Financing / Crowdfunding

Very interesting! Direct booking vs. Four-Walling...Especially interesting as offering by the head of the theater association. Thanks Sam!

Hey Ashley Renee Smith! They essential differene between an independent production and a studio production, is that the studio production is typically fully done within the studios own ecosystem - which includes financing, production and distribution / streaming. There is no back-end or investors recouping from revenues. An independent production on the other hand, is financed through multiple sources whereby the financiers are entitled to recoup their loans and invesments, and may have an equity stake in the project, that comes with a profit participation as well. And then there are all sorts of other commitments that the producers will need to pay from revenues. That means that a studio project does not need a CAM - as there is no revenue sharing - and an independent project does, as there is revenue sharing amongst multiple stakeholders and beneficiaries.

Hey David Zannoni , Would you suggest filmmakers forego paying for an attorney and just download templates from the internet for agreements, and then pray they hold up in court (for a win, in all manner and matters) in the case of a dispute? Or, would you advise all filmmakers to always consult an attorney for any transaction in the entertainment business?

Hi Jack Binder, I most definitely recommend filmmakers to ALWAYS involve an attorney. It may be an expense but it is more than worth and it certainly pays back, as an attorney saves you a lot of headache (and money!) afterwards. Having an entertainment lawyer working on the CAM Agreement on your behalf, and in a broader sense, helping you properly structure the whole legal framework of your project, is in my view, essential.

What if you are working on an extremely low budget project. Are there any recommendations for legal without the expense of an attorney? I have found out in the past that finding the right attorney is like a marriage, the wrong one, and it can cause more problems than you already had.

That is a very good point, Eugene Mandelcorn. There may be lawyers whose format is better adapted for smaller budget projects in the way they work and charge. Furthermore, on a lower budget film, the involvement of a lawyer may be more topic or issue-specific, rather than a full engagement from A to Z. However, from the perspective of the CAM, what I have seen through years of experience, is that even on smaller projects, it generally does pay out to have an experienced entertainment lawyer involved in some sort of capacity.

Great news, congratulations! Pittsburgh is an attractive city to film in for locations, crew, film tax credits, and of course setting.

Of course they shift away from Hollywood, Mark. Too many creatives, too late, start to understand that Hollywood is a pipe dream -- for them -- fabricated by... Hollywood. -- through every outlet related to them, making even more money. But now Hollywood, and everyone job related to it, is losing it's grip on the film marked, it itself will be promoting to 'join hands all over the world.' Just smart politics. All of this, in whatever sort of way, is nothing more than a (sometimes miss)calculated numbers game.

Another solid indicator, not only of the global expansion we speak about here daily and through Stage 32 Certification, but the return of theatrical.

I would argue Rutger Oosterhoff that the very notion of Hollywood is the problem. Even Hollywood doesn't think Hollywood anymore. They think across the U.S. and international. Shooting in California has declined year over year. That doesn't mean the studios and independents in Hollywood and around town aren't making films and shows, but the deals are not necessarily structured here. The industry is no longer Hollywood, it's the world.

Absolutely Richard "RB" Botto Theatrical as a marketing and financial lift for films remains a relevant and important window and the numbers back it up. More top filmmakers need to continue to demand theatrical, despite an uphill battle against some of the streamers (Netflix, AppleTV+) refusal to support cinema.

Agree fully, Jack Binder. There's a very good article on The Wrap today regarding the surge in theatrical and how 2025 projects to be a banner year. Unfortunately, it's behind their paywall or I would post it. But it's just more optimism in what has been a wave of it over the last 4-5 months.

Yep. They got $ to buy Disney in 2025.

Netflix's leadership team do seem to be true movie fans and know/can read quickly what movie fans like/want. Inevitably this helps them secure great titles that will boost subscriptions globally. Not just great movies but buzzy talent and trendy concepts. They really have the formula down pat, and no surprise after a lot of years of trial and error, they've cracked a code on how to turn in huge stock gains year over year.

