Low Budget Stereoscopic FilmMaking - The Race is On!

Back in late 2009, early 2010 I was digging around a bit in the film industry analyzing numbers for a few different reasons. I shared my ideas with a few people but it didn't seem to click with anybody. Rather then pursuing any of my ideas further I shelved them as I couldn't afford at the time to do anything about any of it. Things just weren't working out well for me personally at the time.

In my research at the time I had found that since 1999 there had been five key films that were popular for their low production budget and handheld camera tactics. The budget for all 5 films in total is estimated to be around $56 million. The cheapest of which only weighed in at an estimated $15 thousand for production and bringing in over $100 million in domestic gross alone. To date, the total of all these films are estimated to have brought in over $783 million in worldwide box office gross. These films include "The Blair Witch Project", "Open Water", "Cloverfield", "District 9", and "Paranormal Activity".

I was doing this research in comparative terms of what was soon to be known as the highest grossing film of all time, "Avatar". In fact, the day I watched that film for the 1st time I went on a local forum and stated that it would soon be known as the highest or second highest grossing film of all time and was attacked for making such silly claims. Regardless of that and back on topic... comparatively to the prior films mentioned, this film had a production budget rumored to be over 400 Million.

It was my belief at that point that the race was on. The world was not only just ready for stereoscopic but it was also becoming foolish to excuse the gross/budget ratio's of low budget film-making with handheld camera tactics. The time has come to blend the two and whatever films are 1st to successfully do so will reap LARGE bennifits. While many might bash this strategy as almost backwards film-making progression, it's irrelevant. The numbers do the talking. Film goers are growing tired of Hollywoods predictable offerings. They want movies that can connect with them on a mental level. Something that's different and can plug them into another world for them to explore (3D) or give them something that questions their intelligence into believing something is real or not (hand-held tactics).

Does it take $400 million to make such a thing? No! Heck no... Although it does take more then just 3D and low budget, it takes a solid film idea. 3D movies are declining in interest the more needlessly 3D movies are released. Since last year I've watched numerous 3D films and the only ones to have really benefitted from 3D have been "Avatar" and "How to Train your Dragon". Not to strip "Up" from it's worthy position of being a solid 1st candidate for the idea. But folks, my solid plea is to "not just make a movie 3D because you can and it's popular". In doing so it's only going to alienate people from this amazing new tool. Use this technology sparingly and when appropriate. Ask yourself, "is this just gonna look cool or does it really add to the storytelling and experience of the film". 90% will just "look cool" and in doing so will add to the "gimmicky" title that many give stereoscopic.

But there you have it. I've been on record for the past 10 months, trying to get people to listed to me in regards to these investment and business strategies. After just reading that "Paranormal Activity's" new 3 million budget film has pulled almost 42 Million in just 3 days in comparison to "Red", a 58 million dollar film that has brought in only 44 Million in 10 days; I felt compelled to run my mouth a little.

As film-makers catch onto this idea you should be ready for a slew of sub-par low budget stereoscopic films coming our way but lets just hope that one of them... gets it right. You will know who holds the title when you see a low budget movie that can honestly claim that seeing it in 3D doesn't "just look neat" but was necessary to add to the story and experience.

What is my own plan? Well, personally I believe that there is a non-stereoscopic low budget film technique and strategy that has been overlooked. One that is less complicated, a lower risk, and much higher pay-off. When I can afford to pursue it I will do so or if a studio/invester would ever like to explore my thoughts then I am available via email. Until then, lets see if someone can get stereoscopic low budget film making done right.