Indie film is DEAD... Let's Fix It!

[@DanLotz]

Am I an idiot? Is indie film alive and thriving? Or is the system broken and does it need to be fixed? Comment below!

[@Joel-Haver]

Really well said Dan! I will say that, with the current monetization structures available in the free film sphere, we live in an age of supporting yourself off of short form content and doing no budget features for the love of it. Not only is it easier to build an audience with consistent shorts, but they’re more financially supported by the various platforms. The features I’ve released that are monetized have made next to nothing in comparison to my shorts. I encourage all no budget filmmakers to make shorts and lots of them (maybe even weekly), not only for these reasons but it’s also the fastest way to destroy the perfectionist that stops you from releasing stuff and hone your skills.

[@DanLotz]

Yeah I've found the same basically. My weekly talk in front of camera videos do relatively well with the monetization, the film I have monetized (Pure Cinema did alright), my patreon has also been my biggest earner and seems to be the most realistic way for smaller creators to support themselves under 100k followers. Great to have your perspective especially from someone who's seen it all :). Thanks Joel!

[@nothingnobodynever]

Just curious, but why would the end goal of filmmaking be increasing audience size and monetization?

[@THEDONTTELLSHOW]

@@nothingnobodynever so I can stop being a post man.

[@Joel-Haver]

@@nothingnobodynever No one said it’s the end goal, but if you want to have more time to devote to art it certainly doesn’t hurt to have your art come to support you. Many people spend 5/7 of their life working/exhausted after work, I see no harm in one allowing their art to change that for themself. This doesn’t mean cater to an audience, just accept one as it grows organically with creating/sharing.

[@nothingnobodynever]

@@Joel-Haver to me, comments like do 'x' because it will lead to a bigger audience and is more financially viable does sound like catering. And as one of those 5/7 guys, my point is that the merging of job and art does inherently change the craft to work or at the very least conflate the two since the goals have changed. As soon as one shifts the conversation to business, the topic is no longer about Independent film.

[@brendalotz2218]

remember when you interviewed to go to film school, and that professor hated your direct answer of where you thought the film industry would be one day - you said "people will be watching film from their homes more than at the theaters" and she got so pissed at you. She thought you were the moron, and she really was.

[@DanLotz]

Yeah they were behind the times in that department.

[@beautyofcrypto3618]

typical formula that can work: film school, festivals, possible success; new formula: self taught, free content over tons of social platforms for everyone to find you/enjoy/discover you, possible success. Both formulas end at possible success. I think the second is the best option and good strategy.

[@DanLotz]

Both formulas work just different ways to make it :).

[@THEDONTTELLSHOW]

Spielberg spoke in the early 80s about how Hollywood's ultimate quest was to find a perfect film. Not artistically, but financially. A film that every person on the planet wanted to buy, because it had the widest possible appeal. Indie film WAS separate from that quest. It was literally independent, and an individual expression for an individual or small group of like-minded people. Since Hollywood basically bought up the term "indie" then those singular voices have become an offshoot of that Hollywood quest and those individuals are devoured by it (anybody seen The Eternals yet?) The only way to rejuvenate Indie film is to focus on and find those unique voices again, and keep them away from that meat grinder. We have the means to go it alone, to be independent properly now. Let's do it.

[@DanLotz]

Yeah man the 80's was a weird time for film. Tarantino always says the 80's was the beginning of the death of cinema and its hard to argue with that when it really was the start of blockbuster era.

[@nothingnobodynever]

Very interesting to bring up because the video's main point is conveying how independent filmmakers should focus on audience appeal and making more money.

[@DanLotz]

@@nothingnobodynever Not necessarily my point. My point is indie film as a market is basically dead. In terms of generating revenue, most true indie films lose their ass if they spend over 10k. My point is there is a new way to do it. Make movies cheaper, and consider making a higher volume of work. I don't think this has anything to do with audience appeal or expectations. Honestly though in order to continue making films, making money and making film a business will always be smart for long term. Doesn't mean art and commerce can't mix. I've never started making a film thinking about how much money a film would make, considering that most of my films are slow, quiet, and not really specific genre films (stuff that does well) but at the same token if Sheepland or any of my 12 features films makes money I wouldn't be upset by that. My hope is perhaps there is a healthy mix between the artistry which comes first, and the marketing which comes after making the film.

