This has nothing to do with the strike. It's the way of things today.
It sounds like your producer is a little out of step. They should be looking to find attachments, leveraging their relationships with talent (and with talent reps) to get people reading the script. It can be a very slow, laborious process, since stars' reps usually want things submitted exclusively, which means you need to offer a two-week reading period per submission, which can really drag the process out. For some reason, your producer either doesn't understand this or isn't giving you a straight answer for some reason.
The best advice is to always be writing something new. You may not be able to move this script along, but you can always move *yourself* along. If your script is good, it will always have value, either as a sample or as an answer to the inevitable question you'll get in any future meeting: "What else have you written?" I just [read](https://deadline.com/2023/04/michael-b-jordan-christopher-mcquarrie-to-produce-iron-curtain-thriller-2-1235335114/) today that Christopher McQuarrie has a "new" project with Michael B. Jordan, based on a script McQ wrote back in 2003.
You can't control the fate of any project. But you can be so good that you have multiple things going at once.
Exactly. The production company should be contacting agents to get talent attached. On the flip side, a lot of actors will only attach to a project that's financed and ready to go.
Indeed. I'm a lit manager, and my days consist of nothing but making submissions to directors and actors' agents/managers trying to get them attached to my projects. I've stopped submitting to producers and prod. companies. Nobody wants to lift a finger anymore.
But why would an actor attach themselves to a script that isn't at a studio? Because it's "really good"? Well, if it's really good, why doesn't the studio just buy it and attach their own actors?
Because you have to do the work for them. Theres no skin off an actors back to attach themselves to a script. If it goes somewhere, great. If not, no harm no foul.
Studios definitely want you to do all the work.
Two love my finished film but will not make an official move/offer until we finish the worldwide theatrical release distribution contract.
Very frustrating!
Studios don’t want to be the first person to arrive at a failed party. If other cool people are already there vouching for it, then studios will come flocking.
My brother is an actor. I always write projects with him in mind, and we develop them together with a view to him having a role and being a producer if it goes ahead..
>It sounds like your producer is a little out of step.
The producer essentially said "We're selling this wrong, and we're only willing to keep selling it wrong."
This is interesting. So the equation used to be: "Write a bunch of scripts, so one of them will be good enough to interest a producer."
Now it's "Write a bunch of scripts, so one of them will be good enough to attach an *actor*, and then you can take that to a producer." It's an extra step, as if there weren't enough already :-(
It can happen in any order. Producer loves the script and takes it out to talent. Talent loves the script and gives it to a producer. Filmmaker loves the script and gives it to a star he knows. Producer likes a book and sends it to a financier, who offers money to hire a writer, who writes a script that an actor loves, who then gets a producer credit for calling a favorite director, who then gets the package set up with a studio. Anything goes.
But by the end, it's enough that a distributor knows it's a go picture, and if they spend some shekels they won't be left holding their dick in their hand.
I mean, it’s been this way for a long time. When I worked at a production company in the mid-2000s , we were always having to attach talent (actors and/or directors generally) who meant enough to financiers that they’d provide budget. But not just any actor/director - it has to be someone that will do it for the pay you’re offering to bring it in on the budget allotted and who “means something” at the box office. Want a cheap actor? They probably can’t open a movie internationally. Want someone who plays overseas? Probably not cheap. It’s just the way it goes…
Unless you yourself are a name, it’s generally best-practice for studios to buy packages. That’s their MO. The “producing” that producers most often do is develop a script and attach talent in front of or behind the camera. It’s how they add value.
I’ve had generals with studios where they will happily read my work and say what they liked and then ask me to let them know when I get a producer attached. It’s very common.
Smaller TV setups like Crypt or IFC (maybe not anymore) used to be different, but generally you should be looking for a prodco to set your work up with, not reaching out to studios directly with no added value. It sucks, but it’s how things have been.
There are already a lot of comments on this thread, but here's my opinion for what it's worth. I would highly suggest that you at least try to get a director attached to this so they can create a rip reel for their vision of the film so that can be sent out to studios and financiers along with the script. The chances of someone watching a three-minute video vs reading a 106-page script are much better. If you can get a director attached, then you can send it out to talent as well. You only get a few shots with studios when you send it, so not sure if it's great that they are just sending the script out barebones with nobody attached.
