Occasionally the script requests I see on Ink Tip give me a chuckle. Loved this one from today:

We are looking for completed, feature-length, microbudget sci-fi scripts, i.e. scripts in the vein of "Prospect,” "Alien,” "Mad Max,” "District 9,” or even "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.” Post-apocalyptic scripts that can be shot on a modest budget are also welcome. We are especially interested in reading scripts that have been vetted by contests or festivals, so if yours is such a script, please include a link to the contest/festival's announcement in the personal message space below.


Not sure that any of those could be shot on a "micro-budget"

And did we mention micro-budget? In other words, you let us have the script for free. If we end up making millions, we'll toss some money your way...

Quoted from Grandma Bear And did we mention micro-budget? In other words, you let us have the script for free. If we end up making millions, we'll toss some money your way...

Micro payment :)

The least these idiots could've done was said, "Just make Primer 2. That's all we want."

That’s if they keep in communication with you. We’re so total glutens for punishment. Lol.

Gabe

From my perspective, I thought it was OK and it was fairly clear what they wanted.

A high concept, but ultra low budget sci-fi. Which I think is a good avenue to explore.

It's easy to imagine a version of District 9 that's more low budget: Change the appearance of the Prawns to something more achievable, and make it more character based than action.

The original Mad Max is easily achievable.


Alien is the difficult one...but you could imagine a script set on an alien planet, all in one location where they've discovered alien life and are performing tests on it. Or maybe some non corporeal entity that inhabits other corporeal life-forms...something like The Thing in space...

If you have a script that matches what they want... it's better than it gathering virtual dust on your hard drive.

I get those weekly request emails and they do make me smile. It's like, we want Titanic but we can only afford a bathtub, or it's something really specific like a feature lenght script about Indonisian badminton players taken hostage by LGBT activists.

Quoted from MarkRenshaw ...It's like, we want Titanic but we can only afford a bathtub...

Made me laugh, Mark! ;D

Quoted from MarkRenshaw I get those weekly request emails and they do make me smile. It's like, we want Titanic but we can only afford a bathtub, or it's something really specific like a feature lenght script about Indonisian badminton players taken hostage by LGBT activists.

Now, if it was table tennis, I'd be right in there!

Does anyone have a feeling for where simple CGI falls on the budget scale?

By "simple" I mean something that should look reasonably photo-realistic, but doesn't need to really interact with anything else on the screen. For example, a robot that doesn't bump into any human characters.

It's obviously not free, but just wondering if this now counts as low-budget effects.

Sfx is always cheaper than vfx.

But it's a hard question to answer. Bumping into things isn't a problem. You just shoot a 'plate' where you pull the thing away and one where you shoot the scene with no movement and then composite then together with your cgi robot.

It all depends on the complexity of design, what it looks like, how reflective it is. To make it look realistic is harder than having a skinny guy in an outfit.

Quoted from MarkRenshaw I get those weekly request emails and they do make me smile. It's like, we want Titanic but we can only afford a bathtub, or it's something really specific like a feature lenght script about Indonisian badminton players taken hostage by LGBT activists.

exactly!

I'm a bit confused though... Taking a big budget story, and making it small budget is really the way to go for independent films.

Take Monsters for example: Your typical independence day story but told without seeing the aliens till the very end. That was a career making film.

Titanic with a bathtub: great. Take a couple of refugees in a shitty raft trying to escape hell with all their dreams of a better life. Then end it in tragedy. You might even win a Palmers D'or.

Fucking autocorrect.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films Take a couple of refugees in a shitty raft trying to escape hell with all their dreams of a better life. Then end it in tragedy. You might even win a Palmers D'or.

Sounds like a winner to me. This has an Oswald written all over it.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films I'm a bit confused though... Taking a big budget story, and making it small budget is really the way to go for independent films. Take Monsters for example: Your typical independence day story but told without seeing the aliens till the very end. That was a career making film. Titanic with a bathtub: great. Take a couple of refugees in a shitty raft trying to escape hell with all their dreams of a better life. Then end it in tragedy. You might even win a Palmers D'or.

Monsters isn’t Independence Day done on the cheap. Gareth Edwards based the whole idea for the film after seeing fishermen attempt to bring a creature in with a net, and imagining a monster inside. He didn’t start off by trying to do a cheap ID4. And BTW the only reason Monsters ended up far cheaper than if should have been was coz he wrote, directed, produced and did all the visual FX himself.