[@HollyHargreaves]

2:43 Just on the Jim Cummings thing, Thunder Road was made for about $200k, I think.

[@DanLotz]

thanks for keeping the details straight, I wished I had them in front of me when I was talking, thanks for clarifying :D.

[@HollyHargreaves]

No worries Dan. I just remember him saying $200k in an interview, but I could be off. It was around that number 👌

[@dyerhaus]

It depends on which "Thunder Road" you're talking about. The 2016 "Thunder Road" short that Jim Cummings made cost roughly $11,000 to make, and all the equipment was rented. This became an instant success at Sundance and he had to dig up another $7,000 to actually get the rights to use the Springsteen song. But, due to his win at Sundance, he secured a $150,000 production deal, raised roughly $36,000 via Kickstarter, and ultimately spent $191,000 on the feature "Thunder Road" feature in 2018.

[@scottslotterbeck3796]

$200k according to IMDb.

[@dyerhaus]

@@scottslotterbeck3796 - The Trivia says it made back its $200,000 budget, but I think they're just rounding that up. Go into IMDB Pro and it lists $191,000 as the budget, and a WW gross of $458,064 (which is really good for an indie film with basically "no budget" by Hollywood standards).

[@ScottyDunn]

Great video Dan! We're in the middle of a new era. It's so new that a lot of filmmakers aren't seeing the opportunity in front of them... right here on KZbin. Great work man.

[@marklotz7193]

I think counting on yourself & your audience vs a film festival panel is the better bet

[@DanLotz]

Yeah I agree!

[@mridulchhibber]

I view this early stage of youtube filmmaking to be an untapped resource that a lot of people haven't understood the full potential of yet. Right now is the best time to make a folk film!

[@DanLotz]

Think of it like any big market before a boom. Those who want to make a splash in indie film have a chance to get in early on a big concept. 5 years from now, those who made the risky bets and moves towards creative independence will likely be rewarded.

[@JonathanEBoyd]

Very well articulated I think you're onto something .I think this is the most healthy & practical approach to indie filmmaking in this day and age

[@obscurity_films]

Great insights. I think this approach of high volume is not just a way to be profitable as an indie filmmaker, but also just a great way to improve as a filmmaker. Quantity creates quality. Reminds me of that parable of the pottery teacher who told half the class they'd focus on making one perfect pot and that they'd be graded on the quality of one pot, the other half the class was told to make as many pots as possible and they'd be graded on how many they could make. In the end all the best pots were made by the quantity group because they kept moving forward and learning from their mistakes. This is something I have to remind myself of all the time. Fail fast and fail forward.

[@DanLotz]

This is definitely the same way that I think. I'd rather make more films and fail and learn from them, then trying to focus on one masterpiece and still failing due to lack of experience. Making 5 films has taught me a LOT about how to be a better filmmakers. Thanks for the comment!

[@juliaradochia]

I find that fascinating! That is something I've found myself conflicted with. I'm glad to see there is value in just doing a lot. I do think that sometimes there could be a project that you do need to spend a little more time and care with (really depends what it is) but it makes me happy to think that when I do try to do "quickies" that it can help me get better.

[@obscurity_films]

​@@juliaradochia For sure, some projects definitely require more time and effort to do it justice. I think it's just important to realistically gauge where you're at in you're at in your filmmaking journey and how much time and resources you have available to pull of your vision. Better to make something with flaws than nothing at all. Personally, I just often find that if I spend too long on something I can start overthinking things and momentum halts because I know it won't be "perfect."

[@KayminFarmer]

Hit the nail on the head I think. I want to be one of those guys that submit shorts to festivals but I am so caught up just trying to make music and videos for the sake of it. It just feels more productive at the moment. I feel like building a long term audiance on youtube is the future. But then I feel like I am gonna try that for a few years. But maybe one day after I have 1-2 features under my belt. The festival thing might be the go for me. Like the whole benifit to being indie is we can literly make more content then hollywood in a year. Like one man can make high tier content without legislation holding him back. While the "big league" are working on one thing for 2 years. We can literly make that much if we try. Which excites me to no end.

