ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

7 years, 2 months ago - Vasco de Sousa

Sometimes, I think genre is useless. Twilight: horror or romance? And comedy, do we ever all agree what's funny? (I've written more about that here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/film-genres-still-valid-vasco-p-de-sousa?articleId=6394918998194163712 )

Do we agree on what's scary? What's dramatic? Not always. If you go to the cinema as often as I do, and see who watches which films, you'll see that very, very few films crossover. You'll also hear people complain about some of the most popular films, or even see them walk out of them. The audience is more segmented than ever.

But, from watching a lot of movies, researching about films, directing a feature (and more short films than I care to admit), and being involved in films that never get off the ground, I have a theory. My theory is that most films fail (or suck) either because the filmmakers don't know what kind of film they want to make, or they are tugging in different directions to make different kinds of films. This can affect not only the production of the film, but also the marketing. The films that do well do well because everyone is working together well.

(For my microbudget, well, even with almost no money, it did better than expected, because most of us were aiming for the same target most of the time, even if we lacked experience. No, it didn't get to the cinema, but viewer satisfaction was high. One of our actresses got an agent, and our storyboard artist has been offered a design commission, and others seem to have improved their careers after being involved.)

Another reason for film failure is unrealistic expectations, including unmerited pessimism. People who think they need a-list actors to make Napoleon Dynamite end up making Ishtar, or nothing at all.

A third is skin in the game. Those producers who spend more money on software than screenplays, who spend more time raising money than planning, tend to make really dumb films. (Of course, software may be expensive in post production. I'm talking about those who buy all the latest gear before development, and then whinge they don't have money for the storyboard or the script. Well, with something better to show than your software receipts, you might have raised more money.)

And, of course there's a money issue. But, once you get the money, that doesn't guarantee a good film. If it did, none of us would have a chance to break in, because the best films would be made by the billionaires. (The writer of Spiderman was descended from a steamboat baron. Billionaires can also make sucky films though.)

Not having the right skin in the game often comes from not knowing what kind of films you want to make. You can acquire expensive software, drone cameras, take out adverts, rent an office, without thinking. And, it may be okay for making tourist promos or wedding videos. But, when you're looking at fiction, well, you don't need After Effects and a bunch of aerial footage to make a good drama. You might need one of these tools, but sometimes it's cheaper to hire a professional than buy your own crane and bulldozer.

I'm not interested in making just any films. Only good films. Not just "well made" films. (George Bernard Shaw fans here?) But, "fun to watch" films or "makes you think" films.

Often, the films that suck most, are the ones where someone gets paid a record breaking salary. The production values are "good" but the acting, writing, and directing are off. This is from a viewer's perspective, as someone who would like to go to the cinema more often, but ends up saving his money because so many awful films are out there.

When I do go, I often see the cinema half empty, and no, it's not because of netflix. TV's no better than it used to be (in many cases, its worse). It's because of what's in the cinema. I'm not trashing anyone I've worked with here, I'm pretty good at recruiting the right people. It's the films I've seen. Talented people are involved in every credit, but the film is a frankenstein's monster.

I think of films like food. Even if you make the best escargot in the world, I still don't eat escargot. It's not the French food "genre," I love croissants and french pastries.

I also think that just because someone is great at cooking pastries, that doesn't mean they'll make great pretzels. If you try to make a pretzel taste like a danish, well, it won't work. If you like danishes, stick with danishes. It doesn't matter how big the pretzel market is, or how much I love pretzels, I'd prefer a good danish to a bad pretzel.

So, it makes sense to make films for an audience that you're part of. This applies to everything from music videos and corporate films to, well, what kind of films do you really want to make?