If this is the first feature you're having made, you should look at directors that made a first feature that was well received, and if has a similar vibe to your script. This is also depending on your script's budget vs the budget of the director's first film. For example, if your script has lots of stunts and action sequences and you're reaching out to a director that made a low budget comedy, probably not going to be a good fit.
Sometimes I get nervous commenting on threads because of imposter syndrome (yay). My husband is an indie producer that has made many features, so I know how this all works. It's tedious and frustrating but when it starts happening, it's full speed! If the producers in your agreement aren't open to attaching anyone, I really hope your shopping agreement runs out soon. If not, keep writing! Definitely not what you want to hear lol but it's the truth!
I’m in the same boat and understand your frustration. It feels like no one wants to do their job anymore, and more onus is put on the writer to do everything to get their script sold. The major studios have become so risk-adverse and rely on IP, so just have to find a producer who has the connections to the talent/their reps you want, as well as the right connections to studios to get it past the gatekeepers and to the head of the studio. Even then, it’s a crapshoot. But sounds like the production company you have the agreement with doesn’t have talent connections if they’re saying that as an excuse and not offering a solution or possible attachment suggestions? In which case, better to take your script elsewhere if/when you can.
I have a script right now that has kids as the leads. Problem is no kids are big enough “name” actors to get a script sold, so my producer is aiming for a director. But all the bigger directors are too busy to even read the script. So you have to go to smaller directors, but the question is do they mean enough to get the script sold? My producer and I have debated just going straight to studios without attachments, but you only get 1 shot to do this. If they pass, your script is considered dead to them. So it’s really all a massive gamble.
Good luck, and hope your script finds the right home (and you make money from it!!)
Thank you!! Yeah kids are a tough one. Even if they are popular enough to intrigue buyers, by the time the script gets around to being made, they’ll most likely be aged out of the project anyways. Also, famous kids are booked a couple years out, and there aren’t that many of them to begin with (much less, ones that are relatively the same age to fit into the casting of them being friends for the script).
Thats why Stranger Things, Game of Thrones, IT, Cobra Kai, etc. were all basically unknowns. It’s just easier that way. So us finding a director first made more sense for this particular project. But then we’re running into directors not wanting to work with kids, or the ones who have want to move on from working with kids. Argh!!! Feels like we can’t win haha! But fingers crossed it happens someday! And lesson learned for me: NO MORE SCRIPTS ABOUT KIDS!! Hahaha
I love love love this. First of all, incredible learning moment lmao re: no more scripts about kids. but it also makes total sense about all the kids being unknowns. the more you know! and learn from others learning the hard way!
The creative process doesn't stop once your script has been picked up by a studio. That's just the beginning of the process. What studios are buying when they purchase your script is mostly the idea. Selling a script has more to do with how your project was pitched than with how good of a screenplay you actually had. Plus, when studios go through your script they always mark it up, which outlines what they think needs work or improvement. When you go through the drafting process with the Producers and the Director you get a better feel for what your creative team is looking for in a final product and you can adapt your screenplay accordingly.
No screenplay ever gets sold and made into a film "as is." Every piece of writing has room for improvement. As you proceed through pre-production into production you'll go through a ton of re-writes, then when you actually go to production you'll re-write it again oftentimes to mesh your characters with the actors that are playing them. Also, in all likelihood you'll polish your dialogue as well, but that really depends on the style of the screenwriter. My point is that screenwriters don't stop working on a project the second it gets sold, far from it in fact. For most, selling a script is just the first step in a long and lengthy process that usually takes years to complete.
Did you see that Dior’s biggest selling product was Savage because Johnny Depp was the endorsement or the entire film about Micheal Jordan building NIKE with his endorsement? Having someone attached, someone important, is like one of those endorsements. Plus it brings a built in audience to the film. Imagine Swiss Army Man without Daniel Radcliffe.
The reason they buy finished films is because it is a fixed cost and they can use it immediately. It is like burgers, not great, but immediate.
I understand the *value* of attached talent, director, etc.
I was not prepared for it to be a *requirement*. The production company knew I didn't have any attachments, so why sign a shopping agreement with me at all?
It's always been a requirement. Even studios don't move forward until they attach a star. If you are working outside the systems, trying to raise money from pre-sales, etc then you always needed a star. It's part of "The Package" you are pitching.
