MovieChat Forums > El mariachi (1993) Discussion > Exploding the $7000 myth

Exploding the $7000 myth

posted 20 years ago by Petros000
116 replies | jump to latest

It was a great story to hype up the film, but if you actually read "Rebel without a Crew" (Rodriguez's account of the making of this movie) it's clear that the film you're seeing on your DVD player is not the movie that RR made. The studio had to spend a huge amount of money (many times the original budget) to fix the sound and make the film fit for public projection. Basically, what RR did was make a 16mm action flick with non-synchronized sound and no work print -- he just had it printed to a video tape which he used as a sort of calling card to open doors for him in Hollywood. Of course, it worked, and got him a good studio deal, though at several points in negotiations there was a lot of talk about shelving the film and having RR remake it from scratch. Too bad for the unpaid actors who helped him create the movie -- maybe they would have been less enthusiastic for the project if they had known they were only contributing to making a video resume for Rodriquez. Luckily, it turned out better than that.

On the upside, this is an enjoyable, no-budget action flick that's fun to watch and is good for 90 minutes of entertainment, but that's about it -- nothing particularly substantive in it, not that there's anything wrong with that in itself. It's clear Rodriguez saw himself as a budding Spielberg, not a budding Cassavetes, and had an eye for a big studio career from frame one. There's nothing in El Mariachi that undermines standard Hollywood conventions or expectations (other than the low budget and Latino cast and locations, which are colorful and fresh for most of us in the U.S.)

A must-read companion piece to "Rebel without a Crew" is Joe Queenan's "The Unkindest Cut," in which the humorous movie critic tries to follow Rodriguez's advice and tries to prove that "anyone" can make a movie for $7000. He fails miserably but hilariously, ending up $60,000 in debt for his efforts to create a cheezy and worthless black comedy, "Twelve Steps to Death." Point being, not evyerone can be a Rodriguez -- wannabe filmmakers beware. ;)

[–] MrMister 20 years ago

But the actual film he made before the studio fixed it up looked as good and did cost 7,000. Columbia only fixed it up to send it to cinemas. So really it did cost 7,000. The film beforehand looked just as good, only on video. He had to redo to send it to cinema. So it was redone, but the original still remained 7,000

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Topmounter 20 years ago

The fact remains,

he was able to pull it off

AND

deliver a more entertaining movie than half of the multi-million dollar dreck you see paraded through your local cineplex.

[–] Quankers 18 years ago

Exactly. He made a movie for 7000. And it can be done today.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wclarkmc 20 years ago

when you say "the script and dialog is pretty average" i hope you speak spanish!! i can't stand the MORONS who criticize the writing of foreign films when all they understand is the subtitles. two of the most important parts of dialogue are the rhythm and the message (what fact/opinion/etc the speaker is trying to convey). while the message gets extremely obscured in most translations, the rhythm is COMPLETELY LOST.

in spanish, the writing of el mariachi is pretty good. he's no spike lee, but the spanish writing is far better than "pretty average."

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JimmyZappa 17 years ago

Rob's dialogue is not like Tarantino's, Cameron's, or any other writer of that caliber, no, but I don't think that was his intent. His work is more action movie comic book type stuff, he obviously puts more of an emphasis on his crazy action choreography, slick few lines of dialogue, and quirky moments.

As much as I like Tarantino's work, I preferred Rob's Planet Terror over his Death Proof segment in the Grindhouse movie. Rob's stuff is simple entertainment and its great, but he is no James Cameron when it comes to writing. I understand your complaints, but as a first time full length feature film on a low budget, its actually pretty impressive stuff.

Stuff like this reminds me of "Movie Poop Shoot.com" from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.

[–] mikepasley 17 years ago

i just got done reading the book. it's funny to come here and read such synical opinions about such an awesome success story. i sense a lot of jealousy and spite just for the sake of it. instead of trying to prove that someone who's made it isn't a good writer or didn't make the movie for only $7000 or he had a lot of free help, think of the point. i don't know the guy, but i get the feeling what he is saying in the book is, "i don't give a *beep* about anybody that doubts me." in fact, he seems to not give a *beep* so much that he doesn't care about defending himself or proving people wrong. to me, the book is inspiring and positive. i bet no one in here can touch his level of success, talent, or ambition, otherwise, these forum posts would read a lot differently. it's easy to rip on the people that have made it, but it's almost shameful to rip on someone that seems so cool. lastly, he also encourages people to NOT get a loan, so if making a movie because you love doing it is worth 7 grand, then you should do, and not expect to get rich.

[–] shipscat-716-650621 12 years ago

"Cameron's, or any other writer of that calibre"

Don't make me laugh, Cameron can't write for toffee.
*beep* A man!" really? I don't even class that as English!

