• About
  • Contact Us…

Inside-Out, Outside-In

~ Every journey worth taking…starts on the inside.

Inside-Out, Outside-In

Category Archives: Development

Thanksgiving 2014: Time for Some Gratitude from Indie Filmmakers…

26 Wednesday Nov 2014

Posted by hunterlh in Development

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2014, gratitude, how to make a movie, hunter lee hughes, independent filmmakers, indie film, making movies in 2014, thanksgiving, top ten thing to be grateful for in 2014

Sometimes, I get all “Midnight in Paris” and wish I was making movies back in the 1990s when indie filmmakers could actually make a decent living. Or if time travel was affordable, safe and legal, maybe I’d wander back and shoot character-driven films on 35mm film back in the 1970s. Or perhaps direct silent films in the early 1920s before burdensome sound equipment and studio executives with provincial taste.

But, you know, it’s Thanksgiving and I’m in 2014 Los Angeles where we develop our spiritual practice and live in the moment and all. So here’s my shot to articulate the top ten things that indie filmmakers should be grateful for right here, right now.

1. Laptops – Can you imagine how boring it was to write screenplays at home or in the office on a personal computer (or even more cumbersome, a typewriter…)? Lame. That’s right motherf$#$ker, I am sipping a latte with my sunglasses on while writing this synopsis at Intelligentsia. In the 90s, if you wanted to go out for coffee, you were taking paper and retyping that shit later. Or your ass was at home, bored and decaffeinated.

2. Better actors – Yeah, yeah, yeah, there were some amazing actors in the 1930s. There were also some pretty arch, fake-ass performers back then, too. So let’s break it down – for the most part, actors are much better trained now than they were in the past. There’s so much more competition in the field of acting that actors have been forced to improve to continue to book jobs. Even big stars have the humility to coach with svengali’s in our field, oftentimes with good results. And it’s not just the stars who are talented, dedicated and skilled. Working actors across the board have gotten better to the point that I think it’s pretty rare that you see a laughably bad performance in a major film, which used to happen with more regularity. Before people blow up leaving comments refuting this, EXCEPTIONS EXIST. But most of the times when I see a bad performance these days, I blame the director. Either he/she doesn’t know how to get a performance out of an actor or has incredibly bad taste to either choose a bad actor or choose a bad take from a good actor. I also believe that – per capita – there are more good looking actors now than in the past. Admittedly, this is not a scientific study, but it seems like it. A lot more six-pack abs, etc.

3. Google – Imagine the wealth of information available to you that filmmakers in the 1950s had to learn by trial and error, by finding a mentor, by moving to Los Angeles or New York and hearing what was going on in the business. Everything from writing tips to video content to technology how-to’s to film theory to primers on the film festival circuit is far more accessible than it was to previous generations who minimally had to get to a bookstore, local cinema or library (now the problem becomes sorting through too much information but that’s a topic for another day). If you want to learn about filmmaking, there’s really no financial or access-based excuse not to make progress.

4. Come on, you really CAN make a feature film for less than $200,000 – Making a film is a huge undertaking that can take years and the work of dozens of people. I realize that making a quality film is never inexpensive in terms of resources or time. But, in this era, digital cameras and online editing technology make it possible to make a feature film for less than $200,000. Most Americans still believe they can earn enough money to buy a condo, townhouse or home, many of which are valued at far greater than $200,000. So instead of a home, if you’re willing to work and save, you can put your money towards a movie. When films shot on 35mm and had to go through a telecine process and then spit out prints, those numbers were a lot higher.

5. There’s an app for that – Scheduling used to be done by cutting little strips of paper and arranging them on a board. Ledgers were once used to track the complicated accounts created by the varied expenses involved in filmmaking. Polaroids were taken for continuity pictures. Wow, things have changed. Now there are programs that let you snap a picture with your smart phone and attach it to all the scenes in which it applies. You can enter in this same program how much the costume costs to rent and keep track of how many days and which days you’ll need it. All in the same program. That’s pretty incredible.

6. You don’t have to only make films about straight, white people – In the 1940s, if you wanted to create an interesting role for an ethnic or religious minority or someone in the LGBT community, good luck! Now, at least you have a chance to develop interesting characters from a much broader spectrum.

7. On-set selfies – Come on, you know you do it.

8. YOURNAMEHERE.com – It’ll probably cost you around the same amount of money to register YOURFILMNAMEHERE.com as it cost NBC to register NBC.com. And if you take some wordpress classes, I bet you can make your site look almost as good or even better. This is a huge competitive advantage for the “little guys” of filmmaking compared to the control over the means of distribution and promotion that the “big guys” had in the past.

9. Social media – so many people talk about how annoying it is and yet…so many people discover content they want to see through a tweet, post or blog article. And you don’t have to spend a fortune on it (although it helps if you do….).

10. Kombucha – maybe it existed before, but it’s only had its positive effects on sets all over Los Angeles in recent times.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Advertisement

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

This film is not dead: The revival of “Inside-Out, Outside-In”

09 Sunday Nov 2014

Posted by hunterlh in Development, Pre-Production

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Alexander Dreymon, Blake Sheldon, Christos Vasilopoulos, daniel berilla, dreams come true., Gopal Divan, Guys Reading Poems, hunter lee hughes, jason fracaro, jerod meagher, justin schwan, Lydia Hearst, Megan Sousa, Michael Marius Pessah, Patricia Velasquez, rex lee, Vincent Montuel

Several years ago, I started this blog to chronicle the progress of “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” I was determined to direct my first feature film and wanted to share the ups and downs of the journey with like-minded creative types. Well, a funny thing happened on the way to the set….