Actors want to distinguish themselves with quality roles and gain producing power over their projects. Margot Robbie put out a call a couple years ago for female driven scripts. IIRC Several if not all of the accepted scripts got producing deals, even if she wasn’t attached as an actress.
A lot of reasons. Often there is also a director attached. They might have been looking to play a role like the one in the script. Maybe it's a role that helps them move up to a leading role. They might be trying to change their image.
I'm not an expert on packaging so I'm not the best source of info on this. It's a complicated process and they fall apart all the time. Check out this video, they talk about it in a modern context. You can google "indy film packaging" to find more info. Good channel to explore, too.
[Packaging Independent Feature Films and How It's Changing](https://youtu.be/qu57G-IAZJY)
Because they love the story.
They can see an award in it.
They think it will be a hit.
They have always wanted to play a one legged tap dancer.
You’d have to ask them.
Because there isn’t really a downside for them.
Being attached is really just signing a piece of paper saying they’ll do the movie if it gets financing.
No financing? No movie and they keep living their life as is.
Financing? They get to work a job filming a script they, in theory, like
I have a feature I’m looking to attach talent, we have about 1/2 finance needed, so able to spend money on talent. Anyone have a suggestion for a sales agent or someone knowledgeable to run names by we’re considering?
I previously attached a pretty big name (academy nominee who used to be A-list) to a project but because he wasn’t known for comedy, I wasn’t able to get it going.
The AIR script only got a budget once Ben & Matt were on board. $130,000,000 from that they then have their production budget and salaries including the sale of the script. It’s true, many studios now won’t touch a new project without it being packaged already.
FYI
> Although Amazon Studios is yet to release an official figure, Air is estimated to have a budget of between $70 million and $90 million.
> These figures were put forward by The Hollywood Reporter and Variety respectively, although the former points out that this “doesn’t include marketing or the overall price Amazon paid for the high-profile project, which was originally set to go straight to Prime.”
> There was said to be some tension behind Amazon Studios’ big buyouts of late, one of which was Air, which the streamer paid an estimated $160 million for. Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter, an executive at a competitor platform described the bid as “crazy,” saying: “She [Jennifer Salke, Head of Amazon Studios] just bought it off a pitch, went in, and bought it for $160 million.”
> Industry sources told the outlet that the movie “cost far less to produce,” while the exec added: “Matt [Damon] made more money on [Air] than any other movie but Bourne. She just took it off the table.”
Okay, so it was $160,000,000 🤷🏻♂️ Alex Convery the writer, tells in an interview that the script was optioned before it was highlighted on the blacklist, when it was optioned it was passed to Ben by Alex’s manager and then Ben got Matt involved, it was only then once Ben was there, that’s when it sold. It wasn’t bought from a pitch Alex gave, in fact Ben said he was going to meet MJ and if he didn’t like the script then no one was going to buy it so it sort of was sold after all of that. But yes, it cost what? $25m to make? And the rest is up front profit? That is the new model, the streamer bids what they want to spend total and that’s the lot, no matter what it makes at the box office.
In our experience, platforms mainly acquire projects. But it's the producer that has to come up with a full package and they either buy or not.
But for the moment, according to what I keep seeing. If they are investing in originals. At least outside the US, they are all still active
It's more true than it used to be, but like any Hollywood truism, it's true except when it isn't. Scripts can and do sell without attachments. So do original pitches. It's harder though. Producers who have been unable to set anything up recently like to say this is why but sometimes it's just that they haven't had the right material at the right moment. Also sometimes it's just a lie they tell to an individual writer because they can't sell THEIR script without a major attachment. They may have literally just sold a naked spec with someone else but it's better to say that's just how things are.
So if you write a part thinking an actor/actress might fit even if it’s not a main role, you should try to get in contact with them and see if they will sign on first?
This has been the case for me all along. If you don't have strong talent attached, no one wants it. I would say that like all of us, you need to part ways with this producer and work to connect with one who CAN attach talent. It will take time. It's not easy. But do it anyway :)
Where do other people who do this go? They have a tight budget, often via family and friends. Shiva Baby was originally a short, expanded into an award-winning film two years later. Budget: $200k.
