Low-Budget Horror - sleeper economics

[sickfish]

In any business venture you want to spend as little as possible to reap as much reward as possible.

So the less spent = bigger return, %-wise.

Now that DV is easily available, ingenuity can make the sleeper work.

Budget : $10,000

Profits :

!,000 DVD's @ $5 profit = $5,000
10,000 = $50,000
etc etc

1,000 T-shirts @ $5 profit = $5,000
1,000 Mugs, Beakers, Key-Chains, Car-Stickers, Posters, Postcards, Maggot-Flavoured Ice-Cream etc etc @ $2 - $5 profit = $20 - 50, 000
etc etc

Compare this to Hollywood :

Budget :

Production Costs : $20,000,000
Advertising & Marketing : $50,000,000

Profits : Whatever

They need to make $70,000,000 to break even, share some of the royalties with Directors/Producers/Copyright owners etc

And they have to bow down to the Advertisers, backers, test audience and government . So we end up with a possible flop , 75% likely to dissapoint in at least one aspect, and a whole load of money spent just to keep the movie industry running .

But now Grindhouse , B-Movie Gore-fests are back in vogue thanks to a couple of directors , and they are spending big Hollywood bucks imitating $10,000 movies .

Durrr !

With MySpace, Youtube, and countless other forms of Advertising available to us now, we should all be investing our time and welfare checks on cameras and fake blood ! It makes sense !

George A Romero, Troma Films, Tobe Hooper, Sam Raimi are all rich . The wheat are seperated from the chaff on-line very quickly , but like the music industry, DIY is back and here to stay !

DaDa 1923
Punk 1975
2008 ... what do we call this one ?

[newb]

I'm not sure if I'm digging your theory.....most direct to video movies suck...."Grindhouse".....while I loved the whole concept and greatly enjoyed the movies...didn't fair well at the box office. I have nothing against "low budget" movies, as long as they are well thought out with decent acting.

[sickfish]

I'm talking about mathematics and economics here.

Yes, the Grindhouse films didn't do so well ... badly timed, the distributors couldn't decide how to release it .. in one or two parts ... and I'm sorry to say it , but the majority of consumers are dickheads .

They won't sit through 180 minutes of intelligently written cool experimental cinema, but will for Tolkein, Harry Potter or countless other epics . Not that these are bad movies .. just that most people like the mainstream stuff ... that's why it's mainstream .

Most people these days see movies on a TV screen or computer monitor, and most of THAT is a copy . At $20 + per DVD in the stores, it makes it worthwhile to copy badly and sell pirates . But the big companies have to sell at that price to make back their magic millions .

A low-budget company only has to make $10,000 to break even .
So, to discourage piracy , sell DVD's between $5-10 per copy. The pirates won't touch it ... their profit-margin has shrunk . The consumers will dig the value for money , and it only takes a few thousand sales to make your money back , if not a lot more .

I agree that it is only enjoyable to watch a movie with good acting and good storyline ... but that is true of ANY movie ...

Kianu Reeves ... acting SUCKS !!! Stick to Bill and Ted dude, it's the only part I ever believed in ! I wouldn't personally employ him . He's as wooden as Arnie but at least Arnie knows his limitations and sticks to action . Generally . Or ruling Californians . Arni doesn't try costume drama .

And as for good storylines ... in Hollywood are you kidding ? Every screenwriter, novel-writer or Graphic novel writer dreads the day Hollywood decide they want to Bludgeon their creation into a mass-consumer masterpiece . "Change the end ! Change the beginning . Set it somewhere else . Cut that bit out it's too slow . Kill that guy off even though he lives in the books. "

So really it's down to the makers of a movie whether it's good or not . And everyone has different tastes . But all I was saying was that it makes "Business-sense" to curb the budget then make a lot of money than to put the entire national debt of Bolobo into a wishy-washy predictable time-filler . That's all I'm saying .

Top Five Horror Sleepers :

Night of the Living Dead (made $30,000,000 in 1969)
Evil Dead (made for $10,000 )
BlairWitch project
Texas Chainsaw Massace
Nosferatu (1921 - they didn't even pay Bram Stoker's copyright fees !)

[illdojo]

Night of the Living Dead did NOT profit or cost $30 million in 1969.

[sickfish]

my mistake . Romero made it for $114,000 in 1968 but it hadn't made the $30,000,000 immediately . But since 1968 it has grossed over $40,000,000* . A good investment in my book .

And most of the budget probably went on 35 B&W film . If he had had DV tech back then it could have been a lot cheaper .

*IMDB databank

[Roderick Usher]

my mistake . Romero made it for $114,000 in 1968 but it hadn't made the $30,000,000 immediately . But since 1968 it has grossed over $40,000,000* . A good investment in my book .



And he didn't copyright it correctly. It is public domain, he gets no royalties from any rebroadcast or DVD sales/rentals. Only rare exceptions get rich in low budget filmmaking. And if getting rich is the goal, there are better businesses than film.

However, low budget and DIY films are a great idea, but distribution and advertising are what cost you money. You don't get paid from youtube hits. It is hard enough to simply make a living making films (I'm still a broke-ass) let alone to make a LOT of money at it. But passion for film and dedication to pursuing your vision is a wonderful thing.

Best of luck to you.

[GorePhobia]

I don't know why you would want to get in the business of film to get rich. There are sooooo many people who are starving artists in the business. Only A-List people in Hollywood make money. I would make films for the love of films and money is just an added bonus for it.

[sickfish]

just to be living comfortably off the revenue would do me fine .

but according to my proposition , the less I spend making a movie , the more % profit I make . And my crew, actors , etc etc .

the same goes for you guys ... make your own movies ! Some will be bad, some will be ok and some will stand out . But if we all leave it to Hollywood , then our choice of viewing is limited - and Hollywood is heavily censored, controlled .