One-sheet - "Guys Reading Poems"  designed by Chris Friend

One-sheet – “Guys Reading Poems”
designed by Chris Friend

Turns out, I achieved my dream to direct my first feature film. Only, to my great surprise, that film turned out to be a completely different project than “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” “Guys Reading Poems” – a neo-noir, black-and-white feature – consumed my time and energy to the point that I wasn’t able to continue to blog here. However, now that the film is safely into post-production, I am returning to my original mission to get “Inside-Out, Outside-In” off the ground. But now the conversation is a little different. Instead of how to get a first feature film off the ground, I’m dealing with the (ever-so-slightly) better problem of how to get a second feature funded and produced. (ok so yeah, I’m bragging a little….I can’t help it.)

Let me explain.

In the beginning of 2013, I was taking meetings and pitching “Inside-Out, Outside-In” but having great difficulty raising the kind of capital needed to fund a story that takes place in both modern day Los Angeles and ancient India. I came up with an idea – almost on a whim – to combine classic poetry with an all-male secret society narrative and shot some footage relatively cheaply. The results were so good that many trusted friends and advisors suggested I continue developing “Guys Reading Poems” as a feature film. And so I did. Relatively quickly, private equity investors rallied around “Guys Reading Poems” and we were also able to crowdfund more than $40,000 to raise enough money to transform the original project into a feature. Casting also fell into place relatively quickly (actors love black-and-white, apparently, especially when the cinematographer is someone as talented as ours – Michael Marius Pessah). Patricia Velasquez (“The Mummy”, “Arrested Development”) agreed to play the female lead role and Alexander Dreymon (“American Horror Story”) – a former acting student of mine – signed on to play the male lead. Lydia Hearst (“The Face”) also liked the script and agreed to play a key supporting role and so did Rex Lee (“Entourage”) and Christos Vasilopoulos (“Banshee”). The rest of the cast was populated with talented up-and-comers Jerod Meagher (“ABCs of Death 2”), Jason Fracaro and Vincent Montuel (all of whom also took my acting class at StoryAtlas) and also Blake Sheldon (“Age of Reason”), Justin Schwan (“Cutback”), Daniel Berilla (“Kissing Darkness”), Megan Sousa and Gopal Divan. Of the entire cast, only Blake and Lydia were brand new to my life. The rest were either friends or colleagues from previous encounters on projects or in acting classes. In the case of Rex, well, he’s one of my very best friends in the world.

What can I say? I got lucky…but in a way that I could not have predicted.

Looking back, I can’t help but wonder if there was some divine guidance that brought “Guys Reading Poems” up to bat first. Like I mentioned, the budgetary requirements are less than those required for “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” There’s a great tradition of directors starting their careers in black-and-white and the neo-noir feel needed for “Guys Reading Poems” allows me to knock on the door of that club. “Guys Reading Poems” is more daring in terms of its form, whereas “Inside-Out, Outside-In” is a much more traditional narrative. There’s nothing wrong with traditional narratives (in fact, I love them) but one could argue that a more experimental approach is more likely to convince festival programmers and audiences to give a first-time director a chance. Also, since 90% of the cast were personal friends or longstanding colleagues, there was enough trust on both sides to build the type performances I admire – where the dark side of the psyche and its vulnerabilities combine with human need towards a quixotic goal or dream. As a first time director, I needed personal access to the hearts and minds of the talent and “Guys Reading Poems” offered that sort of opportunity. Along the way, I developed relationships that are crucial for my future success not only with acting talent but also investors, fellow producers, department heads, creative collaborators and crew (and yes, Shpetim Zero did the costumes for “Guys Reading Poems” as well, see below).

But now, it’s time to finish what I started with “Inside-Out, Outside-In” so you’ll be hearing from me a lot more! Over the next few weeks, I’ll try to condense some of the lessons of “Guys Reading Poems” and how I feel they might set up “Inside-Out, Outside-In” for success. Then, I’ll move into chronicling the next stages of the project.

I planned for “Inside-Out, Outside-In” to take two years to finish and start hitting the festival circuit relatively soon. Sometimes, plans don’t work out…yet, somehow, strangely, even mysteriously, dreams do.

Jason Fracaro in "Guys Reading Poems"  photo by Michael Marius Pessah

Jason Fracaro in “Guys Reading Poems”
photo by Michael Marius Pessah

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Storyboarding a Sequence: To investors and beyond…

27 Saturday Apr 2013

Posted by hunterlh in Development

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

angel investors, daniel berilla, film investors, holly elkjer, hunter lee hughes, investor packets, investor proposals for film, james lee hernandez, jerod meagher, Monte Patterson, storyboard, Storyboarding, the final image

This latest set of storyboards from “Inside-Out, Outside-In” is being used to bling out our investor powerpoint pitch and accompanying proposal. I chose to dig into this early audition sequence because it reflects the DIY sensibility of both our protagonist Nathaniel Quinn and the film itself. The storyboards were drawn by the talented Monte Patterson, who curates the amazingly successful and fascinating film blog, “The Final Image,” recently featured on The Sundance Channel (and deservedly so).

