The 5-step approach to selling a movie presented in the document follows a traditional and straightforward method. However, it is likely to be ineffective or have limited success for several reasons, which I’ll explain as I summarize the steps.
Summary of the Method:
- Cast Name Actors: The premise here is that having recognizable actors guarantees sales. It assumes that talented actors are accessible if provided with a good script and that agents are mere obstacles that can be bypassed.
- Pick a Sellable Genre: Focus on popular genres like action, sci-fi, or family-friendly films. The guide discourages “difficult” genres like edgy dramas, claiming they are harder to sell, and emphasizes genres with broad market appeal.
- Add Production Value: The idea is to use resources creatively to make a low-budget film look more expensive, such as finding free locations or borrowed equipment. This is supposed to give the film a higher perceived budget and enhance its attractiveness to buyers.
- Go to Markets: Filmmakers are encouraged to attend major film markets (not festivals) to pitch their projects and network with potential buyers. The key is making connections and pitching films to distributors and agents.
- Send Screeners and Close the Deal: After making contacts, filmmakers should send their final films to sales agents and negotiate offers. The guide advises researching potential distributors and being careful with legal negotiations to avoid over-complicating deals.
Why It’s Likely to Fail:
- Overemphasis on Name Actors:
- While recognizable actors do have a selling point, the assumption that filmmakers, especially new ones, can easily access name actors is overly simplistic. Agents and managers are typically gatekeepers for a reason: their clients are selective. Furthermore, casting actors purely for marketability rather than a fit for the role can weaken the film’s integrity.
- Name actors are not always synonymous with success, especially in the indie space. Indie films that break through often do so based on strong storytelling and direction, even without famous actors.
- Genre Limitation:
- While it’s true that action, sci-fi, and family-friendly films have broader commercial appeal, many successful indie films thrive precisely because they are unique, risky, or unconventional. The emphasis on “sellable” genres could stifle creativity and originality, limiting a filmmaker’s ability to stand out.
- Market oversaturation of genres like horror or action, as acknowledged in the guide, makes it harder for indie films to compete without a big budget, even with a recognizable cast.
- Production Value Misconception:
- The advice to make a film look more expensive through soft money assumes that indie filmmakers will consistently have access to high-end resources. While clever production design and resourcefulness can elevate a project, relying on external favors or “soft” assets doesn’t guarantee quality and can even hinder a production if those resources are unreliable.
- Also, audiences and distributors can often spot low-budget films trying to look bigger than they are, and this can backfire by diminishing credibility.
- Film Market Overdependence:
- Film markets are highly competitive and saturated environments. Merely attending and networking is not a guarantee of success. Additionally, many deals at these markets favor well-connected producers and established sales agents, meaning a new filmmaker could get lost in the shuffle without prior relationships.
- Filmmakers who lack a strong sales pitch, marketing strategy, or a distinct identity for their film are unlikely to succeed in this environment.
- Overconfidence in Deals and Legalities:
- The assumption that merely following these steps will result in multiple offers overlooks the reality that most indie films don’t get offers, let alone multiple ones. Furthermore, the warning against “over-lawyering” contracts could lead filmmakers into bad deals by discouraging thorough legal review.
- The idea that filmmakers can “help the release” of their film after selling it is misleading, as distributors typically control this process and often don’t prioritize small indie films.
Conclusion:
The method simplifies a complex process and assumes that access to talent, resources, and connections is easy or readily available, which is not the case for most independent filmmakers. Moreover, it prioritizes marketability over creativity, originality, and authenticity—factors that are often more critical for the success of indie films. By focusing too much on commercial trends and ignoring the importance of innovation and storytelling, this approach is unlikely to work for most filmmakers.