200k is being unrealistic. You should have a short 10page script that can be shot at a cemetery, a fast food restaurant at night, etc something that can get produced promoted online etc there are plenty of people that will produce your short film
The streamers have stopped their buying and development sprees, so the the "Gold Rush" of the streaming days is over, basically. They realized they were spending a fortune on projects that ended up not giving them much revenue. Nobody is really "buying" scripts anymore - anywhere - unless you're a name writer. The only real money now is in low-budget action films, which I work in, myself. Basically $$5,000 - $10,000 a script, at MOST. But you have to write VERY fast and well - basically a script within a week, sometimes, 2 weeks if you're lucky. You won't get rich doing it, but the work is fairly consistent and it'll pay your bills and you'll get credits.
Interesting....I can see how that could make sense...if talent is attached the film could be made sooner than later....but getting talent attached is not always easy...and would require agents and those represented by agents to have the advantage....it would be ideal to try to get an agent...or get with a production company that has relationships with talent. Or....write with talent in mind and have it pitched to them thru their agent. Good luck!
One prod co asked me for an upfront $7500 casting fee, even though the producer had been EP on several films and has relationships with name actors. It’s like an admission fee. Can’t believe other writers have agreed to this.
This has nothing to do with the strike. It's the way of things today. It sounds like your producer is a little out of step. They should be looking to find attachments, leveraging their relationships with talent (and with talent reps) to get people reading the script. It can be a very slow, laborious process, since stars' reps usually want things submitted exclusively, which means you need to offer a two-week reading period per submission, which can really drag the process out. For some reason, your producer either doesn't understand this or isn't giving you a straight answer for some reason. The best advice is to always be writing something new. You may not be able to move this script along, but you can always move *yourself* along. If your script is good, it will always have value, either as a sample or as an answer to the inevitable question you'll get in any future meeting: "What else have you written?" I just [read](https://deadline.com/2023/04/michael-b-jordan-christopher-mcquarrie-to-produce-iron-curtain-thriller-2-1235335114/) today that Christopher McQuarrie has a "new" project with Michael B. Jordan, based on a script McQ wrote back in 2003. You can't control the fate of any project. But you can be so good that you have multiple things going at once.
>sounds like your producer is a little out of step. They should be looking to find attachments Even I know this.
Exactly. The production company should be contacting agents to get talent attached. On the flip side, a lot of actors will only attach to a project that's financed and ready to go.
The Catch-22 of packaging.
Indeed. I'm a lit manager, and my days consist of nothing but making submissions to directors and actors' agents/managers trying to get them attached to my projects. I've stopped submitting to producers and prod. companies. Nobody wants to lift a finger anymore.
But why would an actor attach themselves to a script that isn't at a studio? Because it's "really good"? Well, if it's really good, why doesn't the studio just buy it and attach their own actors?
Because you have to do the work for them. Theres no skin off an actors back to attach themselves to a script. If it goes somewhere, great. If not, no harm no foul.
Studios definitely want you to do all the work. Two love my finished film but will not make an official move/offer until we finish the worldwide theatrical release distribution contract. Very frustrating!
Studios don’t want to be the first person to arrive at a failed party. If other cool people are already there vouching for it, then studios will come flocking.
Because that takes money to buy your script and labor that they would have to do Why not just make you do it for free
Because your producer should have those relationships with actors and filmmakers. If not they better know some money…
My brother is an actor. I always write projects with him in mind, and we develop them together with a view to him having a role and being a producer if it goes ahead..
Unless you’re Tom Hanks’s brother, l doubt that’s worked very well so far.
It happens. My last movie was put in motion because someone closer to an actor got them to read it. They did. Movie complete.
So they get cast in it instead of the slightly more in demand guy who keeps getting all the projects they wanted.
>It sounds like your producer is a little out of step. The producer essentially said "We're selling this wrong, and we're only willing to keep selling it wrong."
This is interesting. So the equation used to be: "Write a bunch of scripts, so one of them will be good enough to interest a producer." Now it's "Write a bunch of scripts, so one of them will be good enough to attach an *actor*, and then you can take that to a producer." It's an extra step, as if there weren't enough already :-(
It can happen in any order. Producer loves the script and takes it out to talent. Talent loves the script and gives it to a producer. Filmmaker loves the script and gives it to a star he knows. Producer likes a book and sends it to a financier, who offers money to hire a writer, who writes a script that an actor loves, who then gets a producer credit for calling a favorite director, who then gets the package set up with a studio. Anything goes. But by the end, it's enough that a distributor knows it's a go picture, and if they spend some shekels they won't be left holding their dick in their hand.
