Guerrilla Filmmakers Didn't Need the Digital Revolution

As I was wrapping up post-production for "The Allan Carter Saga Part I: AMNESIA" I ended up on a phone conversation with my brother who had helped with the editing, compostiting and CGI special effects for the film.  In the conversation I blurted out, "if the digital revolution hadn't come along when it did I wouldn't have been able to make this movie".  My brother's response was a very interesting comment because for the last couple years I have found myself going back to it over and over again.  He replied, "you, me, we didn't need the digital revolution to make a movie...  We would have found a way even if the digital revolution hadn't happened."

Recently many filmmakers have commented that SM and the internet will be the answer to the marketing and distribution delemia that independent filmmakers are experiencing.  I disagree.  SM and the internet are tools, not the answer.  When we put our reliance on the tools the tools become the master and we are a slave to them.  If Thomas Edison couldn't find an answer...  he made one.

The thing about trailerblazers are that the blaze a new trail.  In their quest of cutting through the brush and creating a new path they risk having major pitfalls but also benefit by creating a path that others will take.  Anyone else that goes down that path isn't a leader but a follower of the path.  We all find points in our journey of filmmaking where everything that can go wrong does go wrong and you are pushed into a corner.  You can not proceed with the "business as usual" mode.  It is at this point, when everything logical will not fix the problem, that you have to "get creative" to beat the odds.  This is when you blaze a new trail, even if a small, minor one.  Too many filmmakers, I fear, when facing the impossible, instead of "getting creative"...  just back down.

Here's a great historical story to illustrate my point:

The year is 1776, the British army are held up in Boston while the rebels (Americans) lead by Washington are in the counrty.  They are basically waiting for the other side to make the next move.  It's a stalemate.  Winter is setting in, but Henry Knox went to Fort Ticonderoga, in up-state New York, to retrive some cannons.  Everyone thought it was impossible for him to bring all these canons across the mountains of Vermont, but he was able to inspire all the people of the countryside in Vermont to get involved. 

Another person named Alexander Hamilton inspired Washington to set up the canons at night, up on a hill, just across the bay from Boston.  The idea was to bring hay stack blocks, quietly at night, up the hill.  They were to make a wall with this blocks which would freeze in place.  They would also bring empty barrels up the hill as well.  These barrels were then filled with dirt and put on the outside of the wall.  When the British were to wake up in the morning, they would see the American's entrenched on the hill with the canons pointed at them.  The assumption would be that the British would then demand an assult on the hill.  The Americans, being low on gun powder, woud instead roll the barrels down the hill, knocking the British soldiers over like bowling pins, winning the battle... 

In the morning the British saw the Americans entrenched on the top of the hill and retreated to England for several months.  They knew they could not beat Washington at Boston.  The plan had worked.

My point isn't a leason in history but to show that creativity can beat the odds.  The internt, digital revolution or any other invention we come up with isn't the answer.  Our never ending determination mixed with our imaginations can do wonders.  A guerrilla filmmaker doesn't back down, they improvise.  Now is the time for a real filmmaking revolution.

My Econimic Stimulus Plan for Indie Films

El Mariachi Meets Star Wars???

by: John W. Bosley

Why is indie filmmaking dying? Why is it that there are more festivals, more content, yet less successful new filmmakers? I have a simple answer: We're not bringing enough to the show.

There is better equipment, but independent filmmakers aren't making better films... They are just making more of them. Imagine a tourist attraction like Six Flags or Disney World. Instead of a bracelet to ride every ride, you have to pay for each one. Tons of people, when the economy is great, are coming to enjoy the rides and every ride is making money... But, when times are tough and if you have to pay for each one, then people are pickier... some of the smaller rides won't make any money.

The definition for independent film is a film done independently of Hollywood money, which can be a little fuzzy... George Clooney can make a film from his own bank account (made by working as an actor on Hollywood films) and it is called an indie film just as much as some kid scrapping together his tax refund to shoot something in his backyard.

What made indie filmmaking different was the so-called "digital revolution?" Cameras became more affordable, people were able to shoot more and risk less. What happened wasn't better content, just more of it.

So how do we change it? Anyone who follows me on Twitter and has read my bio knows that I don't describe myself as an "independent filmmaker," but instead a "revolutionary." This is my reasoning: Indie films have a reputation of being either "small personal films" or "cheap B movies." I hate to be so honestly blunt about it, but I will be. My concern is the audience's expectations. Most expect all independently produced films to look alike. With all the new technology available, "the sky is the limit" and yet we still see the same material.

If you have a great "small personal film" that you believe needs to be made, than please go ahead a make it. Just don't do what many filmmakers I've met via Twitter and elsewhere have done. If you want to make something that looks more like a blockbuster film, don't settle for making a "small personal film" just because you don't think an indie filmmaker can accomplish a blockbuster. --Just do it!

Back to what is killing indies: we can't compete with high concept film ideas with our small concept ideas. It's plain and simple. If an average audience member has only one movie that they can watch, the majority will choose the high concept film over the small personal film. Simple statistics.

It used to be that if you had a celeb in your film, you would attract a larger audience. Both Variety and LA Times have reported that it isn't that way any longer. The only thing drawing people is a really great idea... and I would add also something that looks "hard to make." Since anyone can pick up a DV or HD camera for a few thousand... why should they pay to watch something they "think" they can make?

When I was a kid we were told that books were like visiting another world. I will watch a TV show that looks like my regular life, but I won't pay top dollar at a theater for a film about a regular life. I want LARGER than life.

My point is that you need to make your film feel larger than life. You don't have to change the premis, just give it a grander feel. But that would be too difficult, right? I thought so too... than I decided to "push the envelope" with AMNESIA and realized that when I was done production I could have "pushed it" even more. Trying the impossible, isn't as impossible as you might think. The truth is, my greatest lesson from my project was that "we are only restricted by the limits of our imagination."

A great example of going big was the movie Snow White. In today's terms it wouldn't count for much, but in the 1920's it was unimaginable for someone to make a animated full length feature film. However, Disney figured out that by doing "keyframing" he could make something that large without having to hire all pro animators. [The concept of "Keyframing" came from Snow White. He would have the pro animators draw the "key frames" while having the apprentices do the frames that would be less noticeable within the scene.] By doing this he cut down his budget and created a piece of history.... he just found a way.

What we need right now is El Mariachi meets Star Wars: a low budget film with an grand high concept idea. [El Mariachi was Robert Rodriguez's 7k film that caught Hollywood's attention.] If that happened it would catch everyone's attention.

How can we call it a "digital revolution" if nothing much really changed?

(If you still want to pursue a "small personal film" then I would recommend building a fan base by connecting on sites like Fans of Film or rebfest.com)