I came across a good article about making movies cheaply.
Since I got into making films, I have been very concerned about finding ways to do it without spending much money. I’ve talked about some of my thoughts on this in a couple of articles I’ve posted:
Like J. Blakeson (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2128335/ ), who wrote this article, I don’t expect someone else to give me money to make my movies.
I like his comment that writing a film, then trying to scale it down to save money hurts the quality of the final film. A film that looks bad doesn’t help you advance. I think that most filmmakers are like me, in that they want to make something they can point to with pride.
One rule is to shoot 90 per cent of the film at one location. This is more drastic than anything I have thought of doing. I shot 100 per cent of My Next Film (http://www.dynamiclethargyfilms.ca/my_next_film.php ) in one location, but when I’ve thought about doing a feature I felt that I needed to have at least four or five locations.
I worry about the limitations on the story of having only one location. Alfred Hitchcock did Rope on a single set, and it turned out well. I am no Alfred Hitchcock though. On the other hand, I feel that it is the limitations that decisions like this put on you that force you to be creative.