In the audition sequence, we open on a completely dark stage. The lights come on and we reveal Nathaniel standing alone on the stage. Unobserved, he raises his fist triumphantly and says, ““Enter Stage Right. A young man, filled with hope, crosses to the most beautiful girl he’s ever seen.” Nathaniel realizes that his face has softened with tears, feeling the opposite of the sentiment he expressed.  From behind him, we hear a woman enter….it’s his best friend Dorothy, arriving at the theatre to help Nathaniel audition actors for his latest strange movement theatre piece.

This short scene sets up that although the auditions may seem harmless and fun, Nathaniel is covering up a wellspring of unprocessed grief and powerful unrealized hopes that won’t be satisfied with a theatrical piece alone…

We then go to the auditions, where we see a couple of goofy guys introduced – an adorable twink Eli, who bounces up from behind a cube for his audition and Clarence, a hip hop enthusiast who interprets Nathaniel’s deadly serious material via breakdancing moves. Finally, we introduce one of our lead characters, Jason Quinn, as he energetically crosses the stage on a Z-axis towards Nathaniel. The idea is that Jason has unstoppable momentum so that we know he’s destined to crash into our director. The solo shot of Nathaniel back to the solo shot of Jason are different from the previous actors, showing us that Nathaniel has now met someone who will change his life and cause it to go out of control, unlike the two more symmetrically framed auditions we saw previously, where Nathaniel’s status as a director was unquestioned. He has now met the character capable of throwing him off balance, into his grief and, through the course of the movie, back into the hope of a fully realized life.

In our industry staged reading, Nathaniel was played by Hunter Lee Hughes (um, yeah that’s me), Dorothy by Holly Elkjer, Eli by Daniel Berilla, Clarence by James Lee Hernandez and Jason Quinn by Jerod Meagher. They all served as the visual inspiration for the attached storyboards.

We’re confident these boards will help our investor proposal so we can raise the additional capital we need. We’ve found two major investors so far and once we raise another $80,000, we will begin our crowdsourcing campaign. So let’s hope these storyboards help us ignite the imaginations of a few brave investors….

We're in darkness.

We’re in darkness. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

Lights flip on. Nathaniel enters the stage...alone. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

Lights flip on. Nathaniel enters the stage…alone. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

Nathaniel, carrying a bag of groceries, looks around the stage wistfully. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel, carrying a bag of groceries, looks around the stage wistfully. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel raises his fists in mock triumph saying, "Enter Stage Right. A young man, full of hope, crosses to the most beautiful woman he's ever seen." He holds back tears as he says the line, ironically. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel raises his fists in mock triumph saying, “Enter Stage Right. A young man, full of hope, crosses to the most beautiful woman he’s ever seen.” He holds back tears as he says the line, ironically. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Dorothy enters from backstage, startling Nathaniel. He quickly gets out of his "hero" pose. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Dorothy enters from backstage, startling Nathaniel. He quickly gets out of his “hero” pose. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy realized they both bought food and drinks for the actors auditioning. Overkill. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy realized they both bought food and drinks for the actors auditioning. Overkill. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy prepare to watch an audition. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy prepare to watch an audition. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

We see the top of a cube on the stage. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

We see the top of a cube on the stage. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

From behind the cube, Eli pops out, finishing his audition with a flourish. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

From behind the cube, Eli pops out, finishing his audition with a flourish. (Storyboard by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy watch the audition intently. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy watch the audition intently. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Eli looks for approval after his audition. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Eli looks for approval after his audition. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

From between Nathaniel and Dorothy, Clarence enters. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

From between Nathaniel and Dorothy, Clarence enters. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

Nathaniel and Dorothy watch Clarence's audition. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy watch Clarence’s audition. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Between Nathaniel and Dorothy, Clarence interprets the material in a unique, hip hop way. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Between Nathaniel and Dorothy, Clarence interprets the material in a unique, hip hop way. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Clarence really goes for it, diving on the floor. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Clarence really goes for it, diving on the floor. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy have to change their view to see the action as Clarence dives down. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel and Dorothy have to change their view to see the action as Clarence dives down. (Storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Jason powerfully crosses the stage in a Z-axis towards Nathaniel. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Jason powerfully crosses the stage in a Z-axis towards Nathaniel. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel is taken aback by Jason's performance. Note: It's a solo shot, unlike the other two auditions. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Nathaniel is taken aback by Jason’s performance. Note: It’s a solo shot, unlike the other two auditions. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Jason finishes his audition and takes in Nathaniel's feedback. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

Jason finishes his audition and takes in Nathaniel’s feedback. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson)

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Industry Reading: Holly Saves the Day

10 Sunday Feb 2013

Posted by hunterlh in Development, The Script

≈ 3 Comments

Eugene Delacroix once famously said, “To be a poet at twenty is to be twenty. To be a poet at forty is to be a poet.” Maybe Delacroix’s sentiment explains one of my favorite lines from the screenplay, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” It comes from a seemingly unimportant scene when movement theater director Nathaniel Quinn, alone on an empty, dark stage, mutters aloud, “Enter Stage Right. A young man, filled with hope, crosses to the most beautiful woman he’s ever seen.”

Once spoken aloud, Nathaniel chokes back tears, knowing the statement embodies the polar opposite of his current state of mind. “Inside-Out, Outside-In” follows a man whose experiences with corrupt Hollywood, whose personal and professional failures have robbed him of the hope of outer achievement so brightly felt in younger years. But nonetheless, he has become – despite himself – the real deal “poet” as he approaches middle age. And that, in itself, is its own strange comfort, providing the fuel for his march towards a destiny that the screenplay documents.