[@DanLotz]

its an exciting time my friend :D

[@SFCFilms]

One of the solutions I see and I'm working towards is to create indie film distributions. I have created a streaming service for a niche market of positive space films, mainly due to my frustration of more and more depressing dystopian futuristic being made and decreasing inspiring positive futuristic films. I have discovered that there is a market, very small one, but I am doing my best to grow this niche market. Part of that is us indie filmmakers supporting each other, I believe cooperation is much much important as indie filmmakers than competition. I guess what I'm saying is that even though it seems a lot of doors are closing but a lot of doors are opening up. I don't know where my journey will end up but I'll give it a good go, and if I can inspire few more positive space filmmakers then I can die happy :)

[@Zegeebwah]

Indie films are dead. Shit, mid tier budget movies are dead. They dont make their money back in the theaters so all the streaming services suck them up and use them as leverage to keep people subbed. The only movies that make real money anymore are the 100 million plus blockbusters that are connected to some brand or franchise that's proven to print money and wont offend Daddy China. The only silver lining I can see is that by reducing movies to being simply "content", Netflix and all these other services are desperate for more and more movies and have let their quality control slip to the point any old garbage can get on their site as long as it's technically competent and theres a diverse enough cast. So maybe you can get a gig churning out lifeless boring movies based on an Oprah Bookclub book for Netflix for a bored lethargic audience. Keep The Dream alive!

[@LotzRemodeling]

I think the folk filmmaker movement/idea gives you more freedom

[@DanLotz]

Definitely agree :)

[@astrahcat1212]

I moved to making video games.

[@lowbudgetvisions]

Great video, Dan. Growing up and making my first movies in the '90s, I was very much in the thrall of the success stories of Smith, Rodriguez, et. al. By the time I got to film school the model that made their paths to success possible was already shifting. I thought I would go the route of making a short to submit to festivals, hopefully get in to one or two, then make more shorts, screen them at more festivals, etc. then make a feature and slowly build an audience that way. But I quickly found that route was not really in the cards. Making shorts on my own allowed me to keep working just for my own satisfaction. To me, as someone who continues to make totally DIY/no-budget movies pretty much as I always have, it's great to be able to get the work out there this way and to be able to connect and share it with others doing the same thing. Plus, this way, you can do whatever you want and make the films you want to make.

[@Two80studio]

I agree with everyone's comments, but I think it's important to support each other's work. Even if I'm not a fan someone I know might love it and that's just as important to me

[@DanLotz]

Oh I totally agree :).

[@AntoineMatuttis]

Really good video! Accurate descritpion of the indie part of our business

[@LotzofClients]

yeah, the festivals are not as relevant as they used to be, esp since Cv, and now things have changed.

[@DanLotz]

Festivals definitely have lost relevency.

[@brendalotz2218]

I love the folk filmmaker movement, bc it is a big middle finger to the festivals

[@DanLotz]

Yeah I agree!

[@popflicktionedits3256]

Just wondering, when can we see an update on The Folk Filmmakers?

[@DanLotz]

are you talking about the folk filmmakers documentary? Nothing much to update right now beyond editing starting on it. In terms of 12 features we are attempting to shoot the 3rd and 4th film simultaneously so editing has grinded to a halt on Sheepland and The folk filmmakers.

[@sjlouie]

I feel that indie films have a big obstacle to face and that is obviously the big film producer that have access to a huge budget, advertisements, equipment and manpower while indie films don’t necessarily have those opportunities. However I feel that indie films will follow in the same footsteps that indie games took in where the big film producers run out of films and ideas to make and people will eventually look to indie films to find different entertainment. I’m not too informed on this topic but from an outsiders perspective I have a slight feeling that something like this could possibly happen in the future.

[@AccipiterPictures]

Hey, Dan! I was curious about how people get put on folk filmmaking playlists. My friends and I made a feature recently that I believe fits this category, and we would love for people in the folk filmmaking community to see it

[@DanLotz]

just added it to the playlist :). Thanks for reaching out!

[@AccipiterPictures]

Thank you so much, Dan! We really appreciate it.

[@dyerhaus]

I think all in all it depends on what your goal as a filmmaker really is. I don't know if I'm a typical indie filmmaker as I'm not making films to make money. I make films because I want to tell stories and (hopefully) entertain people with those stories. My films are low-to-no budget, and are usually short films. I promote my work to my friends, family, and coworkers, as well as social media… but I don't do anything to monetize it. I don't care about that. My goal is to tell stories and entertain, and if I ever make money doing it, then that's just a bonus. The really good news with that mentality is that you never get bummed out if your film doesn't recoup your budget. It's just not a factor!