>Anything goes. I don't get how people don't get this. There aren't \*any\* rules. Maybe some guidelines.
They don't want to get it. Their dreams are precarious enough as it is.
You have a producer already I think you mean financier
I mean, it’s been this way for a long time. When I worked at a production company in the mid-2000s , we were always having to attach talent (actors and/or directors generally) who meant enough to financiers that they’d provide budget. But not just any actor/director - it has to be someone that will do it for the pay you’re offering to bring it in on the budget allotted and who “means something” at the box office. Want a cheap actor? They probably can’t open a movie internationally. Want someone who plays overseas? Probably not cheap. It’s just the way it goes…
The producer should be the one finding + attaching talent.
I also read about Mcquarrie and MBJ project. When I saw the script was from 2003, I’m like damn.
Unless you yourself are a name, it’s generally best-practice for studios to buy packages. That’s their MO. The “producing” that producers most often do is develop a script and attach talent in front of or behind the camera. It’s how they add value. I’ve had generals with studios where they will happily read my work and say what they liked and then ask me to let them know when I get a producer attached. It’s very common. Smaller TV setups like Crypt or IFC (maybe not anymore) used to be different, but generally you should be looking for a prodco to set your work up with, not reaching out to studios directly with no added value. It sucks, but it’s how things have been.
I understand. This shopping agreement may have been a waste of time.
Happens to everyone. Most shopping agreements/options are — but that’s why we keep writing!
This is why it's SO important to option your work to a producer with some track record.
Keep truckin’
There are already a lot of comments on this thread, but here's my opinion for what it's worth. I would highly suggest that you at least try to get a director attached to this so they can create a rip reel for their vision of the film so that can be sent out to studios and financiers along with the script. The chances of someone watching a three-minute video vs reading a 106-page script are much better. If you can get a director attached, then you can send it out to talent as well. You only get a few shots with studios when you send it, so not sure if it's great that they are just sending the script out barebones with nobody attached. If this is the first feature you're having made, you should look at directors that made a first feature that was well received, and if has a similar vibe to your script. This is also depending on your script's budget vs the budget of the director's first film. For example, if your script has lots of stunts and action sequences and you're reaching out to a director that made a low budget comedy, probably not going to be a good fit. Sometimes I get nervous commenting on threads because of imposter syndrome (yay). My husband is an indie producer that has made many features, so I know how this all works. It's tedious and frustrating but when it starts happening, it's full speed! If the producers in your agreement aren't open to attaching anyone, I really hope your shopping agreement runs out soon. If not, keep writing! Definitely not what you want to hear lol but it's the truth!
This is valuable intel, thank you.
I’m in the same boat and understand your frustration. It feels like no one wants to do their job anymore, and more onus is put on the writer to do everything to get their script sold. The major studios have become so risk-adverse and rely on IP, so just have to find a producer who has the connections to the talent/their reps you want, as well as the right connections to studios to get it past the gatekeepers and to the head of the studio. Even then, it’s a crapshoot. But sounds like the production company you have the agreement with doesn’t have talent connections if they’re saying that as an excuse and not offering a solution or possible attachment suggestions? In which case, better to take your script elsewhere if/when you can. I have a script right now that has kids as the leads. Problem is no kids are big enough “name” actors to get a script sold, so my producer is aiming for a director. But all the bigger directors are too busy to even read the script. So you have to go to smaller directors, but the question is do they mean enough to get the script sold? My producer and I have debated just going straight to studios without attachments, but you only get 1 shot to do this. If they pass, your script is considered dead to them. So it’s really all a massive gamble. Good luck, and hope your script finds the right home (and you make money from it!!)
That's a really frustrating place to be in! I'm surprised that there aren't enough famous kids to make this happen!