Making a movie like “Inside-Out, Outside-In” feels like war and a spiritual revival all at once. War because the sheer number of tasks and daunting resources required demand strategy, stamina and allies. Spiritual revival because the work being created isn’t simply an objective science project about someone else – it’s you up there and every decision reflects, in some way, your own conscience and authenticity. Sometimes the two are linked. During the crazy lead-up to our staged reading of the piece, our event planner Louise Miclat asked me to write something for the program. I quickly turned to our Fatelink mission statement, adjusted it a bit and Louise threw this into the program, “Hunter Lee Hughes founded Fatelink, a production company whose mission is to create compelling stories and empower others to tell their own…”

I didn’t give the statement a second thought until after the reading was over. We had too much drama unfolding to waste time on philosophy. Our original cast member for Adrian Quinonez as ErnestoAbhaya was forced to drop out less than a week before the reading due to a serious illness in his family. Finally, two days before the read, we found Adrian Quinonez to play the part. I thought I was done with last-minute cast changes, but at around noon on the day of our performance, I lost our “Dorothy,” one of the lead roles, due to a last-minute unavoidable scheduling conflict. The actress was near tears explaining things and I did my best to reassure her that we’d be okay. Downing my coffee at the PaliHouse hotel in West Hollywood, I immediately walked out in a panic…and forgot to pay my bill.  Luckily, I didn’t get far before realizing my mistake and went back, just in time to preserve my relationship with the waiter who’s down for me to order one cup of coffee and park there for two or three hours at a stretch.

As I paid the nearly abandoned bill, I realized that I wasn’t at all convinced that we would be okay, not just because we were down an actress. We never even ran the entire script at our two rehearsals. We built a pre-show that involved ten actors doing living theatre that seemed risky for a screenplay reading. Some had asked, “What is this? A table read? A staged read?” I tried to explain it, “Nathaniel’s a performance artist so we have to create a screenplay reading that reflects that…otherwise, we won’t embody the character and it won’t work. We have to create our own performance art to connect them to our story.” Some people got it. Some people faked it. And some “got it” but seemed to think there wasn’t enough time to pull off such an intricately staged experience.

I scrambled my rolodex looking for an actress. This one’s too old. This one’s too young. This one’s too big a bitch. This one’s not tough enough. For anyone who’s ever had to replace an actor on the day of the performance, I’m sure you appreciate the special kind of anxiety that accompanies the experience. Finally, scanning an old phone list from the master class at the Ivana Chubbuck studios, my adrenaline pumped an extra wave of holly1hormones when I saw her name – “Holly Elkjer.” I immediately called and offered the part. Must’ve sounded like a crazy man in the message. Within a half hour or so, I received a phone call back, “Hunter….you know I haven’t acted in a year,” said the ever-modest Holly. “You’re in,” I shot back. It was already 2:30 p.m. Our show started in less than six hours.

Holly studied at the Ivana Chubbuck Studios for at least five years, consistently doing excellent work. She cared deeply about her work as an actress, but not necessarily for the traditional Hollywood machine that might’ve made her an acting success. Maybe the veneer required for that sort of ascension clashed with her South Dakota upbringing. She also spent a lot of time painting, with the results intriguing enough that I felt confident that she could have a career as a visual artist if she found connections to the right group of people. But I also could imagine the fine-arts set easily overlooking a woman whose values and spirit strove to find a traditional life as a wife and mother, despite the hardship of doing so in the narcissistic breeding grounds of Los Angeles. Still, Holly tried, on all fronts, and at least has been rewarded for channeling her sharp eye into a hairstyling career at a top notch salon in West Hollywood.

Our tech operator Phillip Wheeler highlighted Holly’s script as I sped towards the salon. holly3She warned me that she’d be doing extensions right up until 7:00 p.m. The earliest she could possibly arrive at the theatre would be 7:30 p.m. Just four hours before showtime, I ran in with the highlighted script. As Holly twisted and clipped the hair of a client-turned-theatre-bystander, Holly quizzed me about the character, her objectives, her past history. I answered the best I could, then later sent a text, “She’s one of these ppl who’s trying too hard…”

Thirty minutes before we were scheduled to walk on stage, we were still missing Holly and Rex Lee, (Entourage’s ‘Lloyd Lee’) who was set to play Steven Park, the sharp-tongued talent agent of our leading man. By 7:45, they had both showed up. We quickly ran the entrance and exits on and off the stage and Holly settled in for a ten-minute stretch of trying to understand the script. “Who am I even referring to here?” she asked Marlyse Londe backstage, who did her best to guide the newcomer. Within minutes, we all walked on stage as if this was the plan all along. The show goes on.

You might say the night belonged to Jerod Meagher, our leading man. Jerod – another fascinating human being – has lived in Los Angeles for two years and has spent most of his time training and doing low budget work, in addition to three “day jobs.” He hasn’t even attempted to find an agent yet, believing it more important to develop himself as an actor and man. He couldn’t be more right for “Jason Quinn.” And, wow, did he pull off the performance and prove that he’s more than ready to play on the big screen….and not just in my film. You might say that the night belonged to our two monks from the past life story, Adrian and Gopal Divan, a brand new Los Angeles arrival. Adrian noted that I exhaled dramatically after he nailed his monologue. Going into that part of the script, I realized I’d never even heard him say it and didn’t have a clue what was going to happen. It turns out my trust was warranted. And Gopal also delivered in a big way on a crucial scene, which can’t be described for fear of ruining the suspense of the film. holly2You might say the night belonged to Rex, who consistently elicited laughter with his character’s witticisms, or Marlyse, who startled the audience with her beauty and audacity. You might say the night belonged to Betty Jones, whose penetrating singing voice moved us all. I could nominate almost anyone from the cast, but I think the best case is that the night belonged to Holly, who pulled off a lead role with only ten minutes preparation. I guess, actually, she’d be preparing her whole life, through dreams delayed, hopes revived, skills gained, lost and developed again. As my friend Richard observed from the audience, “Holly came across like sunshine, with her red hair, her smile, her presence. You just can’t deny how genuine she is.”