[@ryanjames4837]

Your KZbin channel is the best !! Well said Dan !!!

[@DanLotz]

Thanks :D!

[@anthonyislas5414]

I think crowdsourcing is the future for Indie films now that we live in a time where we get free content on KZbin alone. But knowing from wisdom, nothing in this world is free, someone is always paying for it. In this case, KZbin is backed by corporations with the deepest pockets in exchange for ad placement, just like how television works. Only the format has changed. But with Kickstarter, it’s much more flexible and creative in what they have to offer, including being a producer. Plus you might even build sustainable connections in the future, since we’re tapped in the same niche.

[@DanLotz]

Yeah crowdsourcing is a great way to fund your films :)

[@BattlestarGaraptica]

How do I make films if I have no money, no friends, and no writing skills?

[@DanLotz]

i made a feature film nearly entirely alone called Sheep Theater, where I played the main character who interacts with puppet creatures, I'd say the horror movie genre is probably the easiest to pull off by yourself.

[@BattlestarGaraptica]

I don’t like horror.

[@DanLotz]

@@BattlestarGaraptica what genre's interest you?

[@BattlestarGaraptica]

Dramedy and musicals

[@DanLotz]

@@BattlestarGaraptica shoot a musical by yourself or a dramedy by yourself you can do it

[@TCY-jn9nw]

So true. Good video chungus

[@joblanco9242]

As a professional photographer of 35 years , I had the production experience to embark on shooting an indie film with no money. I casted people committed to creating art on film(video) . I basically produced it all myself and relied of very little help except when it came to post. I did it for the love of art without any expectations of hitting it big or making a profit. I had no name actors and I myself am a no name director. I will tell you I am totally satisfied with just having finished my film and publishing on streaming platforms for people to see. Ultimately thats where I get my satisfaction when people watch.

[@maxniehaus1760]

This video was really a eye opener for me me and my friends are planning on making apocalypse fan film any advice from the ledgend🤘😄again great video

[@maxniehaus1760]

Sorry I ment short film

[@DanLotz]

Thanks for watching the video Max!

[@joeldik2]

Whenever you think you can't, just remember... you Cannes. Seriously though, the archaic route of making the most Hollywood-esque big-budget project you Cannes (ok I'm done) and praying that someone important sees it is not feasible anymore. Testing the market and building your skills slowly while finding your audience seems to be a pretty well thought out strategy. However, I'm sure it's not the only successful one. As filmmakers, creativity is not limited to only the production of your films anymore, you need to creatively look for ways to sell and market your work too.

[@DanLotz]

Yeah there are multiple ways to make a successful film and distribute it. This just seems to be the best way for me and you.

[@SeniorAdrian]

I think Gareth Edwards method is the best one for starting.

[@musingsofrock]

I want to be a filmmaker too.. bro.. but today the barrier to entry is low. Everybody with an iphone is a filmmaker! lol As you said, I wouldn't know what to do with the film once I finish it. If I put it up on YT, you are going to get like 100 views in 1 year for something completely unknown.

[@CrissCHG]

What is that tube that he keeps pronouncing or is it tobe ? Great topic

[@DanLotz]

I think your talking about tubitv which is a major player in the distribution of indie films now.

[@CrissCHG]

@@DanLotz yes that Thanks!!!

[@DillonVibbart]

I think you're right that the best approach for indie filmmakers is to avoid film festivals and focus on building an audience online. I've been studying distribution for awhile and it really is a broken system that doesn't allow for indie filmmakers to A) get noticed and B) recoup their investment... The one area I might disagree is that when indie filmmakers focus on building a KZbin audience (or Tubi / Vimeo), I think they should do short films and not features... at least for awhile until there is some following of your work. Like you mentioned, films are expensive and stretching $1k across a feature means the quality may not be that great, which may work against you. It's not impossible to make a great feature with little money, but it's rare and if you're wanting to stand out, I would recommend quality > quantity. I think people will remember a filmmaker's work a lot more if they put in the extra effort for each film rather than focusing on making a certain amount of films each year. But for the most part, this is spot on and I totally agree with you.

[@DanLotz]

Yeah I'm mostly just basing this on my personal experience. The more work I've done in a year has directly correlated to more success. I think quality is only as good as the quantity. If someone makes 1 good short every year, most will forgot about it because our tiny little human brains only have a million other things to remember, but if you make a consistent body of work throughout a year, you are more likely to keep people engaged. Obviously this idea is controversial, but I think on average the more successful youtube channels are ones where both quality and quantity are prioritized. Thanks so much for the comment, I always love challenging the ideas I present as a way to start an open dialogue. Hopefully people will figure out what works best for them.

