Yeah that's true. Well when it comes to getting funding from an investor but the other person is paired with a co-director, how do they decide which director does which tasks, usually?

You said the guy youd worked with who’d gotten funding, that his storytelling was good and there were other things lacking. So in that case perhaps the co-director is handling the actors.

In your case unfortunately, youve been criticized for storytelling, technical skills, and actors’ performances, so there really are no strengths for a co-director to complement, only weaknesses for them to compensate for, making it likely, as has been said, that you would be forced out of directing your own film.

Oh well I thought that if I had more of a crew, that the technical skills part could be covered better there. I feel I would do a better job of directing the crew, compared to the actors, so maybe the co-director could direct the actors, but that is just what I think.

I don't know that "directing the crew" is an actual thing.

A film director is known for three things...the overall vision of the movie, directing the camera(s), and honing the actors' performances.

Based on what we've seen here, none of those are areas where you're strong.

Oh okay, but I thought I could be stronger in the vision if I had a more experienced DP, with more equipment though, as well as more production design options. Wouldn't a better DP and production design benefit me more, or no? I feel that I would do better if I made the cinematography and production design decisions, and the editing and music and sound decisions, where as the other director could perhaps do the acting side of things, but that is just what I feel would work best.

Here's a question for you Ryan. When you watch poorly directed movie do you think if only he had a more experience dp I would think he's a good director?

I usually don't think too much about what went wrong in other movies if I find they are poor.

Well why do I have to be the DP as well? I thought that if I had a better DP the movie would look a lot better and since I was told the cinematography was a problem. Is is the problem perhaps me and I just need to direct the DP I have better and it's not the choice of DP that counts?

We're trying to help you out by giving honest advice. But it seems like despite not being good at this it makes you happy so keep plugging away.

Oh well at the end of the day I feel like you just have to take all info, advice, and research you can, and do your best and go for it. But isn't that what you all did on your first feature, is just do your best and hope for the best?

AGAIN, most people on here have not made a first feature or any feature cause folks here are primarily not filmmakers.

Including myself. I have a career in video but I need to earn money and pay bills. I still take on small creative projects but no feature films. I had a small interest but listening to Ryan's struggles eliminated all desire to make one without any regrets. Not that I don't think I could make a small short for a film festival, I just don't feel the need to put myself through the wringer. I have a better understanding of the process where as it used to be shrouded in mystery and appealing in that respect. Ryan to me represents the extreme of recklessly and doggedly pursing something despite lacking the aptitude. But I'm frequently pleasantly surprised by the creativity and great work by other small "unprofessional" film makers. There's never been a time that you could do so much with so little. A golden age of amateur video.

Well I am trying to develop my aptitude further as best I can, hoping that will help.

You know what the best way to do that would be? GO OUT AND MAKE MORE SHORT FILMS, ANY POSSIBLE WAY YOU CAN.

Oh well it's just that I feel they will turn out the same way, and with bad acting and bad cinematography, if they are no budget, with hardly any money spent on them though. So will they improve if I do not have more actors or a new DP to choose from? I was advised by other filmmakers not to bother if I cannot get better actors or better cinematography, if they have a point?

It's just I thought it would be better to save up more money for it, and wait for covid to be over more, so actors a people will want to make it more.

Surely a good small budget movie would work better for you than a big budget flop?

Oh are you saying I should make it a zero budget pretty much?

You could spend a bit more on your short films, so that the quality improves. However, even with that, you may still be stuck in a cycle.

The problems you have on your short films are going to increase by an order of magnitude on a feature film. Currently, from the questions you keep asking here and on other forums. you don't seem to have yet grasped many of the basic skills and the judgment required to make a no/low budget feature.

Oh okay, well I thought that having more actors to choose from and more DPs to choose from would make it better. Even in the casting calls, I need more options I think before I can do something better, or at least that is what I feel.

Where did I suggest otherwise? Allowing some budget on a short for actors will increase the options..

Oh I just meant I am not sure how to solve the problems I am having if they are going to increase in magnitude, other than by hiring more people, and having more options. I thought that my problems would reduce on a feature if I did that as well.

The problems only increase, to believe otherwise is naive.

Oh okay, because I thought that on the last short film I had less problems, and things went along smoother than before. There were still things that went wrong of course, but I felt it was easier than before and things were more organized, based on new approaches. Things will get harder with as the challenges get bigger, but I thought that was normal.

Yes, but you're still a long way from having the skills needed for making an acceptable feature films, especially on an extremely low budget.

But that is where I thought having more actors to choose from and a better DP would help out with that, especially since I was told it was the acting and cinematography that were my biggest issues.

Your biggest issue appears to be a lack of judgment in how to put together the elements involved in making a film. Casting actors correctly for the roles is just one part of the jigsaw that needs to be put together,

Oh okay thanks. Well I will try to do the best I can judgment wise, I just thought that getting more acting options would severly help since that is what most of my critiques were from others.