As I walked her to the valet station after the show, Holly told me that she wanted to return to Ivana’s class and resume her career as an actress. I looked at her, then gave her a hug, no doubt that Holly will be the “poet at 40.”

More than any of us, I guess the night belonged to an idea: whether you are Nathaniel or Holly, whether you’ve been slighted by the industry or rewarded, you have to keep going, do your work and see what happens. And sometimes, something good and unexpected comes along. And that gives you the courage to keep going…a courage that an unknown stranger down the line will need from you.

As I left Holly and walked back to the Bailey’s/Coffee party in full swing, I realized that the Fatelink mission statement I dashed off for the program…had been accomplished without us even really trying.

For the record, here’s the cast list of the first public reading of “Inside-Out, Outside-In” (in alphabetical order): Daniel Berilla, Camille Carida, Marilyn Chase, Gopal Divan, Holly Elkjer, Jason Fracaro, James Lee Hernandez, Hunter Lee Hughes, Betty Jones, Rex Lee, Moira Leeper, Marlyse Londe, Jerod Meagher, Shon Perun, Alexander Popovic, Adrian  Quinonez, Tracey Verhoeven.

We give a special thanks to costume designer Shpetim Zero, technical operator Phillip Wheeler, event coordinator Louise Miclat, volunteer Pete Willink and the McCadden Place Theatre, along with its manager Ken Basham. Additional thanks to J. Parker Buell, Alesandro Piersimoni and Richard Scharfenberg.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Image

Invitation – “Inside-Out, Outside-In”

22 Tuesday Jan 2013

Tags

hunter lee hughes, independent film, inside-out-outside-in, screenplay development, screenplay reading

Very excited about our first public reading of “Inside-Out, Outside-In,” scheduled for Thursday, February 7th.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Posted by hunterlh | Filed under Development, The Script

≈ 4 Comments

Top Ten Things I’m Packing For Sundance

16 Wednesday Jan 2013

Posted by hunterlh in Development

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

fatelink, hunter lee hughes, jason fracaro, jerod meagher, packing for sundance, richard scharfenberg, sundance, sundance trip, top ten things to bring to sundance, what to bring to sundance

Tomorrow morning at 5:30 a.m., I will brew the last of the Christmastime Urth Cafe coffee, pour it into a thermos, pick up my friends and drive the 11 hours from Los Angeles to Park City, Utah for a potentially epic Sundance road trip. Here are the top ten things I’m bringing with me (if I’m forgetting something, tell me now!):

10. Bottled water.  Because I don’t care if bottled water gives you cancer. This weekend, I want to stay hydrated and avoid altitude sickness.

9. My grandfather’s four woolen shirts – Because I want to layer up and strike up some apple orchard memories while in the midst of industry small talk. Keeps you grounded.

8. E-Tip Gloves – Because I want to stay warm and still operate a smart phone at the same time.

7. Cute bathing suit – Because you never know what hot tub parties might send invitations your way.

6. Nine hard copies of ‘Inside-Out, Outside-In’ – Because even when you’re soft selling, you just never know…

5. ‘Dumbass Filmmakers!‘ postcards – Because it’s good to have them set out in the hotel room as a talking point with guests.

4. Thermal Underwear – Because I want to look like Michael J. Fox in “Back to the Future, Part II” and stay warm at the same time.

3. Business cards – Because not everyone has a smart phone and, you know, I may get asked for them every now and then and don’t want to look stupid.

2. Snow Boots – Because they were 50% off at Target and preventing icy, mushy snow from reaching my toes is worth a lot.

1. Wool Socks – Because my grandparents from Ohio gave them to me and again, preventing icy, mushy snow from reaching my toes is worth a lot.

For the record, Team Sundance includes: Jason Fracaro, Hunter Lee Hughes, Jerod Meagher and Richard Scharfenberg.

The next post comes from Utah…

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Version 2.0: The Second Screenplay Reading

06 Thursday Dec 2012

Posted by hunterlh in Development, The Script

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Ann Russo, bossa nova, Charles Hoyes, friends, gaydar, how to do a screenplay reading, hunter lee hughes, jason fracaro, Jeord Meagher, Luke Massy, making movies with friends, revising your script, rewriting, rex lee, screenplay reading, Screenwriting, story analysts, Tracey Verhoeven, Whitney Anderson

An intimate, elegant screening room fittingly served as the locale for our second reading of “Inside-Out, Outside-In”, unconsciously expressing the ethos and hopes of the project. At first scheduled for the more grand space on the 5th floor, I decided to relocate our reading downstairs so my WeWork colleague Kristin Nedopak could more easily access the 5th floor screening room to celebrate the release of her webseries, “Skyrim Parodies.” At first obstinate over a change requiring more emails and a slightly smaller room, I relented. After all, the number four is the number of spiritual wholeness and maybe a bit of good luck might follow a bit of a good deed. Turns out, the fifteen actors and three invited guests fit perfectly into an imperfect circle of chairs of differing sizes, styles and fabrics.