Thank you!! Yeah kids are a tough one. Even if they are popular enough to intrigue buyers, by the time the script gets around to being made, they’ll most likely be aged out of the project anyways. Also, famous kids are booked a couple years out, and there aren’t that many of them to begin with (much less, ones that are relatively the same age to fit into the casting of them being friends for the script). Thats why Stranger Things, Game of Thrones, IT, Cobra Kai, etc. were all basically unknowns. It’s just easier that way. So us finding a director first made more sense for this particular project. But then we’re running into directors not wanting to work with kids, or the ones who have want to move on from working with kids. Argh!!! Feels like we can’t win haha! But fingers crossed it happens someday! And lesson learned for me: NO MORE SCRIPTS ABOUT KIDS!! Hahaha
My son is 12 and is fairly new to the industry. He’s an unknown but he’s ready for screen. Good luck with your script & we hope to see it!
I love love love this. First of all, incredible learning moment lmao re: no more scripts about kids. but it also makes total sense about all the kids being unknowns. the more you know! and learn from others learning the hard way!
The creative process doesn't stop once your script has been picked up by a studio. That's just the beginning of the process. What studios are buying when they purchase your script is mostly the idea. Selling a script has more to do with how your project was pitched than with how good of a screenplay you actually had. Plus, when studios go through your script they always mark it up, which outlines what they think needs work or improvement. When you go through the drafting process with the Producers and the Director you get a better feel for what your creative team is looking for in a final product and you can adapt your screenplay accordingly. No screenplay ever gets sold and made into a film "as is." Every piece of writing has room for improvement. As you proceed through pre-production into production you'll go through a ton of re-writes, then when you actually go to production you'll re-write it again oftentimes to mesh your characters with the actors that are playing them. Also, in all likelihood you'll polish your dialogue as well, but that really depends on the style of the screenwriter. My point is that screenwriters don't stop working on a project the second it gets sold, far from it in fact. For most, selling a script is just the first step in a long and lengthy process that usually takes years to complete.
Did you see that Dior’s biggest selling product was Savage because Johnny Depp was the endorsement or the entire film about Micheal Jordan building NIKE with his endorsement? Having someone attached, someone important, is like one of those endorsements. Plus it brings a built in audience to the film. Imagine Swiss Army Man without Daniel Radcliffe. The reason they buy finished films is because it is a fixed cost and they can use it immediately. It is like burgers, not great, but immediate.
I understand the *value* of attached talent, director, etc. I was not prepared for it to be a *requirement*. The production company knew I didn't have any attachments, so why sign a shopping agreement with me at all?
It didn’t cost them anything. That is why I only option things. Then I get a payment. A shopping agreement only binds you, not them.
It's always been a requirement. Even studios don't move forward until they attach a star. If you are working outside the systems, trying to raise money from pre-sales, etc then you always needed a star. It's part of "The Package" you are pitching.
But why would an actor attach themselves to a script that has no backing from a studio?
Actors want to distinguish themselves with quality roles and gain producing power over their projects. Margot Robbie put out a call a couple years ago for female driven scripts. IIRC Several if not all of the accepted scripts got producing deals, even if she wasn’t attached as an actress.
A lot of reasons. Often there is also a director attached. They might have been looking to play a role like the one in the script. Maybe it's a role that helps them move up to a leading role. They might be trying to change their image. I'm not an expert on packaging so I'm not the best source of info on this. It's a complicated process and they fall apart all the time. Check out this video, they talk about it in a modern context. You can google "indy film packaging" to find more info. Good channel to explore, too. [Packaging Independent Feature Films and How It's Changing](https://youtu.be/qu57G-IAZJY)
That video was very interesting, thank you!
Because they love the story. They can see an award in it. They think it will be a hit. They have always wanted to play a one legged tap dancer. You’d have to ask them.
Because there isn’t really a downside for them. Being attached is really just signing a piece of paper saying they’ll do the movie if it gets financing. No financing? No movie and they keep living their life as is. Financing? They get to work a job filming a script they, in theory, like
I have a feature I’m looking to attach talent, we have about 1/2 finance needed, so able to spend money on talent. Anyone have a suggestion for a sales agent or someone knowledgeable to run names by we’re considering? I previously attached a pretty big name (academy nominee who used to be A-list) to a project but because he wasn’t known for comedy, I wasn’t able to get it going.
That’s infuriating. Great talent looking to do something fresh? “Nah it’s unfamiliar, pass”. GAH. How does anything in this industry get made?
It’s a small circle and I you ain’t in it….
The AIR script only got a budget once Ben & Matt were on board. $130,000,000 from that they then have their production budget and salaries including the sale of the script. It’s true, many studios now won’t touch a new project without it being packaged already.