If you start off with the idea of a big budget film but with a micro budget you restrict creativity and then don’t have the budget to pull off what the producers already have in mind before you even start. I had the displeasure of watching a big alien invasion movie based on ID4 and other similar blockbusters over the weekend. It’s a new one on Netflix called Rim of the World. It’s about a bunch of reject kids at summer camp when the aliens invade. It copies every alien invasion movie ever made but has lousy FX and some bad acting to boot. It does have some good comedy moments, including a Star Wars joke that almost saves the whole movie!

When your template is a huge, successful big-budget movie you are already boxing yourself in and aiming for the moon with just a kid’s balloon to take you there. What I’m trying to say is, instead of trying to create something a bit different like Monsters achieved, you end up copying something but with far fewer resources than they had.

I’d much prefer the creative challenge of, What if aliens did invade Earth 10,000 years ago and it was us humans? GO! Rather than, a movie like Minority Report but on a micro budget, GO!

It doesn't matter where Edwards got the idea from...all it is is an Alien Invasion movie. That's it. It's Independence day set in a Mexican forest for low budget. The only differences: Smaller scope POV, Aliens were different, we didn't see them till the end and it was filmed on a prosumer cam.

Signs is Independence day set in a farmhouse.

That Cloverfield One with John Goodman is Independence Day set in a basement.

Independence Day itself was just War of the Worlds again. With added jingoism, airplanes and less theme.

You choose what to show.   A big budget film can show military from all over the world attacking huge space fleets, a low budget film may have the same action, but instead two people listen to the attack being reported on a CB radio.

You also get to choose what else the story is about...from theme, to genre beats, twists etc. all of which give it a different feel, if you desire.

Ultimately, the difference here seems to be purely one in interpretation:

I get what they mean. They are not asking for the LITERAL film they mention to be made low budget, they are looking for things with High concept, big emotional bang in that genre that is attainable on a small budget. There are no limits on creativity, just on scope. The moment in Signs when they see that singular alien on the old TV set was great (despite poor VFX)...it was a more memorable moment than anything in Independence Day...that's what they're after. Big impact, small scope.

That's where the creativity lies...doing something we've seen lots of times, but in a slightly new and affecting way.

If a Producer asks for something "in the vein" of something else, they're not demanding that you follow the exact template.

What they're asking for is creative, high concept, strong genre ideas that can be filmed well and convincingly on a small budget. They are not asking for generic scripts that can't be filmed on a small budget...like the Rim of the World example.


Your last line is dealing with two different situations:

The Producers putting the shout out are usually looking for scripts that are already written...so are using existing IP's to give the writer a sense of whether their story fits into what they are looking for. They give a few examples so as not to suggest they are looking only for an extremely specific type of story.

Your example deals more with being assigned to write a film. That aside:

"I’d much prefer the creative challenge of, What if aliens did invade Earth 10,000 years ago and it was us humans? GO!"

Is just an aspect of Oblivion. You want to write Oblivion on a micro budget, basically....which is fine, but it's the same thing as:


"Rather than, a movie like Minority Report but on a micro budget, GO!"

It's just that you're failing to deconstruct it into: What if it was possible for future Police to predict crime before it happened? What effect would that have on society?

Or what if it were possible to judge human beings on their thoughts? Etc.

Or How could I commit a crime in a world where the Police can predict your actions and can read your thoughts?....And in writing that it occurs to me someone already made that film...they answered that by having him learn Buddhist meditation to clear his mind, so he could destroy the program he'd invented that was being used to monitor everybody.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3153582/

So, you see, Minority Report on a Micro Budget is exactly the type of thing writers and directors should aim for. You've just got to learn how to ask the proper questions and break it into its constituent pieces.


It's all the same thing in the end. Like an actor interpreting directions, the writer has to learn to interpret what the Producer is actually asking for.

As I say, they're not looking for generic refits, but creative works that could change their lives that are nevertheless attainable on tiny budgets.

Which they mostly won't find, of course, which is why most Producers/Directors that make it end up making their own stuff..like Edwards.

That works both ways, of course...the writer who is sick of filmmakers messing their stuff up, and the Director who can't find the right story...they both end up in the same place.

It's also worth remmebering that sometimes projects grow. The right attachment can make all the difference in terms of funding. Not everyone is about the money.