Quoted from Grandma Bear As far as insurance goes, I had crew, cast, equipment and a national monument fort insured for 48hrs for $325. That's not too bad. I would never do anything uninsured. As far as the shadows go, I wouldn't worry too much about that. A boat is never stationary in the water, so the shadows would be moving around anyway. Dustin, poisoning???????  What????

Anything's possible, but with some stories you are compromising more than with others.

The ideal low budget script is one that can be made without compromise, imo.

This is why something like Blair Witch is a good low budget film (I don't actually like it, but that's not the point). If you made that film with millions it wouldn't be more effective. The low budget style is perfect for the story.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Anything's possible, but with some stories you are compromising more than with others. The ideal low budget script is one that can be made without compromise, imo.

This. I've read a few scripts in this challenge that yes, you could probably physically shoot for a small amount. But they wouldn't really be 'as written'.

I agree that most of the scripts are well written but quite a few have a fairly average story. Some have rushed or unfulfilled endings. It's only my opinion but the sheer openendedness (is that a word lol) of theme leads to that. The classic monsters have no real goals except killing people I guess.

Harking back to past Halloween challenges, the 2010 always remains the best in my time here. Squeezing a wheelchair, an abandoned house, one female char all set on Halloween eve made for some truly great scripts.

Anyway just my view is all.  Maybe the next challenge could be a pure comedy theme. That would rock.

I've lost track of which ones I've read in this one, so PM me if want a read. Cheers

This was just fun. Three of my better written shorts all came out of an OWC. I guess the restrictions, time limit, page limit has something to do with it.

Quoted from SAC This was just fun. Three of my better written shorts all came out of an OWC. I guess the restrictions, time limit, page limit has something to do with it.

So, we can all surmise yours has done well. Good on you.

Meh. So-so.

Quoted from JonnyBoy This. I've read a few scripts in this challenge that yes, you could probably physically shoot for a small amount. But they wouldn't really be 'as written'.

It’s rare that a spec script is ever filmed as written. These are blueprints that will go through quite profound changes if optioned and produced. They give you an idea of what you had in mind but if you’ve written the script correctly, if something is deemed unfilmable it should be easy to change without affecting the core story.  

Quoted from Grandma Bear I agree with Dustin that it all depends what the filmmaker has to his her disposal. Take the Starving Sea for example. I live in Florida, so it's not very hard to find a boat to use. Plenty of people have them and they are easy to rent. The ocean is free to use. Most editors know how to do some simpler FX. Really good ones will be able to do some amazing things with After Effect for example. Things that would've been extremely expensive ten years ago. Only three speaking parts. I think the hardest part with that one would be to find a very pretty teenage girl willing to be buck naked the whole time and tied up. That, you might actually have to pay for. The Riding Hood's Creed wouldn't have to be that expensive either. Only one bike is shown. Only four speaking parts. The other people are easy to get. They'd do it for free for some food and beverages. Like Dustin said, just to be able to be in a film. The bar would be easy to find too. I don't see why the make-up would be that expensive. Either real or FX. To me, getting the cages would be the biggest expense since I imagine you would have to build those. Outdoors at night requires serious lighting, but again, if you have a good cinematographer on your team, he might have access to that. So, it all kind of depends what you have available.  My 2 cents.

If you live next to a sea and have access to a boat for free/cheap and hire only local actors/crew then yes, such a script is an option for you. I would say you'd need a really good FX guy to create a believable blob attacking and devouring the people though.

However, for independent film makers who don’t, that would be too expensive to even consider with travel costs alone. Hence if a script is generally considered low-budget or not.

Similarly If you are near some woods with a railway bridge, have a guy with a motorbike and know someone who will let you film in a bar on the cheap, plus you also know  a cinematographer who will light up night time shoots for food and a few beers, plus an FX guy that can do the slow mo silver bullets for a few bucks (not counting the Werewolf transform as that’s the ‘one good make-up effect so it is allowed), know someone who can rustle up some cages, know a stunt guy who owes you a favour to do the jump off the bridge or hire a green screen studio cheaply to somehow stimulate it;   then yeah the Red Riding Hoods script is really low budget. If not, it is an expensive script!

You can try and go some things guerrilla style but if things go wrong you are in trouble. If you use SAG actors then there’s rules to abide by. Don’t even get me started on actor’s agents!

So yes, everything is relative but if you write something expensive in your script which is integral to the story, to me it’s no longer low-budget in general.

I’m currently in pre-production and I’ve already had to change scenes from a railway bridge to a rooftop and from a hospital to a bedroom because they were too expensive to get legally. Now we are trying to rent an empty office for one day and the cheapest we’ve been quoted is $500, which is $300 more than our budget allows for this, so we are looking to hire a print shop but if that falls through, I’ll have to change another location.  