Like all readings, despite my best efforts, we started late. Still, as director, I felt is was my responsibility to properly frame the evening and send us in the right direction. So I somewhat awkwardly told our group that the script was intensely personal to me, hoping that such a revelation would increase the chances that they would also bring an intensely personal approach to the night. Building on that notion, I asked the actors to let go any sense of a “professional veneer.” Lately, I find the acting in studio films so boring because a sense of the actors’ professionalism prevents me from relating to them no_egoas human beings.  They almost know the beats too well – it’s like watching an emotionally resonant cuckoo clock. Even at an early stage, I didn’t want to see that happen to my actors. So I suggested they see the reading as a “practice round” and encouraged them to just be a human being in a situation, not a professional actor at a reading.

Just before we dove in, television’s Rex Lee once again blurted out a quote of the night, “Is that buzzing, like, going to go on for infinity?” Apparently, a smoke alarm needed more acknowledgement than a roomful of actors and went off with annoying regularly throughout the reading. But something amazing about a good story and good acting – once we got past page 10, I didn’t hear the buzzing anymore and not because of a decrease of its decibel level.

I’d made a number of changes in the cast of the reading – about half the people were new. Sometimes, it was a result of a desire to try a new angle with the character, sometimes a scheduling conflict forced a change. Also, my friend Zsa Zsa Gershick, an accomplished playwright and director, previously implored me to see different people in many of the parts before settling on someone, as part of the process of understanding the character as deeply as possible. Indeed, the fragility of casting and character development pervades my thinking at the moment – add a few years to this character’s age and another character needs to be younger. If we go with a more quirky sensibility for one character, it requires a different character to step up as an authority, changing the requirements for the actor playing him.

An interesting addition to the evening was Jerod Meagher, an unrepresented actor just starting out at Ivana Chubbuck’s studio, where so many of us have trained. He stopped by the office a few days before the reading in hyper-ripped jeans to get some direction on the Jerod Meagher, actorcharacter. I immediately liked that he took notes with a pen and crudely folded piece of paper rather than an iPhone or some other secondary device. It’s a good thing if notes are fragile enough to be lost. He apparently made a good impression on at least four female attendees whose comments after the reading ranged from, “He’s got something” to “He’s sincere” to perhaps the most powerful – “I don’t know, I just like Jerod.” The ever-quirky and entertaining Tracey Verhoeven went a step further and said, “He’s just like a little angel. I mean, not like one of those fat cherub angels but like a good-looking one.” Also new this time were talented veterans Whitney Anderson, Luke Massy, Ethan Rains whitney aand Charles Hoyes. Whitney, who recently forwarded my acting reel to a director for a mind-bending fright flick for the role of a juicy psycho guy, is one of the most helpful people to know in terms of making recommendations. She’s savvy about seeing when colleagues might be a good fit and has no problem connecting them, a refreshing attitude in this town.

Afterwards, the approval of the adjustments I made to the script were heartening and the discussion turned more to “which way to go” with certain characters and practical concerns for the shooting rather than folks suggesting major overhauls. I even got one, “It was fuckin’ awesome” from a guest. That felt good. I am still worried about the climactic scene being too talk-y and Ann Russo echoed that concern. But we both felt the visual element of the choreography in that section might compensate for a dialogue-heavy stretch. Ms. Russo easily could’ve been a colleague of mine as a story analyst. She consistently airs notes that my foggy unconscious hasn’t yet articulated, so I was especially grateful for her feedback throughout the night on characters, plot and pre-production. There’s always a chance people are holding back their doubts out of respect or fear, but I now feel confident enough with the script to go ahead and create a shooting script to schedule the film and start getting more detailed with the budget.

Speaking of budget, the one startling bit of feedback came from high fashion designer Sphetim Zero, who passionately declared that he would need $50,000 to properly costume the feature. I appreciated his ambition, but warned him that was impossible with our current budget constraints. He encouraged me to open myself up to receiving more from the Universe. I agreed to be more vigilant about hoping for the best, but warned him to think of a back-up plan. We both agreed that he would help me clothe people from their closets for the industry read in February and take it from there.

Once again, a core group ended up at Bossa Nova for late night steak. This time, Dumbass Filmmakers! producer Jason Fracaro joined myself and aspiring social media guru Richard Scharfenberg (more on this effort in a future post). Jason, back from a 10-week basic training for the Army and his inclusion in the National Guard, has a reputation as one of the best guys to know (and one of the worst gaydars – ask me privately) and he gamely filled our quota for at least one “straight guy” at the dinner. Rex arrived late and this time, we were able to order his “ribeye steak cooked ‘medium rare plus’ with plantains, extra pico de gallo, extra salsa” before he arrived. But, just like last time, he paid for all of us with the quick move of a credit card and a declaration that, “I don’t believe in splitting checks.” He’s one of those guys that picks up the check when it’s kinda expensive or a big group and lets you return the favor at a hamburger joint. Ah, friends.

Correction: Ah, friends…and filmmaking.

