Do I tend to overthink things in filmmaking?

[Paul R Johnson]

I was just about to post then read Josh's comment on what I would say and it was exactly what I was going to say. Scary!

I think thought this weighting really is the weak area - in one post we accidentally shot one bit soft, and it generated a topic I've ignored. I've messed up loads of times in my focus prediction. With my kind of stuff I have to pick a focus position without any actors, and I usually use the floor and my eye to gauge distance I'm pretty good at it but sometimes I'll get it wrong, or worse, knock the focus ring. Every time I have had to fall back to my wide shot, I have never been happy. It's really not a solution for the rubbish shot, but we have to use it as such. Unless every shot has a proper purpose, trying to fill with the wrong shot is rarely successful. I am doing projects at the moment with locked of cameras and it's the same problem. Covid means I cannot have the people, so I am running around on multiple takes operating each camera in turn. It sort of gives me angles but I'm editing constantly annoyed by every shot - which would have been so much better with a cameraman on the end of!

For me, this concept of a wide angle safety means emergency compromise, and if you have to use them, it's bacause mistakes were made - either in planning or production. One I did last week had a faulty camera - well actually an ok camera just on the wrong setting - so with the HMI I was using as a distant key, it flickered. In the end, I just couldn't live with it, and as the setting was symmetrical, and the actor had a symmetrical hairstyle, I used the camera on the other side, cropped and panned a little and flipped the image and use this shot when I needed to, and I think I got away with it.

This use the safety conversation we've done before, more than once.

Ryan's problem isn't unique - but maybe he needs to try to formulate a flexible plan for dealing with mistakes. Proactive and reactive problem solving is an essential skill.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. Well as far as scripts go I picked what I thought was the best one I had access to. There is a couple of other filmmakers were more enthusiastic about but that one involved a submarine setting and thought that would just be more challenging and cost more. So I thought I would go with a story which may have a darker and more dramatic impact, but could be done in realistic locations.

But should I look for a different script perhaps?

[Josh Bass]

Yessssssssssssssssss

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, but what is the problem with the script I wanted to do, just so I know what avoid perhaps, when looking for other ones?

But it's not like I concentrate on just the physical part of filmmaking only. I went over the script with other writers and readers, and they helped improve it a lot. I just didn't talk about the script on here hardly, because I thought that the site was more about the physical filmmaking process, rather than the script writing. So I get that feedback and collaboration from other sources, but I can talk about the script on here, if that's good..

[Brian Drysdale]

Writing a script is entirely different to turning it into a film. You can have a good script, but unless you've got resources and skills to turn it into good film, the results are going to be disappointing. Unless you're using this a learning exercise, you've got lots of areas that will probably fall short.

If you had the range of skills to overcome them it would less concerning, but, from your messages, you don't appear to have these for this particular project. You can do a lot if you that rework things to fit in with what you have available and can think on your feet. However, flexibility doesn't appear to be one of your strengths and it's a key one on extremely low budget films,.

[Greg Miller]

I agree with Brian. You might have a great script, but if you don't have the budget to get the cast, crew, and equipment, the final result will be bad. Imagine if someone gave you the script for Star Wars and you tried to shoot it on a very limited budget (which seems to be your financial situation). The result would be sad, maybe even laughable; maybe you'd never even get to the end of the script.

I think you are trying to make a seven-course meal when all you have is a pound of ground beef, paper plates, and five dollars cash. You would be better off to buy some buns and do a really good job of making the best possible hamburgers. In other words, "realistic expectations" that are matched to your level of experience and budget.

You mentioned an example about not having handcuffs. If you couldn't afford a $10 set of handcuffs, what was your actual budget for that project? Did you, or did you not, have someone in charge of props for that project?

More specifically, what is your total budget for shooting this particular script that we're now discussing (ad nauseam)? You're asking some very experienced people for very specific advice. I think you would get better answers if we knew very specifically what your total project budget is. How many dollars, give or take 10%? An actual number?

[Paul R Johnson]

I quite like the submarine idea, but the cost of the set would be huge - the guys building home aircraft cockpit simulators spend tends of thousands on just that small bit - building even the control room would require serious money to even consider.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

The submarine is a perfect example of you coming up with ideas without thinking through how it would be produced, the costs, the sets, the cast, etc. I have a hunch sub movies aren't filmed on subs but are mostly filmed on Hollywood constructed sets.

A large part of your problems stem from not being able to execute the fundamentals used on a pro set. It's easy to write in your screen play, gun battle, car chase, or even something as simple as dolly in. But if you don't have the expertise the experience, resources, or staff to pull it off. What's the point of spending all this time refining a script for a movie you can't produce.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh yeah, I did the submarine idea as more of a mental exercise rather than something I wanted to make with my money now, but others told me that it was my best idea and to find a way to make it.

But I would really like to do the other script since it can be made in realistic locations theoretically. I was able to raise 30K, and can maybe add 20 of my own. One of the reasons I haven't made it yet, is I want to find more actors to choose from. But it is the lowest budget script I have access to that I think would be good, compared to some other ones that even though are low budget, don't think would be as good. So I am trying to find a balance.

But I do feel I could pull it off as long as I had the right cast, the right small crew, such as DP, make up, etc, and good enough locations around where I live.

[Brian Drysdale]

Going with the best script/story is always best. Audiences aren't interested the fact you can find "realistic locations", they invest in the story, not the locations.

[Paul R Johnson]

Well - I thought I'd see if I could find a real submarine where a movie could be made and I found one available as a location for a very modest sum, and while you'd need to do some of the common movie tricks with lighting, being a WW2 submarine, there are no computer screens, but lots of levers, wheels and meters. I've also found a location available that would probably go hand in hand - an ex-cold war nuclear bunker, filled with the kit - so again for a modest fee it would be a brilliant place for a typical movie thriller.

Building a set would be hugely more expensive, and rather pointless.

Ryan - you really need to invent a scoring system for your advice giving friends. Some seem to dish out sensible, grounded advice and others are bordering on being idiots.

[Brian Drysdale]

Although, this depends on your skillset. If you're a director with the skills to design and build a set. plus access to suitable old scrapped industrial/marine/aerospace kit, you can do a surprising amount on limited funds.It costs mostly your time.

Some of the most iconic film props are just re-purposed old stuff bought on the cheap.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, well as far as a WW2 sub goes, the story deals with sub being a nuclear one, so I don't think a WW2 looking one would pass therefore, but maybe I am wrong.

But even if I do not make the submarine one, don't I still have to make some sort of low budget feature film to try to break into the business? Every other filmmaker I have worked with has done, so isn't that what you have to do break in, or is that not the way to try to break in and I am going about it wrong?

It was also said before that when it comes to directing the other script I was interested in directing, that I should choose a script that is modest rather than something that is overly ambitious. How do you keep a script from being ambitious, or what is the key to keeping it modest? I thought all feature film scripts were ambitious to a degree, but is there something about it that is overly ambitious compared to other ones? I thought that if I chose a lower budget horror thriller script, that that genre would be better to do a on a microbudget, but perhaps that is not the right genre for micro, and I should have chosen something more low key, like a drama or comedy perhaps? But other filmmakers have said to avoid drama or comedy because they are tougher sells in the independent market compared to horror and thriller, unless that is wrong advice again?

[Josh Bass]

With your experience and budget you should be doing something like this (I thought this movie was awesome by the way, even though it's not exactly your genre):

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2866360/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

It has no special FX to speak of, no stunts, gunplay, fighting (with the exception of a few very small scenes of violence), explosions, etc. It's all in houses and neighborhood streets. Just a cool plot/idea, and the whole thing relies on the strength of that.

What makes yours overly ambitious is...everything...every overturned car, gunfight, etc. You want to keep this SIMPLE. SIM. PLE. Something like "Tape" with Ethan Hawke. That may not sound "cool" or "exciting" but it's what you MIGHT be able to actually pull off. Big budget action stuff? Not so much.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, but the problem is with the writing is that for example with guns, when criminals want to commit crimes, they are going to want to bring guns because it makes the crimes a lot more easier to commit and a lot more easier to get people to do what you say. Plus when the police go after such villains to try to catch them, they will logically bring guns to.

So how do you cut out the guns, without cutting out the logic of the story? I don't have to have the car flip, that was just more of a bonus if I could pull it off. But I think if I am to set the story in modern day America, the police are going to bring guns, which means the villain is going to want to bring a gun to a gun fight, wouldn't he?

I mean as far as not having guns go, perhaps I could set the movie in a country like the UK, but then I have to try to make it seem like the UK, and the actors would have to fake accents. Or is there a better way to write the guns out a horror thriller script?