Translate

Case Study:

Using Script Coverage to Get Name Talent.

Script to Screen

Fusion's Open Call For TV Projects is a Push for Diverse Voices.

Case Study

When To Say No To A Film Festival

Case Study

The Full Costs and Income of an Indie Film

The Production / Filmmakers Toolkit

Documents, Templates and Resources for Every Phase of Production.

11.06.2017

PRODUCTION JOURNAL: When you form a production company, FOCUS on what matters!




A decade or so ago, two of my filmmaker friends and I formed a production company.

The goal of the company was to produce two feature films back-to-back; one written and directed by one of my two friends, and one written and directed by me. The third friend had a line on $10,000 seed money and wanted to produce his first feature, after producing several short films and being involved in the Sundance community for several years.

We kept it simple, at first. We met at a Denny’s and set up an office in my 2-bedroom Los Feliz apartment with the main goal of getting name talent attached to our two scripts.

We decided to work on two films at once to put us ahead of the game in two key ways:

1) If we were known to be setting up a slate of films and a production company, rather than just setting up a single film, we'd be able to differentiate our company and our films from the scores of other filmmakers out there hoofing it to raise money for their single film.

and 2) two films would allow us to manage risk of loss and leverage our positions with potential cast and investors. That is, if we were trying to get two films going, and if name talent jumped aboard at least one of them, we'd be automatically in a good position to make the second one, as we would have gained significant "heat" by attaching a name actor to one of our films.

But despite our grand strategy, and despite being able to ultimately attach several smaller name actors to one of our films, we wasted a lot of time and energy doing a lot of pointless, business-y things that we thought were important at the time, but turned out not only to be not important, but incredibly wasteful of our precious time and scant financial and human resources.

A typical day at the Los Feliz office was:  We'd meet, agree on what we were pursuing for the day, as far as a single "action item," such as "Contact Steve Zahn's manager and see if you can get the script to him," then I would track down Steve Zahn's contact information, and then our lead phone guy, Roger, would be the guy who picked up the phone and called him.

That's pretty simplified, but you get the idea.

But another key ingredient in the mix:  we committed to the idea that if we didn't get name actors and raise the budgets within 3 months, we'd shoot both the films ourselves with skeleton crews and cheaper gear, splitting the rental costs and other costs between
the two films, getting the most bang for our buck.

And by giving ourselves that ultimatum, we had to pair the name-talent outreach campaign with a simultaneous "we're shooting in X months" preproduction campaign.  Which meant we had to start finding locations, securing rental deals for cameras and gear, casting actors, and everything else that goes into preproduction on a film. Two films, actually.

And this is where it began to go wrong.

Because we were overloaded, we brought in a couple of interns to help us with that day-to-day grunt work.

And it wasn't apparent at first, but because we'd brought in those two interns, who weren't exactly strangers, but weren't exactly close pals, we all felt like we had to "step up" and act more like a real business—a real production company.

Which meant whenever there was any downtime, we had to come up with busy work.

And soon, that busy work became the end-all-be-all of what we were doing.

We started having meetings to keep us on track and set goals, and because we wanted to make the interns feel like part of the team, we brought them into the meetings.

But even worse, in those meetings, we started talking about things like business card design and who should run the video camera at auditions.

As we descended into this busy-work death spiral, we said to ourselves "This is too much for just us three producers. We need to bring in someone to help with this stuff."

So we added a fourth producer to our production company.

Despite it all, this fourth producer was a valuable asset to have on the team.  He had a knack for quickly building his social circle, so we knew he'd be able to help bring aboard people that could help.  But the only problem was that, now, the topic had shifted even further away from the "get a name actor on our film" to "getting our production company name out there" and "designing our logo."

And then it got worse.

Because then we dived down a two-month rabbit hole as we planned a big launch party for our production company, deciding it was time to make a splash and let the film industry know we meant business.

Facepalm.

Instead of calling actors and preparing for the possibility of shooting the 2 films with a microbudget, we were now worried about arbitrary things like:

-       How can we merge our personal emails lists onto one main Brooklyn Reptyle email list so we can invite everybody to the Launch Party? Should we use Excel? Will our internet provider allow us to send all these emails at once?

-       What should go on each of our business cards? ("Should I be 'Creative Director' or does that sound too pompous?" "How about I'm 'Executive VP In Charge of Production' and you're 'Executive VP In Charge of Finance'?")