Cast of the 2nd reading of “Inside-Out, Outside-In” (in alphabetical order): Whitney Anderson, Camille Carida, Marilyn Chase, Jason Fracaro, James Lee Hernandez, Charles Hoyes, Hunter Lee Hughes, Marcus Kaye, Rex Lee, Luke Massy, Jerod Meagher, Ashley Osler, Ethan Rains, Ann Russo, Tracey Verhoeven. Invited guests included Mr. Richard Scharfenberg, Mr. Jay Walters and Mr. Sphetim Zero.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

To Sundance or Not To Sundance….

30 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by hunterlh in Development, The Script

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

going to sundance, hamlet, how political is sundance, is sundance worth it, making travel plans, park city, sudance, sundance, to be or not to be

….that is the question.

After a talk with one of my inspiring indie film friends, I went crazy and booked a hotel room for four at Sundance in Park City at $289/night.  Of course, I can still cancel the reservation in the next two weeks so there’s really no risk to me just yet.  But I figured I can recruit three other crazies to drive in my black Prius, split gas, split the hotel room and dive into the nexus of the film festival world for under $500 bucks.  I already have a lead on one or two potential Prius-Riders (it’s hard to feel gangsta in a Prius, but still, I think I’ll manage to feel a little gangsta).

The question is, is this worth my time and money? I’m leaning “yes” for a couple reasons.

I had planned to hold a reading of the polished screenplay for investors and industry on January 16th.   Well, I might lose some folks due to Sundance on that date and might gain some folks after the festival by moving that to around February 5th, 6th or 7th. (My friend suggested other industry folks might be at their “high point” of interest in indie film right after a successful festival). If all my prep work was headed towards a date that wasn’t ideal, maybe I ought to work with the calendar instead of fighting it. And if I do attend Sundance, I’d have the reading – an upcoming event – to invite people who showed interest in me or the film.

Also, I had previously thought it was better to attend a film festival only after you’ve had a film accepted into that festival.  My friend convinced me that this might not be the right approach. After all, selection to Sundance is very rare and political, so there’s no shame in not having a film there…just yet. Plus, a Sundance experience might connect me to other interesting filmmakers and film-lovers and provide a sort of energetic push for the project.  While I certainly don’t plan to give Park City the “hard sell” on ‘Inside-Out, Outside-In,’ a few new friendships are worth a lot over the course of a career and Sundance at least provides an opportunity – and one OUTSIDE the established power structure of L.A. – to make connections and to be exposed to new ideas and talent. In a sense, everyone there is at least committed enough to filmmaking to travel some distance. So that’s promising in and of itself.

Plus, I’ve never done Sundance and maybe it’s just that time. Maybe this year is the year the itch becomes a scratch and that’s okay.

Will Sundance be worth it? I don’t know, but Hamlet ended up killing himself and his family after bemoaning an existential question, so I’m not gonna take his example and second guess too much. I guess “To Sundance” it is….

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Intimacy Cinema: The anti-Cool solution to destructive L.A. veneer

16 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by hunterlh in Development, The Script

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1%, can i be a hollywood star, celebrities in rehab, hollywood, image, intimacy cinema, is hollywood socialist, kids of celebrities in rehab, one percent, one percenters, socialims, socialism, special effects, special effects mentality, sum of its parts, why is hollywood socialist

I believe a revitalized cinema must first strip away the sleek “coolness” and visual sophistication that has infected Los Angeles and…through its amplification by Hollywood stars…the world. The demoralizing pretty people on the big screen these days no longer seem to exemplify beauty, but rather seem to be a sum of parts – cute face, talent, hot abs, nice ass, confidence. Whereas something truly beautiful inspires us to live a more realized life, the current crop of Hollywood stars, starlets and films somehow leaves you feeling badly about yourself, not measuring up, as if somehow the films themselves are sending powerful coded messages that its own creators and participants are more valuable than you, sitting in the audience.  While this state of affairs may’ve always been true in terms of raw financial net worth of stars vs audience members, there were periods in movie history where we felt the people on screen were “one of us (only better).” Now, there is an unconscious sense that we’ll never be like the people in the movies…and they know it.

It is a tried-and-true cliche that Hollywood values “special effects” over story. Well, I believe not only that the cliche is true, but the mindset of “special effects” has taken over the casting process and our selection of cultural icons. The modern crop of stars embodies, in a sense, the ethos of this “special effects” mentality. The stars are dazzling, monumental in scale and proportion yet deceptive, flashy and empty of content deeper than a loud “Pop.” Whatever depth of feeling they do generate is almost a spectacle, rather than an organic part of their humanity. As assuredly as something was “missing” from the Old Testament God that rained vengeance on those that didn’t worship Him, something is missing from the stars/myths of modern cinema. What is missing?

A revitalized and satisfying movie experience requires a re-evaluation of the truly important moments in a human being’s life and the most crucial aspects to being alive. I believe the amazing technical and visual sophistication of Hollywood and its ever-increasing ability to dazzle audiences is not simply a product of genius, hard work and technological advances, although all three are to be given some credit. Hollywood’s mind-blowing visual show and piecemeal-perfect stars are also a compensation for something it lacks – the ability to deliver intimacy between its characters and with its audience.

