The SHORT! Guide to Producing

The Practical Essentials of Producing Short Films

Charles Merzbacher

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351186537
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Media & Performing Arts
• Subtopic: Film & Video

In this book, Charles Merzbacher offers a concise, definitive guide to the essential skills, techniques and logistics of producing short films, focusing on the practical knowledge needed for line producing and overseeing smaller-scale productions. Drawing on insights from real-life production scenarios, veteran filmmaker and instructor Charles Merzbacher takes producers through every stage of the production process, from fundraising, preproduction and planning to the producer's role in postproduction and distribution.

Key topics include:

• Finding a worthy project;
• Schedules and budgets;
• Managing the casting process;
• Recruiting and managing crew;
• Location scouting;
• Legal and safety issues;
• Running a production;
• Negotiating music rights;
• And much more!

An accompanying website—available at theshortseries.com —offers document templates for contracts, call sheets, budgets and other production forms, as well as sample production documents and short video guides featuring top industry professionals.

Chapter 1
Getting Down to Business

Financing Your Film

Before you start worrying about how you are going to pay for your movie, do yourself a favor: read the rest of this book. By the end of it, you will have a detailed understanding of the factors that determine a production’s budget. In truth, you can only get an accurate picture of a project’s budget once a number of important variables, from production format to cast and crew size, have been nailed down. This is why it is risky to talk in terms of a “typical budget” for a short film. I have overseen shorts that ranged in budget from a few hundred dollars to over $60,000. The great majority of productions have fallen within the range of $6,000–$12,000, but it would be foolish to therefore assume that $9,000 is a meaningful average. With experience, you will develop an ability to estimate budgets based on a couple of read-throughs of the script. Nevertheless, it will remain the case that every film’s financial requirements are unique.

The production of a short film could serve any number of aims. It could help you develop your skills as a storyteller. It could be a calling card, a way to show the world what you can do. It could be a very effective vehicle for galvanizing support for a cause. There are plenty of good reasons to make short films, but making money is probably not one of them. The avenues for generating revenue are few, and even these scant opportunities are often more like mirages than real sources of income. Let’s examine some of the claims that people make for turning a profit with a short film:

• “Look at all these fabulous prizes!”: Every week seems to bring the announcement of another short film contest, and some of these competitions offer cash prizes. In the great majority of cases, however, there are stipulations regarding either the nature of the content (e.g., entries must promote a particular product) or the conditions under which the production must occur (e.g., the well-known 48-Hour Film Project and its many imitators). We will take a much closer look at the film festival circuit in a later chapter. For now, suffice it to say that relatively few give cash awards to shorts. It’s worth keeping an eye out for those that do, especially when they pop up at smaller, less competitive events, but predicating your film’s success on its winning cash prizes at festivals is like using the lottery as your retirement plan. Not only are the odds against you, but you’ll also spend a fortune on festival entry fees chasing those elusive prizes.
• “Our movie will go viral and we’ll live off the online ad revenue!”: Many believe that the ascent of YouTube, Vimeo and other online video sharing sites are fomenting a new golden age of short film, the last such epoch arguably being the advent of the music video almost 40 years ago. The good news is that the internet is indeed a game changer: it provides us with an immediate “frictionless” portal to a worldwide audience. The bad news is that relatively few filmmakers have proven adept at making smash online video hits, and unless your videos attract millions of eyeballs, you won’t be able to support your filmmaking habit with the profit-sharing schemes that are presently out there. A sizeable gulf separates the multitude of popular and widely viewed online movies from the few shorts that genuinely go viral and generate revenue.
• “We’ll cut a distribution deal!”: Since the advent of feature films back in the silent era, there has never been much of a market for the theatrical distribution of shorts. Should a distributor approach you about your movie, by all means see what they have to offer, but don’t expect to walk away with more than $500. Much independent distribution is moving away from traditional venues and focusing on online platforms and streaming services like iTunes, Netflix and Amazon. To date, stand-alone short films haven’t found a home in that market. When we discuss marketing strategies later in this book, we’ll consider ways that producers of shorts might venture into growing the business of streaming content, but under even the sunniest of scenarios, revenues returned through online distribution are going to be modest.

I recognize that none of this is sounding very rosy. Actually, there are certain instances where a short film can make money—or at least not lose money. Let’s examine them individually.