Pat Alexander actually Netflix stock mooned the past two years. It was $170-180 share in 2022 and now it's $900+ per. So whoever is in charge for past two years is cooking for hedge funds/investors.

Im old enough to work on Season 1 of House of Cards- the show that saved Netflix. I remember looking at Netflix stocks at $6

Paramount?

Arthur Charpentier Who said I didn't have stars? Who said I'm not planning an advertisement campaign? How do you define a star? Before every actor "became a star," they were unknowns. If you put anyone in a movie, they become stars because you mention them as "starring in" your film. A-list talent gauntness nothing. Why am I paying someone $15M to "star" in a film when I can make 3 or 4 films which gives investors a better chance to recoup their investment.

As far as theaters goes, what exactly are their overhead costs? Their locations aren't free if they're renting or paying property taxes. They have to pay their employees. They have to stock the snack stand. You think 50% of 7 people paying $10.78 a ticket is going to pay for everything? Everything has to work in concert, but first and foremost, the filmmaker has to make a entertaining and professional film that will entertain an audience and inspire multiple viewings. That's it. It's not rocket science.

FREDDY GOT FINGERED cost $14M got in 2,200= theaters for an average 3.3 week run. No stars. Pulled in a domestic revenue of $14M. I think I can do better. The Crow (2024) cost $50M, opened in 2,,752 theaters, pulled $15M worldwide. I think I can do better. Theaters want asses in seats. I'm confident I can get them there. Soon theaters will be gone, but there is a window to still use them to your advantage. It's an entertainment industry. make what you do entertaining and your budget or who's in it becomes more of an accomplishment than a detriment.

Philip David Lee

the budget of the film and your statements give the impression that there is no major star in the film. To get the rental you need, you need an advertising budget of about $15-30 million. and then maybe you can at least recoup the costs, if you're lucky.

a long-term rental in a small number of cinemas for 1-2 years and the sale of rights to streaming companies, cable networks and television is more suitable for your strategy.

I also like to add that I have been working with a group of entrepreneurs for over 25 years to get gaming in to the cinemas - playing with a crowd together a specifically designed (story) driven entertainment game on the big screen with a X-box or Playstation consoler. Therefore its important that cinemas gain more profit than they do today, in order for them to invest and expand, in let's say the future that should have already been there, as cinemas popularity is not at an ultimate high now at the moment.

Arthur Charpentier What exactly am I spending $15M-$30M on as far as advertising? Distributors like to make up costs on P&A without any accountability and absolutely no data as to how many people their ad campaigns reach let alone influence. Meanwhile how many advertising dollars did Haliey Welch spend to get her known throughout the country and quite possibly the world? Advertising doesn't have the same clout it did even 10 years ago. Don't leave it up to the distribution companies to advertise your film. That's too late and is not cost effective. Get your film in everyone's mind while you're still in production so that the buzz hits a crescendo upon it's release. You may think I'm wrong, but how can I be wrong if no one has tried it yet?

Philip David Lee, you're right if you have your own advertising platform. If there is no such site, you will most likely spend your advertising budget on bots. The time for viral advertising has passed, now you have to pay for everything.

I would love for someone to explain what a bond is and how it works. I will be looking for financing for an Action-Romance myself.

Hello Maxwell Moore Coincidentally I just wrote a post about the Completion Bond for my website. You can find the answer to your question there. In brief, a Completion Bond is an assurance by the bond company that a film will be finished and delivered to a distributor to enable payment. A fee is included in the budget, and the bond company works with the production to ensure it meets their standards to merit the bonding of the production. They make suggestions, changes, and will take over a picture if it is failing and facing financial ruin. Having said that, the bond company can be a friend. Read the article here: www.filmbudget.com/completion-bond/

www.filmbudget.com/completion-bond/

Great article Jack thank you

Maxwell Moore Thank you. Very kind, glad you found it of value.

Fun to read and a great way to catch up on what's going on in cinema. :-)

Happy New Year, Amanda Toney! Most of these movies are on my watch list. My top theater release this year is Smile 2.

Wow! That's a lot of cinema time!