[@DillonVibbart]

@@DanLotz Absolutely. I think you're exactly right here. In the age of digital distribution, quality and quantity have to be sync and spending too much time on one project (or not enough on others) can hinder your goal. Thanks for sharing!

[@DanLotz]

@@DillonVibbart Yeah honestly learned that the hard way. I used to make 1 to 2 videos a year and struggled to grow. It's when I started going weekly with my posting of videos as well as make featuring films that I found some small semblance of success.

[@LeftHandPuppetry]

You are an inspiration! Maybe the old ways *need* to die so a new style of filmmaking can arise from the ashes? 🔥🐣🔥

[@DanLotz]

I think its time for the old ways to be put to rest, and the new ways to forge a path for the next generation of filmmakers :). Thanks for commenting

[@flikkrstudios]

Awesome video!

[@DanLotz]

Now you know what I was editing!

[@sir_greendown]

Wish there was a somewhat popular KZbin channel that would take indie film submissions like those short horror film KZbin channels

[@DanLotz]

Yeah I've thought about that as well!

[@janesax4001]

The system is broken sadly

[@DanLotz]

I know!

[@GreaterGrander]

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but the business model for the communities that you're referencing mainly revolve around short form content, not features or long-form storytelling. A few examples are Corridor Digital, Casey Neistat, MrBeast, etc.

[@DanLotz]

But I could see a hybrid model that benefits both short and feature length content. Sort of a one for you one for me approach. Do short films and short content for the fans to build an audience ( what Im doing now) and then also make your dream feature projects and release them to that audience.

[@yelsinneklibfimayisyenniafou]

Gracias great idea 💡

[@DanLotz]

Glad you like the idea!

[@DehorseProductions]

Let’s fix it!

[@FilmshooterOH]

Great insights for the small indie producer. It really is a numbers game if you want be successful in that world on a long period of time. I subbed your channel. My only negative comment is that pulsating light behind you is really distracting.

[@uktruecrime]

to be honest, i agree with everything he says, however, towards the end, when he stresses working from the bottom up, I realised that thats what everyone is already doing. I mean, are people really still using the premise he starts off with? he might as well have a video arguing against using celluiloid and accepting they will never make it like in the 1940s as its all digital and can even be filmed on a phone. sort of a 'duh' moment.

[@nothingnobodynever]

Dan, I'll always respect the passion and I've seen the sincerity in your creativity, but then you fall back on this line of thinking and preach it to others. I don't see the point of calling oneself independent and saying the goals are to break away from the system when the goals and methodology practiced are the exact same as the Hollywood studio system. It seems to me there's been this long-standing trend to use "independent" as a means of leveraging an audience. The approach, like the films themselves, is simply a stepping stone on the path to bigger, more profitable things. And it's so infecting that it can change the way you view the very craft. So many seem to equate financial investment with the quality of a film, and so they resolve themselves to the idea that a low budget film can never rival the "quality" of a Hollywood film. Film is film, and it's the business that is a wholly separate entity. You, Haver, Cummings and many others before seem to have conflated your self worth when making a film with the financial value imposed by an outside system. I've repeatedly pointed this flawed mindset out within the premise of a "folk film movement", and it's something present in a lot of the people that call themselves independent. You want to break away from "bad" Hollywood because their goals are amassing the largest audience possible and making as much money as possible, meanwhile independents should focus on amassing the largest audience possible and making as much money as possible. Money and movies are not the same thing, yet it seems a lot focus in on dressing money making up as movie making which is concerning to me when it's broadcast to others as a path to follow.