However, at the end of the day, don't you still do your best and hope for the best when making a movie and that is all you can do, or no?

In the end, you do and no one is stopping you.

Well if the problem is me, then perhaps I do not need a different DP and actors, and I just need to direct the actors I have and the DP I have better, in order to get top notch performances, and better cinematography out of them, if that's the problem?

No one's stopping you from doing so, but that doesn't mean that people think that you're going about things in the best way.

Part of the job is selecting the right people for the roles and knowing if the people have currently cast have the talent to manage "top notch performances". Although, I suspect they're capable of doing better than they've been doing in your current films.

Oh okay. Well what I could do is set my standards higher if that helps. Even before when I made other shorts, I thought to myself in the auditions, "well this actor doesn't seem right but I will just cast anyway and hope for the best in order to get footage in the cast",

But maybe I should have higher standards and should not cast, unless my instincts are higher than that?

How good the acting will be is decided at the casting stage. If you feel that an actor isn't right for a part don't cast them, it's not personal.

The trouble is that you are unable to spot potential, and nurture it because acting is not one of your skills. You have a poor pool of locals and then cast them bizarrely. If your instinct says don't cast this person, then that's the decision made. If you determine they are not good enough, then including them dilutes the product as a whole. What is the point of auditioning if you have to cast them anyway? Just give them the role and stop pretending to do real auditions.

Indeed, you need to have a choice if you're doing effective auditions.

With one film I was extremely lucky with my casting, even though there wasn't really any choice other than who was going to play which part. On the other films we spent days going through the auditions. I probably met most of the local professional actors along the way.

I daren't post this on social media where my friends might read it but the current series of Britains Got Talent rather highlights the problem. The majority of acts were mediocre, I thought, and some of the judges were clearly voting with an agenda. Then at the very end, after the winners were announced they had Cameron Macintosh's professionals - most of whom had not rehearsed together before a few days before the show, brought together for an amazing finale - and these professionals, many of whom the general public would not even recognise wiped out the contestants with their sheer ability and professionalism - a huge chasm in the talent spectrum. The weakest of the professionals making the best of the newcomers look very, very lacking. It just showed how poor some people are, and how they 'think' they're good.

I imagine only a handful of people want to be in his movies. So when he says auditions, I doubt they resemble anything we would expect. I don’t think he has the luxury to be too picky. It’s painful reading him struggle through every conceivable phase of making a movie. One intractable problem after another.

Well before I would pick whoever I could just to get footage in the can. So I went against my instincts before to get a short film made.

But I can not cast if they do not feel right now, and keep looking then, for people who fit the parts more so.

Pre-production is just as important as shooting a film, be it a short or a feature film. It usually involves a lot more time than the shooting days.

Yep that makes sense. I usually have to rush pre-production because someone is only available for a certain amount of time, or a location is... Unless I should cast before looking for locations? I feel if I do that, then everyone has to wait for who knows how long of amount of time before I can find locations then.

Spend time doing both, no wonder you end up with problems. Are the actors going to live in a different country?

No they won't live in a different country. Why?

Why does changing location change the actors? If you can travel to the locations so can the actors unless they live ridiculously far away. You are planning these things really, really strangely. If you decide to feature a castle in your screenplay and you don't have a castle, don't try to mock up something you hope will look like its in a castle unless you really can afford to build it. In your strange way of doing things, I'd suggest getting the sets sorted before you even put pen to paper. All your problems seem to emerge from not having things. Not having the locations, not having the actors and not having the right crew and technical support. You spend all your time fighting fires that should never have happened with proper planning. If you have a local castle, that the owner says you can use, write a movie set in the castle. Do not include a scene set in an underground cave if you don't have one.

I didn't say that changing the location changes the actors, did I? Unless I mislead you, or what did you think I meant?

Are the actors going to live in a different country?

Because you say that they're only available for a certain amount of time. The logic of that is they're going to be moving away from where they are currently located.

Oh sorry, what I meant was, is that they are only available until their job gets busier season wise, or they have other acting projects coming up. I have to find locations before their other commitments up, if I cast them before I have found locations I meant. I didn't mean to imply that I would be moving.

I never suggested you would be moving.

January and February is a good time for shooting low budget films because the rental kit is mostly available and the cast and crew are in the slack season.

All your problems seem to emerge from not having things. Not having the locations, not having the actors and not having the right crew and technical support.

I might add, "Not having the requisite skill set."

How many pages will it take to decide whether Ryan tends to overthink things?

Someone could do analytics based on the past two years’ worth of threads but offhand I’d guess between 27 and 70.

Looks like it's gonna be closer to 70...

I never suggested you would be moving.

January and February is a good time for shooting low budget films because the rental kit is mostly available and the cast and crew are in the slack season.

Oh okay, thanks, I can try to aim for a short film for then, and hopefully covid will have gotten better by then too.

Looks like it's gonna be closer to 70...
The way I look at it we're getting 70 pages of entertainment.

Kinda true. I’ll make the popcorn.