Television Distribution

The prospects of getting a short distributed via television stations or networks vary considerably by territory. In the U.S., arts-friendly networks such as IFC and Sundance have shown sporadic interest in shorts. Public broadcasting affiliates occasionally air short film series, and the PBS network has at times incorporated shorts into its programming. The sums paid by these outlets are relatively modest—think $500—and keep in mind that distribution deals tend to be exclusive, so whatever you get paid by a channel or network is very likely to be all the money you will make from cable and broadcast.

In the rest of world, the situation can be more promising. In Europe, for example, governments still exercise—directly or indirectly—considerable influence over television outlets. In the classical model of the state-run television channel, programming isn’t as formulaic as it is with commercial television. Shorts are often used to fill out an hour or to provide a break between longer offerings. State-funded channels pick up shorts from the international marketplace, but they may also have a mandate to encourage and support indigenous filmmaking. In such cases, channels acquire movies by commissioning them outright or by partnering with state-run film funds. In either case, the deal was more or less the same: in exchange for providing funding, the channel gets the right to show the finished film. Sometimes a state-run film school is involved. While he was a film student, the French filmmaker François Ozon made many short productions with funding from regional and national television channels. He continued to receive funding from these channels as he embarked on his professional career.

By now, this trajectory has been followed by several generations of film-makers. As with so many government programs, subsidies for film production have been cut back as the media economy has become globalized. In most countries, state-funded channels now must compete with privately held networks and streaming media platforms. This undercuts the comfortable hegemony of state-owned media. Nevertheless, particularly in smaller countries, producers should check with their public and private television networks to see what sort of funding exists for shorts. Don’t be surprised to learn that support and distribution schemes come and go, running for a few seasons before being axed or replaced.

As for hawking your short in the international television market, remember those hardy short film distributors? Some of them also act as foreign sales representatives. For a percentage of gross receipts, these agents will sell your film in various foreign territories. You won’t make much money selling to any one territory, but if you can find a home for your movie in lots of small countries, the fees can add up. Even so, only the rarest of short films recoups its cost this way.

Government Support

In many countries, the notion that the state should support the arts is an article of faith. Before you rush out to buy a ticket to that Shangri-La where you need only ask in order to receive funding for your film, please understand that support for the arts—and perhaps especially for the costly process of making movies—is always intensely competitive. Government funding for filmmakers does exist on many levels in various parts of the world, but it is impossible to generalize about the nature of that support. For example, it is wrong to assume that larger or richer countries are more generous than smaller and less advantaged ones. Nor can you draw a neat correspondence between political philosophy and state support. Government funding may be easier to come by for emerging filmmakers in Bulgaria than it is in China, despite the latter’s enormous economic power and nominal adherence to communist principles. Actually, sometimes smaller nations are more entrepreneurial when it comes to supporting media makers. Sticking with Bulgaria as an example, some of the governmental grants are simply aimed at getting people to come and shoot in the country—you don’t even have to be Bulgarian to apply.

While the nature and degree of government support varies widely around the globe, some common themes turn up from country to country. For instance, art and film funding often isn’t only or even primarily offered on a national level. In many cases, more plentiful and generous support can be found on the regional or local level. In the United States, where government funding for the arts is notoriously scarce, town arts councils can be open to supporting a favorite daughter or son. Tapping into these local funds can be easier than wringing support from federal programs such as the National Endowment for the Arts, where short filmmakers must compete against the heavy hitters of independent cinema. In the United Kingdom, although there is a film fund that is administered on the national level by the British Film Institute, another large provider of funding, London Calling, is focused on supporting filmmakers in (can you guess?) London. There are also regional arts councils in the United Kingdom that have been instrumental in supporting filmmakers early in their careers. The same can be said of the film offices in some of the cities and provinces of South Africa. In Norway, filmmakers are encouraged to seek funding from their hometown arts councils, where the competition is said to be less severe than in the bigger cities. The moral of this story is that you shouldn’t make assumptions about the existence or extent of government underwriting for media production in your area. Furthermore, as Dorothy learned after visiting Oz, sometimes the best support can be found back home.

A number of media and arts grants require that awarded funds be administered by fiscal sponsors. This is especially true in the United States. In exchange for a small percentage of the grant funds, a fiscal sponsor safeguards and vouches for the legitimacy of the grants collected. This system may sound like a legalized form of money laundering, but its purpose is to ensure that grants go to the purposes for which they were awarded. Many local and regional arts organizations provide fiscal sponsorship for filmmakers.