There’s changes all the time. The thing is these locations and other changes don’t (currently!) change the core of the story, as I wrote the script as low budget as I could and put in elements that could be swapped or dropped if they became unfilmable.  So far that is. Now that I’ve said that the Director will no doubt ask me to change some key element and I’ll be screwed lol. Well, it would be my own fault for sounding like I know it all ha-ha!

Low-budget will mean different things to different people.

In some ways, it is the vaguest directive of the challenge criteria.

For a OWC -- when judging entries -- I am far more concerned with story mechanics than imposing my own definition of "low-budget" on an author other than myself.  I don't think I've mentioned it even once.  

Quoted from MarkRenshaw It’s rare that a spec script is ever filmed as written. These are blueprints that will go through quite profound changes if optioned and produced. They give you an idea of what you had in mind but if you’ve written the script correctly, if something is deemed unfilmable it should be easy to change without affecting the core story.

Oh, I know. With the one spec short script I had made - many years ago now, before a silly self-imposed hiatus I'm trying to come back from - the filmmakers in Australia made wholesale changes to the script, including a completely new ending. They let me see the rewrite, but weren't open to any feedback from me and went ahead and shot it.

Didn't lose much sleep over it, though - they did a good job, I wasn't going to make it myself, and it played at a few festivals. Best not to get too precious over it, there's always more where that came from!

Quoted from bert Low-budget will mean different things to different people. In some ways, it is the vaguest directive of the challenge criteria. For a OWC -- when judging entries -- I am far more concerned with story mechanics than imposing my own definition of "low-budget" on an author other than myself.  I don't think I've mentioned it even once.

Do you not think that kind of defeats the purpose of these OWC’s? This website helps writers hone all their screenplay skills, not just their storytelling ability. The OWC should encourage a writer  to create a script within certain confines, the same type of confines they will encounter in competitions or if hired to write a screenplay. Writing low-budget is tough but it forces you to really utilise every trick up your sleeve to pull it off. It also increases the chances of someone optioning the script. Does it help the author learn if judges ignore some criteria of the challenge?

I’m not saying don’t give feedback if you like the story, but if you feel it’s not low budget, surely that should be a consideration in the scoring. After all, it would be in real life writing circumstances.

I'm with Bert in the budget department. I haven't really been thinking much about budget. I'm more concerned on story mechanics, readability and story. You always get a bunch that fall short for one reason or another, so when you find one that stands out it usually gets high marks from me, even if budget-wise it may be a bit tasking.

Quoted from bert Low-budget will mean different things to different people. In some ways, it is the vaguest directive of the challenge criteria. For a OWC -- when judging entries -- I am far more concerned with story mechanics than imposing my own definition of "low-budget" on an author other than myself.  I don't think I've mentioned it even once.

I disagree.

I think its actually pretty specific and makes a huge difference to the challenge.

It's a LOT harder to come up with novel ideas that are genuinely low budget, than just any idea where there are no limitations at all.

A films objective budget is what it would cost if you had to pay for each and every item and crew member at a standard Union/professional rate. If in the real world you can do it cheaper, that's great...but that's the way it should be measured.

The beauty of any discussion board is the multiplicity of opinions.

Or, alternatively:

The problem with any discussion board is the multiplicity of opinions.

EDIT:

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films I think its actually pretty specific and makes a huge difference to the challenge. It's a LOT harder to come up with novel ideas that are genuinely low budget, than just any idea where there are no limitations at all.

I do sort of agree - I made a conscious choice to make my script cheap to shoot (I think). Doesn't explain why people haven't on the whole warmed to it, but it's all part of the challenge, right?

Quoted from MarkRenshaw Do you not think that kind of defeats the purpose of these OWC’s? This website helps writers hone all their screenplay skills, not just their storytelling ability. The OWC should encourage a writer  to create a script within certain confines, the same type of confines they will encounter in competitions or if hired to write a screenplay. Writing low-budget is tough but it forces you to really utilise every trick up your sleeve to pull it off. It also increases the chances of someone optioning the script. Does it help the author learn if judges ignore some criteria of the challenge? I’m not saying don’t give feedback if you like the story, but if you feel it’s not low budget, surely that should be a consideration in the scoring. After all, it would be in real life writing circumstances.

Totally agree.

The whole point is that it's a CHALLENGE...a challenge to write to the limitations set by a supposed, real-life Producer.

Otherwise it's just: Write a script in a week.

I'm more bothered that the story works as, let's face it, most if not all of these scripts won't actually get produced. So it's academic.

Nevertheless. low budget means limit the locations, go easy on sets and vehicles and props and costumes and don't have any vast armies or battles or huge impossible scenes. Think Mike Leigh and Ken Loach. Think cheap.

Most films boil down to two people talking. Give them something good to say and make sure it's not in Monaco.

R