[@DanLotz]

My question is what is the alternative then? In your world of film, film should made solely for 1000 percent altruistic purposes (4 of my 5 films aren't even monetized because I care so little about the money and have soundtracks which prohibits me from earning from those films on youtube). I run a youtube channel that talks about all aspects of being a successful indie filmmaker, from producing content, editing it, releasing it, and marketing it. I couldn't in good conscious tell people "f*ck it" about how to release their film in order to recoup the most of their investment. At some point the only way for indie filmmakers to directly compete with hollywood is to build their own audience and their own means of production and if that doesn't jive with your idea of indie film I can really respect that, the mere fact we are friends despite our disagreement is a testament to that fact, but perhaps we just have different definitions. I want to be able to do this for 30 years from now and that requires me to make artistically satisfying work for myself as well as making revenue if possible. I have bills to pay and this is slowly becoming my full time job as well as my artistic passion and hobby. I hope you can understand my answer. I feel my biggest problem with this line of questioning, is that it assumes making money is some corrupt form of selling out, if I really wanted to be a money hungry person, I'd get involved in basically any other career, I'm just trying real hard to make this a reality as a full time career and I don't think anything is wrong with that. Nowhere in the video did I suggest if the film makes money that means its a good movie, many terrible movies make a ton of money. Correlation does not equal causation. Have a good one man, I respect you always challenging my views.

[@nothingnobodynever]

@@DanLotz I'm going to unpack the content of your comment and then circle back to your initial question. First off, I do think we have different definitions. Again, the filmmaking and business are two separate things. So when a lot of the rhetoric you use on this channel circles back in one way or another to investment, revenue, marketing, it does make me question the cause, especially if finances are considered a factor for measuring success. Competing with Hollywood isn't a game of who has the higher view count, and is no real way to measure a film in any case. I apologize if any of this has come across as having a negative bent towards making money; that's not my point. My issue is with conflating business and film. When you say you're going to talk about film making and you talk about money making instead, it just seems like there is some sort of confusion. I too enjoy your friendship and really respect your talents, which is why it's concerning to see any system or business make you feel anything other than successful. I don't ever challenge for its own sake, but because I do want to see you satisfied in your pursuits. I like probably a good portion of your audience also have a fair share of bills to handle, but I don't really think it's a healthy thing to impose a financial pressure onto the art we create. To me, independent film is about the craft, the production, the film, and the community. The only debts are to the medium and the return on investment felt internally through the process of watching and making films is greater than any bank statement. It's not easy, it's not always rewarding in a traditional sense, it's not for everybody, and that's okay. I'm also okay with the fact that I could be wrong in this approach, but at this moment I don't think I am.

[@DanLotz]

@@nothingnobodynever I think we just view it differently. Ultimately indie film's most important contributions to my life have been the community, the art, and the craft. That's what I care about deep down, I've said to many people I'd rather live under a bridge than lose being a filmmaker especially one with creative independence. The money is at a level where its insignificant to the art I'm producing (even if it did get to be quite significant I wouldn't change my films or their stories/meaning just because I got more money). But I run a channel about filmmaking and the business of filmmaking. I run a channel about my life and what I am experiencing through this journey. Perhaps the format of the title confused you but I don't think its wrong for me to talk film business as well as indie filmmaking in different videos. To me the art, community, and craft comes first, but if I can offset a few grand a year by making smart business decisions than I will. I see inherently no negative to growing a larger audience and making more money. The more people who are drawn to my films likely suggests they might enjoy them. I find that to be exciting that random people can stumble onto my channel and be enticed to check out my work. I think where I ultimately disagree is assuming that focusing at all on business or money makes you not care about the art. I've never set out to make a film because its specifically a money maker. Hell I would've just printed Chlorine dvd's the week it got shouted out by austin if I wanted a quick check. But it frustrates me when I'm trying to make educational videos hopefully to set people more financially free to create art that people assume worst intent. Ideally in my world if I could make money doing this full time it would give me more time and effort to put into this, which is currently spent editing videos for companies so I can pay the bills. Thanks for commenting and I know will probably discuss this in the future. A good healthy debate my friend!

[@brycespencer6732]

"Indie film is dead." Not as long as you guys are still alive. 👍

[@DanLotz]

well shucks!

[@scottslotterbeck3796]

Make shorts for yourself. Only make a film if it must be made.

[@simpleetfunky7062]

The problem with indies films are some of them are really not good enough!!! No budget director try to compete with Hollywood or big indies films without any budget . Internet is a great tool for connecting your audience and artists need to understand how to use marketing, personal branding etc And last , be original!!!! You don’t need to be so serious, you can make movie who are fun The book of Alex Ferrari : rise of the filmtrepreneur is really helpful!!!

[@DanLotz]

Yeah I totally agree. I think making fun or original works is the way we compete with hollywood. We cant necessarily out spend them or outdo the scale of their films so lets at least try to be more original and direct with our audiences.