FILMMAKER BLOG  Saturday, February 17, 2007
THE FILMMAKER AS FINANCIER
With his various blogs, Sujewa Ekanayake has been a tireless supporter of DIY independent filmmaking. Now, he's going to put his money where his keyboard has been with a gesture that, if replicated by others, could lead to a new way of financing no-budget films. Two years after the United Nations announced "The Year of Microcredit," Ekanayake is applying the economic model pioneered by Muhammad Yunus in which tiny loans -- microcredit -- are offered to unproven entrepreneurs in order to realize their projects to independent moviemaking. From Wikipedia: Microcredit is the extension of very small loans (microloans) to the unemployed, to poor entrepreneurs and to others living in poverty who are not bankable. These individuals lack collateral, steady employment and a verifiable credit history and therefore cannot meet even the most minimum qualifications to gain access to traditional credit. Microcredit is a part of microfinance, which is the provision of financial services to the very poor; apart from loans, it includes savings, microinsurance and other financial innovations. "Unemployed, poor entrepreneurs who are not bankable..." -- sounds like the classic independent filmmaker. Taking note of this, Ekanayake will loan $500 from the proceeds of his latest Date Number One to another filmmaker. Here's his post: My newest indie filmmaking related past time is trying to help fellow low/"no" budget filmmakers make their second or third or whaterver, post-first & good, "no" budget feature.
And by "no" budget I mean under $10K ($3K to $5K budget would be best, it is doable, Swanberg & Dance Party, USA & others have done it in the past). Often it isn't the exact amount of money that makes a big difference in a project, it is the fact that someone other than the filmmaker believes enough in the filmmaker or the project to give any money to the project. I have been supported at very crucial times by small investments in my most recent project Date Number One. So I would like to return the favor, help another filmmaker or two this year. I offered $500 (to be handed over in May, after taxes & current Date Number One debt & other related expenses of mine are well under control) towards the next feature of a filmmaker friend a couple of days ago. If he does not need it, I'll go down the line of people I know who blog & make low budget indie films. In exchange for my investment I would be willing to take an appropriate number of DVDs of the finished film that I can sell through my blog & other websites of mine, plus a producer credit in the film & an appropriate % of profit, if any, whenever it may (or may not :) happen. And if the film does not happen, then I would want the $s paid back, when possible, so that I can try to use it to help another project. Now that indie films are cheap to make due to DV & can be self-distributed with press help coming from blogs, it is time to do (and more importantly it is possible to do) what we indie film fans can (including with $s) to make sure interesting movies get made by interesting filmmakers, even if we do not have a lot of money to spare. All a part of participating in the new digital & web enabled indie filmmaking scene.
# posted by Scott Macaulay @ 2/17/2007 09:58:00 AM
Comments (3)
Thanks a lot for the mention Scott (not necessarily for press for myself but to help popularize the concept, since your blog gets a lot more traffic than mine :). One thing I should have added to the original post on the topic (maybe i will now) is that we indie filmmakers should prepare two projects for every year (or every two years or whatever each persons production period is) - one that can be shot "no" budget (under $10K), and one for an indiewood low budget ($100K - $1 Mil or more). If the low budget project does not look like it is going to happen by the middle of the year or so, then we should go ahead with the "no" budget project. Perhaps one script can be adapted for low budget or "no" budget situations. I think getting films made & out on a regular basis is better than waiting years for the right budget for a certain project. Microinvesting in "no" budget features can help move filmmaking careers along.
- Sujewa
#
posted by The Sujewa @ 2/17/2007 3:43 PM
And a clarification.
Re: "Ekanayake will loan $500 from the proceeds of his latest Date Number One to another filmmaker."
Actually the $500 is coming from my own savings & is not necessarily related to $s being made/to be made from Date Number One. I've already opened up a new savings account for the microinvesting project & have identified 2 indie filmmakers who will get the loan this year (if the 1st one does not need it, then it goes to the second one, so on & so fourth). The loan/investment will be available for the filmmakers in May.
Thanks Scott.
- Sujewa
#
posted by The Sujewa @ 2/17/2007 6:50 PM
Hey Sujewa,
You're welcome. Again, I think it's a cool thing you're doing.
I agree with you in concept about the "two projects" mentality, although it flies in the face of some things I've noticed about a lot of independent filmmakers. So many first-timers have one movie they have to make, and it's impossible for them to think of another. Others seem to have a hard time multi-tasking beyond a single project. And, more insidiously, others buy into the careerist mentality that the industry promotes and view making a "smaller" movie a step-down.
When you think about a director like Fassbinder, who would make three and four movies a year, and then think about the U.S. indie scene, in which acclaimed directors go for years between movies, it's a bit sad...
I think just like actors alternate between big studio and small indie projects, directors should alternate between larger films and smaller and more experimental efforts and not worry about the commercial ramifications of the latter.
#
posted by Scott Macaulay @ 2/17/2007 10:05 PM
|