-       What's the MP3 playlist for the party? Should it be contemporary? Classic? A mixture?

-       Should the party be invite-only?  Or open to friends of invitees?

The net result:  By July, we had ended up being miles away from that three-person "name-talent strike force" we started out as in February.

And because we had so many sundry mindless little "busywork" things to focus on, nobody was able to focus on anything.

And as a result, morale plummeted.

And when morale plummeted, the interns left. 

And when the interns left, we were overwhelmed with so much busy work left undone, we panicked and brought in a paid office assistant, despite the fact that none of us had any money.

She lasted a month and had to quit.

And it was at this point we lost Roger, our producer who was the main liaison to the name-talent we were pursuing, when he took on a film festival job.

So the name talent campaign was effectively over, and our two-film production slate was teetering on the edge of failure.  It was at that point we hit rock bottom, and had to "sober up," so to speak.

After a few weeks of reorganization and refocusing, we got back on the horse, deciding to make one of the films, Boppin' At The Glue Factory, come hell or high water, and name talent be damned.

We stuck to the basics and scrounged up a microbudget, threw together a cast and crew, and started rolling cameras within a few months.  Three basic business actions we took that led to success:

1) We divided up the work.  Put simply, everybody's jobs were overlapping.  As a result, a team member would do a lot of work (e.g. getting a printer script to a certain manager, or pricing out a location).  Once we divided up the work, we could assign specific tasks to each other, and the list of tasks would keep us on track and accountable to our teammates.

2) We stopped having daily meetings and moved to a weekly meeting.  In addition, the structure of the weekly meeting became tighter and more focused.  We set an agenda for each time we got together, and attacked each bullet point individually, minimizing chat and distraction, and stayed focused on end results.  We checked to see if each teammate achieved the tasks assigned to them on their task list. We brainstormed new ideas and new tasks within a set period of time, and if we went over, that was it.  We called the meetings "Tactical Strike Meetings," instead of the long, drawn-out "campaign" meetings we'd grown accustomed to, and the new urgency really helped. 

In one meeting, for example, we did a timed "angel investor brainstorm," where we each had two minutes to throw out the names of as many connected, or wealthy, or otherwise viable potential angel investors as we could, and the person who threw out the least amount of names had to buy lunch.

As a result of that meeting, we stumbled upon one name that we hadn't thought of before. That person ended up becoming our first angel investor, and "made it safe" for other investors to come aboard later, because they perceived our film as a viable, project due to that first investor.  It was now more than just a script and an idea. It was a moving train.

3) We got real about our chances of landing name talent, and refocused on actors that weren't necessarily on the "A List," but had large enough names to get people interested in the film, and to set our film apart from others. This refocusing let us see our casting in a new light, which opened the door for our first few great actors, such as Rance Howard, Conrad Roberts, and Mews Small, who not only fit the parts, but actually caused us to realize how small our thinking was when it came to each of the characters they played, as each of them brought in a whole new dimension of life and magic to their parts, which expanded our film's potential and entertainment value in a huge way. 

That film, Boppin' At The Glue Factory, is actually still making money on Amazon right now.

And, thankfully, our business cards are lost to history.





IMDB page of Boppin at the Glue Factory http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0382579/


10.27.2017

SCRIPT TO SCREEN: Fusion's Open Call For TV Projects is a Push for Diverse Voices


Originally published in Deadline

Cable network Fusion, a division of Fusion Media Group (FMG) that focuses on programming for diverse youth, has issued an open call for scripted and unscripted television projects. The emphasis is on generating new opportunities for young storytellers of different ethnic backgrounds, races, sexual orientations, genders, religions and other under-represented areas of creative talent with or without agency connections.

Selected projects from the open call will receive funded development deals with the network, which promises at least one project selected for greenlight next year. Submissions are being accepted on a rolling basis and should center around stories that “speak to the interests and issues that matter to America’s diverse youth—reflecting their curiosity, sharpness, and passion,” according to Fusion. Selected submissions will receive funded development deals with the network. Interested writers, filmmakers, and producers can submit pitches on the company web site at Fusion.net/submissions.