As I ready this script and experience, I want to build a film that convinces the audience – above all else – that the people in the film are experiencing real intimacy with each other. By extension, the audience should be included in that sense of intimacy and made to feel the range of scary, giddy and life-affirming emotions that comes with finding a cinema that knows your own foibles and potential, a cinema that dares to be affectionate and inclusive of the audience’s nascent hopes. Right now, the dying breed of people who truly understand intimate relationships and find the courage to live them out need to rally and create projects that preserve a sense of intimacy in all art forms. Those people may not look as pretty as Hollywood stars (indeed they probably shouldn’t) and they may not inhabit spaces that look as pretty as Hollywood locations, but they will certainly be more beautiful. And that’s what a country mired in the hopelessness of a slow-going recovery really needs. Modern Hollywood slyly celebrates the dominance of the 1% (although they paradoxically are the biggest advocates for socialism), while an Intimacy Cinema celebrates those across the income spectrum that retain the courage to live as individuals deeply connecting against all odds with other individuals. They win freedom of the need for outer approval, even at great cost to their quality of life and esteem. And yet, what they win is something that the audience intuitively feels that it can attain, too.

If we succeed in breeding new types of Intimacy Cinema stars, I promise so many rehabs won’t be needed for their offspring.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Color Psychology: Can it help in the rewrite process? I gotta say, “Yes.”

03 Saturday Nov 2012

Posted by hunterlh in Development, The Script

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bavo defurne, belgium film funding, character development and color, color for directing, color for filmmakers, color for screenwriters, color psychology, mardik martin, north sea texas, paramount classics, paramount vantage, storytelling, what color should i choose for my character

Last night, I saw Belgian Bavo Defurne’s hypnotic debut feature “North Sea, Texas” and was struck throughout with his adept usage of color to convey emotions and theme in a picture that pointedly veered away from reliance on dialogue. During the first viewing, the colors worked completely on a subconscious level for me. In the moment, I wasn’t aware of why certain vivid colors were selected at certain moments, but knew they were purposeful and effective without knowing why (this is why great films merit a second viewing). Like his lead character, I can only imagine Mr. Defurne’s pathway to directing came from an early childhood fascination with drawing, color and aesthetics. He uses one of his sparing lines of dialogue to point out the importance of color when the child’s mother even says, “Red is the color of love.”

Of course, I come to directing from the completely opposite end of the spectrum, having focused most of my career on acting and creating narrative stories, through screenwriting, through my work with writer Mardik Martin and through years of reading scripts for Paramount Classics/Paramount Vantage. I’ve had the opportunity to observe how the script changed or evolved into a piece of moving art projected onto a screen. And I know how to tell a story. I’m that shy guy at the party who’s quiet for most of the night until it’s my turn to talk and then I say, “So, the other night, I’m at the ATM when….” and everybody shuts up and listens.

Filmmaking all starts with the inner lives of the characters for me, their dreams, desires and conflicts with one another and the world. The aesthetics of the film come second to that, after I’ve worked most of the conflicts and characterizations out in my mind and on paper. And yes, because I wrote plays before I wrote films, I’m turned on by dialogue revealing characters rather than the opposite. But still, film is a visual medium. In our years of working together, Mardik often told me, “With a movie, don’t write with your head or your heart. Write with your eyes.”

So maybe (I’m guessing) Defurne’s impulse to make a film starts with a drawing and mine from a character’s inner life and conflict, but it doesn’t mean I can’t learn from him about the importance of color psychology both in terms of expressing something about the character and provoking emotion from the audience with the palette selected. When I first saw the film, I thought, “Maybe I should just wait and figure out this color stuff after the rewrite. This comes later.” But, as my previous blog post on mindmapping shows, I did include a branch for color for each character. So why not do the work and look into color and try to peg the color schemes for each character, for the situations they face? Although it may not directly change any lines of dialogue, it might help me discover another layer of the characters, which could impact the rewrite. And if I know what characters embody certain colors, I just might add a line to reflect that, as the “North Sea, Texas” screenplay did with its comment on the color red, which works perfectly to reveal that character. It also sounds pretty damn fun.

The biggest fear I have in delving this deep at this point in the process is the fear that all this “extra” work will mean nothing if the film doesn’t get made (I’m a little jealous when I see European film credits that indicate they got funding from their government). My fear says, ‘What if after diving in and realizing that the antagonist should wear purple here and lavender here, we end up with only 25K to make the film and we don’t even have time to buy a purple shirt (or some ridiculous thought like this)?’ This fear of the film not being made has to be confronted frequently (at least for me), but investing more time and energy on deepening the characters, the look, the script and yes the color psychology involved with the film will only pay dividends when the time comes to make the film, no matter what budget we raise. And if i’m armed and prepared to answer every question about not just the characters and their conflict and the script’s structure, but also exactly how I see the film down to the colors of the costumes, I’ll spark more confidence in investors (or even established actors) taking a gamble on an indie film.

Jung has written on color psychology, as have tons of others. I’ll include here a brief YouTube video from About.com that introduces the concept. Happy viewing and let me know what working with color has taught you about your characters and script.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Recent Posts

  • We’ve moved!
  • Co-Creating With Your “Audience”
  • The Voice of Your Film
  • New Film Distribution Models – 7 Ideas
  • The Duty of the Artist

Archives

  • December 2018
  • January 2017
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012

Categories

  • Budgeting
  • Casting
  • Development
  • Financing
  • Interviews
  • Post-Production
  • Pre-Production
  • Production
  • Release
  • Scheduling
  • The Script
  • Uncategorized
  • Wardrobe

Connect with us….

Connect with us….

Twitter Updates

  • How can you as a storyteller or #filmmaker empower yourself to navigate the funding of your passion projects? One s… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 5 months ago
Follow @fatelink

Subscribe...

  • Vimeo
  • Youtube

Blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Inside-Out, Outside-In
    • Join 43 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Inside-Out, Outside-In
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: