Financing / Crowdfunding

Good breakdown, however, I would suggest Sinners was technically "original" but it had Ryan Coogler and Michael B. Jordan attached, which functioned as its own form of pre-sold IP in the eyes of investors. If it was Ryan Coogler's first film, they would need something else to drive it. From a financing standpoint, private equity investment in film dropped 73.5% from 2022 to 2023, and the capital that's still deploying in 2026 is overwhelmingly chasing what's modelable, not what's "safe" or "risky" in a creative sense. That's the real distinction, because a franchise with a $110M budget like Super Mario Galaxy and an original with a bankable director and actor as well as a tight budget are both financeable; they just require completely different capital stack architectures. My theory is that what investors are open to right now isn't one path or the other, it's whichever project can demonstrate pre-awareness, a clear recoupment timeline, and IP that extends beyond a single release. Another great question can be: can I model this in a room full of people who don't care about the story? Another investor are the non-industry investors that I think independent filmmakers need training to go after. Educators on Stage32, such as Sarah Elizabeth Timmins, as you know, teach how to go after investors that have a personal connection to the story. Even if it's fictional. Not the world's best example, but if it's about firefighters, raise funds through firefighters and organizations that support firefighters.

Both can work...but the bar is very different.

IP is about predictability....pre-awareness, global marketing efficiency, downside protection. 
Originals are about URGENCY (I think!) ...a concept so clear and compelling it forces attention.

Right now, most buyers and financiers lean “safe bet” unless the original feels undeniable on the page IE clean hook, clear audience, strong execution path.

So the real question isn’t either/or ...it’s:
 Does your project reduce risk… or create enough demand that risk becomes irrelevant?

Definitely to make it undeniable enough to break through as an original Ashley Renée Smith. I think financing a film is more about networks and and investors seem to want a personal reason to finance a film. My investors are all about the local exposure and highlighting the area / focus that benefits their business/interests the most.

Funny, because I heard that the movie got many negative reviews before it releases in theaters. To be honest, I don't even care for the Super Mario Movie sequel let alone the first film is because it sorts of parody through every Super Mario video game franchise and put these games like Super Mario Bros (NES) mixed with Donkey Kong and Mario Kart 8 (Wii U/Switch Deluxe) in the first film. Not surprisingly, they tried to do it again with Yoshi adding into a disastrous blend of Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario Odyssey and you get an aimless sequel of Mario and gang roaming around through outer space while fighting off Bowser Jr.? How moronic was that?! It's obviously an overdone fan-fiction franchise than a movie adaptation for the video game franchise. It was a disaster three years ago and it's more of a catastrophe now. Unsophisticated at its best! Hmph!

Financiers want a risk-free investment. Hence the ever-growing reliance on IP...which isn't bullet proof. It's not about the IP itself these days, but the audience really. Very curious to see how BACKROOMS fares.

Kseniia Zhuravleva I've been researching film grants for a year. Most grants I've found are for documentaries and very niche genres. I'd advise checking out the film incentives in the state you're filming - and your state's film communities.

Also I think it's great for creatives to be aware of all the different elements that go into building a career. It's not just about writing a script (which is the best it can possibly be). It's also about learning about the industry. Networking. Making connections and finding collaborators. Creating buzz and momentum about yourself and your work and then building on that. You have to be prepared that things aren't always (or usually!) linear, and that often you won't go in a straight line from the A to B you imagined, and that's ok.

Totally agree with all of this; some really great feedback here. I often tell new screenwriters/producers/directors that actually MAKING ANYTHING is a win. The process of creating and then putting that creation up on its feet is the most valuable learning experience one can have. An added bonus is: you have an asset for your portfolio at the end of the lesson! So, if you're just starting out, don't start fundraising for a TV pilot or an indie feature. Start with a 2-minute short film that you can make for under $500. And then, once you do that short...do another one. When you feel like you've made something you're proud of, move to the next level...and fundraise for a couple of 5-7 minute shorts at $1.5k...and so on, and so forth. By the time you're looking to raise more money, you'll be deserving of that money, because you'll have cut your teeth and gone through the necessary paces.

Great advice Michael Fitzer, Mfa. Get your feet wet, just shoot a project to get the feel for it. Definitely direct a short if you haven't.

This is so true, Michael Fitzer, Mfa -- I liken it to learning how to swim, or learning martial arts. Embrace the beginner mind and don't try to fly before you can walk. Because nothing destroys your passion more than being in over your head. And don't be afraid to pursue different lanes - the advice "stay in your lane" will limit you in the modern industry. Just don't try to learn everything all at once.

It's not just right sizing your project but also your expectations. Not every at bat needs to be a home run. Take pride in the single and work to push runs across the plate.

It's so true that VCs want to know you have a plan for them to make money on their investment - otherwise it's not an investment, it's crowdfunding. If you have a plan for how they can see a return on their money, it puts you light years ahead of most filmmakers/

Great question this is exactly where strategy makes all the difference.

Getting your films onto streaming platforms typically involves either going through aggregators, film festivals for exposure, or connecting with distributors who already have platform relationships.

The key is not just having a great film, but packaging it properly strong logline, polished pitch deck, and clear audience positioning.

I work closely with creators on refining their projects and positioning them for opportunities like this, including outreach strategies and industry connections. If you’d like, I’d be happy to take a look at your work and explore how we can get it in front of the right people. Feel free to reach out I’d love to help you move this forward.

Alex Silverscript

Thank you very much for your helpful insights — they are truly excellent. I understand your points very well. As you mentioned, creating a strong logline and preparing a proper proposal can be time-consuming, and it really helps to have someone alongside you to guide the process.

The industry is complex, and sometimes it feels like even if you create something, you may not achieve real success

Find a sales agent, who can sell your content. You need a good poster and trailer and a solid film. Even then, there is no guarantee you'll make $$. Festivals are great to build relationships. In the meantime, while you are waiting on a break, find other ways to generate income, then self-finance projects you are passionate about. This stuff takes time. There is no magic, get lucky route. Just persistence. Best wishes to you!

@muhammadabedbaryal Good question. There are numerous tutorials, courses, blogs, and further information available on Stage 32 with answers to your questions. Head to the Education section as a starter. Real industry pros have contributed hours and hours to these questions. There is nothing like this in the industry. Dive in is my suggestion. https://www.stage32.com/education