For the rest of the article go to Deadline at http://deadline.com/2017/10/fusion-media-group-open-call-for-new-diverse-tv-projects-1202195872/

9.06.2017

CASE STUDY: How Script Coverage Helped Get Name Talent Aboard My Feature Film

Today's case study is written by Brian O'Malley from https://www.screenplayreaders.com on how the use of script reading services like his can make your script more enticing and intriguing to A-list actors. As we all know, one of the best strategies for getting your film financed and made is having top-notch name brands starring and guest-starring in your film. Hope you enjoy. ~~ Danny

Image credit: Rafael Leonardo Re via Flickr Creative Commons

Script coverage. We all know that for agents and producers, it's a great tool because a script reader can wade through a pile of scripts and find the good writers and good stories, then write up a brief script coverage and let her boss know, in a page or two, what's worth reading, and what's not.

And it's a great tool for screenwriters as well. A well-written script coverage can help pinpoint how to improve story and character, plot and conflict, and so many other categories, making it a lot easier for the screenwriter to know where to begin fixing things on the next draft.

But did you have any idea that script coverage is also a great tool for independent filmmakers, and can actually help get projects off the ground?

It was for me.

In the mid-2000's, my production company and I were looking to get a feature film produced for one of my screenplays, Frampton Damper — a dark romantic comedy about a sick man and a nurse.  Raising money for the film was a tough climb, but we were able to get assurances from one large production company, with a deal at a major studio, that they'd be happy to bankroll our $1.2 million-budgeted film if we were able to attach two A-list stars.  We suggested Maggie Gyllenhaal and John Goodman. They said "If you guys get those two aboard, we're in."

But our little film wasn't quite a "package" that would appeal to agents yet, so going direct to the agents of those two A-listers, we knew we'd need two key things:

(a) money in the bank to be able to make a serious offer of employment for both of them, and

(b) an amazing screenplay that was, without question, a fun read and a clear, shootable, realistic blueprint for a great independent romantic comedy that would appeal to both of our targeted actors.

The first thing, the money in the bank, was being taken care of by one of our initial producers, who agreed to fund our production company to the point of being able to make a serious offer to the name talent.  The money he was to put in, however, was to scale up with the size of the talent we were to procure. That is, he made most of his funding contingent on who we got to agree to star in the film.

The second thing was the script. And that was crucial. We had one shot with each of these actors. If they didn't like the screenplay, they wouldn't agree to do the film. Or, more accurately, if the agent or agent's assistant who read the screenplay before giving it to the actor didn't like the film, we'd be hosed.

So the screenplay had to be tight. But being the writer, I felt I was too close to it to be able to critique it and improve it.

That's where the script coverage came in.

I started a script coverage service in 1999, which turned into the script company I run now called Screenplay Readers. So when we needed to make our script as strong as possible before sending it out to those name actors' agents, we ran it by several of my teammates at Screenplay Readers.

We didn't tell them it was me who wrote the script, because we didn't want to bias their read, so I used a fake name on the title page. 

When the coverage came in from the reader, they'd spotted several key places where the script could be stronger, and made suggestions on how to do so.  And you can bet me and my producers took full advantage of the script notes to improve the script.

Not only did the readers’ script feedback help me improve the script thematically and structurally, it actually pointed out several glaring typos and errors that somehow made it past me. Had we sent that script in to the name actors we were trying to attach to the film, those errors could’ve made my producer team and myself look like rank amateurs, which is not the vibe you’re trying to transmit when you’re trying to secure name talent aboard your tiny indie project.

So I rewrote the script based on the script coverage, and I fixed all the errors. But by then the producers and I decided to try a different strategy.  Instead of sending the script directly to the A-list talent, Gyllenhaal and Goodman, we felt we should maybe give the project more of a “moving train” feel to it by seeing if we couldn’t attach some great actors with less star power, but whom those two actors had worked with previously, or who they had great respect for.

To that end, we contacted Swoosie Kurtz's agent and asked if we could send the script.  After a bit of back and forth moving our schedule around for the possibility of Ms. Kurtz, condensing days she'd be shooting, etc., they asked to read the script.

But before we sent it in, we decided to get another round of script coverage from my readers. This time, we asked for focus to be placed on the character that Ms. Kurtz would be playing.

The coverage that came in a few days later commented on some aspects of the screenplay that the previous readers hadn't, but offered a few other specific notes that really helped boost the character we requested the script reader focus on, as well as script notes on a few of the other characters that had not been commented on in the previous coverage.

