The art of the film business. . . .

My previous blog entry asked two questions. Do you have a story to tell? And Is it worth the effort needed to tell the story through a film. Let's skip the former and focus on the latter. What makes anything worth doing? This entry will be quickly focusing on money and business but there are many reasons beyond finances that makes something worth doing. I am sure I can find many people that climbed Mt. Everest that feel it was worth it and never made a dime. If you're in a position to have a ton of money you can afford to lose or equipment you own or talented friends that want to help out for free (and I stress, talented), then tell your story, any story without any further thought, purely for the personal gratification of seeing your story come to the screen. Maybe it will make a million dollars in the process, maybe it won't. Either way, that is one reason to make a movie.

But let's put the cards on the table here. Film is not art. It is a business. Allow me to clearly state that films can ultimately become great pieces of art, and many have indeed become amazing pieces of art. It is my theory that film is the only "art form" to ever be invented to exploit a machine. Thus, it is a business first and foremost. The Art of Film is a byproduct of the business that sometimes happens. First, let's quickly examine the other major art forms to see how they were invented.

Music as an art form dates back to the earliest civilizations as a part of their culture. The "Music Industry" came only after a machine was invented (phonograph) to allow exploitation. The first musical performances put on for profit were the brain child of a opportunistic "promoter" exploiting the talented villager who drew a crowd. "Hey, you can use my hat to put in front of you while you perform. Just give me 10%. Sounds fair." But most importantly, a human being using their vocal chords or hitting their hands on their thighs can make music without no outside investment by anyone. No one ever wanted to sing in the shower but first had to find an investor. (I guess you can argue someone has to pay the water bill but just stick with me here.)

Sculptors were molding human figures out of clay in the Prehistoric ages, long before Michelangelo was commissioned to finish "David." It is my primitive guess that one of the earliest clay sculptures was done by some obsessed guy trying to win over some girl in the tribe (1-800- Flowers still had some kinks in their website in 50,000 BC).

A painter can paint on any canvas with minimal supplies. The "lucky pebble" allows any immature kid to draw a penis on a rock in a playground. And I doubt the early days of graffiti had business plans with a budget line for spray paint.

A novelist with a good memory can write a novel in his head. (or with a yellow pad and a pencil) Hopefully, you get my point by now. . . .

Dramatic theater (stage plays) has its roots in religious rituals in India. This is where we start getting close to the film biz. There's staging, costuming, perhaps even lighting but again this was originally for the art (or religious aspects) of it, not the business aspect.

All of the above art forms were first developed for non-business reasons. Then came the business. Now, let's look at how films came to be. . . .

There are some great books on the birth of photography and I am not prepared to go into much detail on the subject. However, this technology was created from a scientific angle as opposed to an artistic angle. Once still photography was solidified, moving images was the next challenge the scientists took on. To make a long story short, we find ourselves at the 1893 World's Fair where Thomas Edison introduces the first moving picture camera (kinetograph) and the kinetoscope, a device to view the moving images, but only for one person at a time by peeking through a small hole (remember the old View Master toys, something like that). in 1894, Edison used this technology to open up "kinetoscope parlours" that charged money for people to see footage of mundane events such as the five second short film called (ready for this) "Fred Ott's Sneeze" (as in God Bless You sneeze). This is the first film actually copyrighted in the U.S.

So the technology was primitive but people were making money off of showing someone sneeze. Then came the Lumiere brothers in France who invented a way of projecting images for a group of people with their invention of the cinematograph (they were smart enough to realize it is hard to make out with your date if you are both sticking your eyes in different machines). Anyway, they started making money by charging the public to sit in a room and watch their films. They focused on documentary subjects. One of their films, the 50 second classic "Workers Leaving The Lumiere Factory" is considered by many to be the first real motion picture ever made released in 1895.

Then came The Silent Film era and I can go on and on on how the films being projected for the paying audience evolved. I won't, as this is not a Film History blog. My point is that Films as we know it were invented to exploit the technology to make a profit. From day one of the film industry, it has always been about the money, and more specifically, what can we project on a screen where people will be willing to pay to see it.

The question that needs to be answered to determine whether a story is worthy of making into a film is simply this. Will enough people pay for the right to see it so that it generates more revenue than the cost needed to both produce the film and inform (market) the public that the film exists. A future blog will examine how to approach this question for a specific film but first, we needed to establish why the question even exists in the first place. I am sure some film geeks out there will disagree and that is your right. I just hope you're one of the people I described above with a lot of money you can afford to lose.

OK, so let me regroup for a minute. I am not saying that the only reason to make a film is to make money. Actually, I totally disagree with that statement. You should make a film because you have no other choice but to tell the story. But the reality is the film industry revolves around financial considerations a filmmaker has to keep in mind from day one of a project. I hope this blog lays out the foundations of why this "art form" of film has such financial implications as opposed to the other art forms of the world.

A dollar sign is built into the DNA of FILM from the start . . . . . .

So you want to make a movie. . . . .

OK, well, let's first define what a movie is. These days, anyone with a half way decent cell phone can capture moving images. The question is: do you have story to tell? And if so, is it worth investing the countless units of energy needed to actually produce a film? Notice I didn't say "is it worth telling?" Any story is worth telling as long as there's a warm camp fire close by. But telling a story through a film is a huge investment on many people's parts. (More on this in my next blog posting.) So before you jump in, take a deep breath and ask yourself these simple questions. Do you have a story? And is it worth making into a film?

Too many people think they want to enter the entertainment industry when all they really want to do is meet celebrities, become famous, or name drop to their friends as opposed to actually losing friends because you will have to work your ass off to really be in the film business. If you want to meet celebrities, my advice would be to go on EBAY and bid $100k on some charity auction to meet someone famous. It will probably be cheaper in the long run for you. Becoming famous is easy these days and I'll leave it to other blogs for ideas on how to do that outside of film. But if you really want to make a film because you have no choice other than to tell the story you have to tell and you know it is a story worthy of a film, this blog is for you.

This blog is for the true indie filmmaker. The one who lays awake at night staring at the ceiling trying to figure out how to make the film. If they don't, it will never happen. I am currently starting the process of producing my third feature film. My first film, Everything's Jake Everything's Jake Official Website, was a labor of love I co-"labored" with a good friend of mine Matthew Miele. We both co-wrote the script. Miele directed and I produced. We did this completely outside the Hollywood establishment. Eavesdrop Eavesdrop Official Website was my second venture into film production but this was Miele's labor of love. He laid awake at night with the worthy story he needed to tell and I just took the calls in the morning to help bring the project to completion. However, my next film is called "Trust Me" and this is my labor of love. It is my first solo venture into writing and I have no choice but to make this film. And yes, I feel that it is worthy of the effort needed to make this story into a feature film.

This blog will trace the exact steps to produce a film as I detail my journey to produce "Trust Me". It will be boring at times but always informative. My definition of a film is a story told through moving images and sound. More importantly, I want to define "produce". I define this as the most efficient way to use the resources available to tell the story without compromising ANY story elements and while ensuring the film has the best chance to reach its potential audience. The greatest film that no one sees is not a great film. It is just another great story and eventually the camp fire burns out.