend to have their sound remastered for millions of dollars I understand.

10 years, 6 months ago - Ben Bate

There is a recent film entitles Hinterland, which is getting some success over in the UK, budget was £8,000. Im not sure what they have spent on advertising.