The result was that we now had an even stronger screenplay.  We sent it to Ms. Kurtz, made the cash offer, and she was officially aboard.

Her joining made it a lot easier for us to then approach Ed Begley Jr.'s people, because they respected and admired Ms.  Kurtz's work.  After a few scheduling tweaks and backs-and-forth with the deal memo, Begley was aboard.

With those two name actors aboard, we felt confident we could now get either Goodman or Gyllenhaal aboard.  We had a great script, thanks to copious rounds of notes that included free writers group feedback and paid script coverage from my script coverage service, and we had money in the bank ready to make solid offers.

But then both John and Maggie were suddenly on other pictures, and despite our attempts to reschedule our picture around them, those two were suddenly unavailable and out of reach for the next year or so.

We were a bit distraught, having done all this legwork and tweaking the script around the script coverage we received, and finagling with the producer putting up the funds to make the offers.  But we were soon back in business again.

Natasha Lyonne at the time was in between films and had happened on my screenplay because we'd sent it to her agent some months earlier, hoping to get her to play the part of what was essentially an offbeat, co-lead character. The part was virtually written around her: tough, but lovable, and hopelessly weird.  She's good at those roles.

Long story short, we met with her and she said she loved the script and would love to do the film. In a subsequent meeting, she specifically mentioned she connected with the character’s flaws and at least one particular plot twist that was incorporated into the script after we received the first round of script coverage.

With Lyonne aboard, we were able to secure almost full funding from a new production company we'd been courting.  We just needed one more name to make the film a full "go."

That "go," sadly, never materialized, however, as the LLC dissolved suddenly for a variety of financial and personal reasons. The film we were making, with all these great name actors, became hopelessly mired, and we eventually lost our name talent.  The film never got made.

But the net takeaway was that without that script coverage, I'm not sure we would have had any of the success in securing any of those actors on our film. 

Script coverage can be a boon, yes. Script coverage can help get name talent aboard, and therefore help make financing a lot easier, yes.  But is it the only way to get script feedback?  No.  It was just the fastest and most efficient for us.

Sure, I could've sat in a writers group and waited for my turn to do a table read and could've gotten some great free feedback from the writers in the group.  Sure, I could've, and did, receive free feedback from fellow filmmakers and friends, but it wasn't always as concise or critical as I felt it needed to be.

The bottom line is that script coverage services are there to be used, and not just in a creative capacity, but in a strategic, fundraising capacity. If you can make your script better, or shore it up in key areas, or increase its readability in any way, or help find glitches that could mark you as an amateur, it makes no sense to not use one to help your film get off the ground.

That being said, as the owner of a script coverage service with almost 20 years of experience, I'm biased. So I'll tell you this: script coverage can help, a lot. But do your research and find the script readers or script coverage company that fits you best. They're not all the same.

Script coverage might not the end-all-be-all answer for your film getting off the ground, but it sure helped me get the name talent I needed for mine.







3.27.2017

PRODUCTION TIPS: Your April 2017 Calendar for Film Festivals, Screenplay Contests, Fellowships, Labs and Awards

The good people at Script Reader Pro have just made your life easier. 

Why is that you say? 

Because they've made your filmmaking life easier to manage this year with their calendar of all the major upcoming screenwriting contests (orange), awards (blue), festivals (green), fellowships and labs (yellow) in 2017.

Like Yogi Berra says, “If you don't know where you are going, you'll end up someplace else.” 

Saturday, April 1
 HBOAccess Writing Fellowship Deadline
Wednesday, April 5
 Kansas City FilmFest
Thursday, April 6
 Kansas City FilmFest
Friday, April 7
 Kansas City FilmFest
Saturday, April 8
 Kansas City FilmFest
Sunday, April 9
 Kansas City FilmFest
Monday, April 10
 The Academy Nicholl Fellowships in Screenwriting Regular Deadline
Monday, April 17
 PAGE International Screenwriting Awards
 Scriptapalooza Screenplay Competition Late Deadline
Wednesday, April 19
 Tribeca Film Festival
Thursday, April 20
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Friday, April 21
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Saturday, April 22
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Sunday, April 23
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Monday, April 24
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Tuesday, April 25
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Wednesday, April 26
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Thursday, April 27
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Friday, April 28
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Saturday, April 29
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Nashville Film Festival
Sunday, April 30
 Tribeca Film Festival
 Shore Scripts Short Film Fund Final Deadline