In the United States, it is quite common for film grants to awarded only once editing is under way. The rationale behind such “completion funding” is as follows: filmmaking is such a complex enterprise that not a few great movie ideas end up stillborn. By insisting on funding only productions that are well on their way toward completion, the funder ensures both that the film will come to fruition and that a certain level of quality is attained. Of course, this stipulation leaves many producers with a Catch-22: they can’t qualify for completion funds because they don’t have the money needed to get their project in the can. Grants for completion funding do exist on the international stage as well. In Argentina, a state-backed film fund runs a contest each year to provide funding for postproduction on features and shorts. That said, in many countries, grants are not restricted in this way, or they might be targeted toward a different phase of production. As an example, the British Film Institute administers grants that can be applied toward the initial development of shorts. The takeaway: when applying for grants, read the guidelines carefully to determine if there are restrictions on the kinds of activities the funding can support.

The Funding of Student Productions

A significant portion of the short films made around the world is produced under the aegis of an educational institution. Before going any further on our tour of film financing, we should take a moment to consider the special status of student shorts. Being a student filmmaker has its pros and cons. On the negative side of the ledger is the fact that students are not always eligible for government grants. In the United States, this is a common restriction on the state and federal level. In the United Kingdom, full-time students are generally not eligible to apply for the various regional grants, even though some of these schemes are open to applicants as young as 16. The reasoning behind this policy is that students already receive special support for their productions, either through their home institution or through educational initiatives funded by the government.

The degree and nature of financial support provided to students in film schools and media programs varies enormously. Many schools provide support chiefly in the form of equipment. In Argentina, film students don’t just have access to camera, grip and lighting gear; they may also receive in-kind contributions toward postproduction services and materials for distributing their finished films. Time for yet another vast generalization: in many smaller countries, admission to the national film school (and there may be just a single, state-funded institution) is harder than winning the lottery jackpot. In these cases, students selected for the program are provided with an exceptional level of support, including direct funding. At the Norwegian Film School, for instance, students can receive support for their productions to the tune of $50,000—and this is in addition to support the school provides in the way of gear and services. Keep in mind that this support is provided to an elite cadre. Furthermore, funding that is on par with professional productions usually means students are expected to pay their cast and crew at professional rates. In the commercial realm, $50,000 goes fast.

Private Foundations and Commercial Underwriting

In the United States, the arts rely very heavily on private philanthropy. This tends to be less true elsewhere. There are, however, plenty of exceptions to this generalization, and foundations exist in many countries, funded either by wealthy patrons or corporations, that are open to supporting budding filmmakers. Some organizations are very mission-driven, supporting media projects that advance conservation, medical research, addiction recovery or whatever fits a particular foundation’s core purpose. Smaller countries with large expatriate communities sometimes have philanthropic societies overseas that encourage younger citizens to make films in or about their homeland. As with government support, it’s essential to read the fine print. If you are a student producer, you don’t want to waste a weekend filling out a grant application only to discover that the foundation involved doesn’t fund student work.

When it comes to seeking support for your production, remember that money isn’t everything. You may find that companies in your region are willing to provide in-kind contributions in lieu of a direct monetary outlay. This support could consist of professional services, supplies and equipment, such as time in an audio mixing suite or a free camera rental, but it could also take the form of prop loans or train tickets. Not surprisingly, you’ll find that companies are more motivated to provide goods to productions in places where they are trying to make inroads into the local media industry. A film lighting company looking to drum up more business in China might set up a team of young Chinese filmmakers with a nice light kit. Some companies take a commercial or patriotic interest in developing the local media production community. Due to its scenery, workforce and low costs, many international companies shoot in South Africa. This business has allowed many South African rental houses to be quite generous in supporting local filmmakers with discounts and donations.

Pro Tip

“If you’re receiving money from somebody who’s underwriting a production, sometimes you won’t get it in one lump sum. Sometimes you get a certain amount on signing the contract, a certain amount on the first day of production, then a certain amount on wrap or the rough cut delivery. And then you usually get the final check when you hand in all your receipts.”

—Corinne Marrinan

Specialized Markets

There is one domain where shorts remain a viable business, and that can be broadly defined as “educational filmmaking.” This category encompasses all manner of issue-driven motion pictures—everything from films used in driver’s education classes to shorts shown in Sunday school. Believe it or not, entire companies have survived by making shorts for use in lifesaving, EMT training and childbirth classes, and there are filmmakers who have sustained fairly robust careers making shorts docum...