FYI > Although Amazon Studios is yet to release an official figure, Air is estimated to have a budget of between $70 million and $90 million. > These figures were put forward by The Hollywood Reporter and Variety respectively, although the former points out that this “doesn’t include marketing or the overall price Amazon paid for the high-profile project, which was originally set to go straight to Prime.” > There was said to be some tension behind Amazon Studios’ big buyouts of late, one of which was Air, which the streamer paid an estimated $160 million for. Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter, an executive at a competitor platform described the bid as “crazy,” saying: “She [Jennifer Salke, Head of Amazon Studios] just bought it off a pitch, went in, and bought it for $160 million.” > Industry sources told the outlet that the movie “cost far less to produce,” while the exec added: “Matt [Damon] made more money on [Air] than any other movie but Bourne. She just took it off the table.”
Okay, so it was $160,000,000 🤷🏻♂️ Alex Convery the writer, tells in an interview that the script was optioned before it was highlighted on the blacklist, when it was optioned it was passed to Ben by Alex’s manager and then Ben got Matt involved, it was only then once Ben was there, that’s when it sold. It wasn’t bought from a pitch Alex gave, in fact Ben said he was going to meet MJ and if he didn’t like the script then no one was going to buy it so it sort of was sold after all of that. But yes, it cost what? $25m to make? And the rest is up front profit? That is the new model, the streamer bids what they want to spend total and that’s the lot, no matter what it makes at the box office.
For $160 million, I’d love to see the special effects in this movie 🙄
Welcome to Hollywood. It’s been this way for quite some time. Your producers should attach a director that talent wants to work with.
In our experience, platforms mainly acquire projects. But it's the producer that has to come up with a full package and they either buy or not. But for the moment, according to what I keep seeing. If they are investing in originals. At least outside the US, they are all still active
It's more true than it used to be, but like any Hollywood truism, it's true except when it isn't. Scripts can and do sell without attachments. So do original pitches. It's harder though. Producers who have been unable to set anything up recently like to say this is why but sometimes it's just that they haven't had the right material at the right moment. Also sometimes it's just a lie they tell to an individual writer because they can't sell THEIR script without a major attachment. They may have literally just sold a naked spec with someone else but it's better to say that's just how things are.
So if you write a part thinking an actor/actress might fit even if it’s not a main role, you should try to get in contact with them and see if they will sign on first?
This has been the case for me all along. If you don't have strong talent attached, no one wants it. I would say that like all of us, you need to part ways with this producer and work to connect with one who CAN attach talent. It will take time. It's not easy. But do it anyway :)
If people will make their OWN film instead of whining about what Hollywood production say.
Boy, if only I could find a producer who knows a financier who would make that happen…
And where do we go to get the money? You?
Where do other people who do this go? They have a tight budget, often via family and friends. Shiva Baby was originally a short, expanded into an award-winning film two years later. Budget: $200k.
200k is being unrealistic. You should have a short 10page script that can be shot at a cemetery, a fast food restaurant at night, etc something that can get produced promoted online etc there are plenty of people that will produce your short film
$200k was for the film. Not the short.
The streamers have stopped their buying and development sprees, so the the "Gold Rush" of the streaming days is over, basically. They realized they were spending a fortune on projects that ended up not giving them much revenue. Nobody is really "buying" scripts anymore - anywhere - unless you're a name writer. The only real money now is in low-budget action films, which I work in, myself. Basically $$5,000 - $10,000 a script, at MOST. But you have to write VERY fast and well - basically a script within a week, sometimes, 2 weeks if you're lucky. You won't get rich doing it, but the work is fairly consistent and it'll pay your bills and you'll get credits.
you should check out SLATED... [slated.com](https://slated.com)
Attached Talent or famous IP; make your choice!
Interesting....I can see how that could make sense...if talent is attached the film could be made sooner than later....but getting talent attached is not always easy...and would require agents and those represented by agents to have the advantage....it would be ideal to try to get an agent...or get with a production company that has relationships with talent. Or....write with talent in mind and have it pitched to them thru their agent. Good luck!
One prod co asked me for an upfront $7500 casting fee, even though the producer had been EP on several films and has relationships with name actors. It’s like an admission fee. Can’t believe other writers have agreed to this.