Who says that big-budget films are safer than mid-range films? In terms of return on investment, I'd rather have 'Sling Blade' and 'Shine' than 'Volcano.'
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Film is the most expensive, highest risk industry in the world.
The size of the budget doesn't make that much of a difference because the kind of issues I have on a low budget film I have on a big budget film as well, but they're just much bigger.
The size of the budget doesn't make that much of a difference because the kind of issues I have on a low budget film I I have on a big budget film as well, but they're just much bigger.
There are many applications for which film is going to be better, for a very long time.
It seems that the small movies are a little more risky and cutting-edge. You've got your big commerce and you've got your small films that you're more passionate about.
I prefer the smaller budget versus the bigger budget because the mentality that goes along with big budget filmmaking doesn't really suit me; the mind-set that money is the answer.
In the U.S., it would be so much better if the studios made many more smaller films for niche markets rather than a few tent pole films that swamp cinemas and Hoover up all the funding.
Films do seem prestigious and glamorous, but when you create something, you want people to see it. TV still reaches so many more people; it still really appeals to me.
Successful films are very dangerous things.
The big-budget blockbuster is becoming one of the most dependable forms of filmmaking.