"Is this another bug hunt?" If the only "Aliens are xenomorphs" what bugs are they hunting...Maybe he'd read Starship Troopers.

Jack: Where to, Miss?
Rose: To the stars.

This reads like a 5 year old's story.

Yes he's a real genius, though I doubt he could ever hold a torch to Tarantino though now I'm older I don't think Lucas is as good a writer either, he should have left off with the original trilogy.

If you want good dialogue look to some of the classic B&W films or I'd certainly recommend Master and Commander...that is writing, sir, by god that is writing!

“You’re not the tooth faerie are you?”
“No, she’s real. Don’t be a plank!”

[–] JimmyZappa 12 years ago

Uhm, you're probably new to the whole movie thing (nor do you know what the word "caliber" means) so let me fill you on in on how it works.

Cameron, Tarantino, those guys? In their field, they're great at what they do in the genres they work in (in my opinion and by consensus also). I haven't seen Master and Commander yet but it's a HISTORICAL EPIC DRAMA. You're comparing a writer who specializes in ACTION/THRILLER to a HISTORICAL EPIC DRAMA. It's comparable to saying "Feh, a Honda Civic the best of its kind? Doesn't match up to an Aston Martin". Only thing comparable to the two is that they're cars. That's it.

With that in mind, how many different writers can you say are as good or better than Cameron IN THE SAME GENRE THEY WRITE IN? I can agree not every smidgeon of dialogue he writes is gonna be a grand slam (let's not forget writing is just one part of a much bigger picture) but given some of the stuff he came up with, influencing pop culture while he's at it, i'd say he did a pretty good job.

Besides, it's easy to look at a whole movie and just pick one or two lines that don't sound great on paper but when executed on FILM it can be great. The whole script for the original Star Wars is ABYSMAL to say the least, I read it and just reading it by itself, ignoring the wonderful execution by the actors, its pretty tacky and lame. Alec Guiness, Carrie Fisher, and Harrison Ford have stated they didn't like the way Lucas wrote the dialogue at all.

But watching it executed, its just fine. But I guess in the end, it all comes down to different strokes.

Stuff like this reminds me of "Movie Poop Shoot.com" from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.

[–] laspanishspeaking 11 years ago

Lucas is a better writer than Cameron. He may not have it in the dialog department, but he kicks Cameron's ass in the story department.

Barry Lyndon shot first.

[–] Kunovega 10 years ago

Cameron is a great director, he's a terrible writer

Tarantino is a great director; but his (quality) writing is limited to specific genres. He's a bit meh outside his scope.

[–] fifiholden 9 years ago

Yup...you should have read that as "caliber", we all do typos you kwon! I do know what caliber means and I have been watching films all my life though I just don't get the "myth" of Cameron! Mebbe it's since i'm not a fanboy???

"Sameen Shaw: In the arm, through a brick wall, in the dark. You're welcome."

[–] lebowskithedude 9 years ago

Cameron can't write for toffee? You're trying to make yourself sound like an upper class British critic, and you sound like a douche.

[–] Fats_Mattumbo 16 years ago

I believe it was written in English then translated to Spanish.

[–] jdbaxter-1 16 years ago

actually this film was written in english and translated to colloquial spanish, just thought id let you know.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lartrak 20 years ago

" I am not saying that a "Mariachi-style" movie could NOT be made today but it would be soooo much more difficult."

But in some ways, it would be easier - if you already have a decent digicam (as many do) and computer, you don't have to worry about film, editing, or many other post-production costs. Heck, for guns, I could buy airsoft replicas of similar description of all the types used in El Mariachi for a couple thousand dollars - you can add muzzle flares and such in post-production if you have the talent.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lartrak 19 years ago

Of course I wouldn't LITERALLY do that, I was just using that as an exmample. And of course it would still take a long time to do. I'm just saying it could still be done.

[–] jdbaxter-1 16 years ago

*beep* you can just borrow and buy guns or even prop guns. i have a prop handgun, got it in la for 150. and film just looks better than dv, the thing you would have to worry about is digital intermediate for editing, and if you wanted to go super cheap you could use reversal film so you wouldnt have to make a work print

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Bird_Dog 17 years ago

Well it's almost better to read Lloyd Kaufman's <SP> "Make Your Own DAMN Movie" because there are important details included, such as how to raise money for a damn-near charitable cause (indie flicks are a bit on the charity side) and how to get women to take their clothes off in front of a camera for little or no pay. Of course, what some ppl seem to forget is this- it doesn't matter if it costs $25 if it's A GREAT IDEA FOR A MOVIE.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TheDizzy1 19 years ago

Very well put. The story is fantastic. The film also does a great job of telling it considering the money put up to make it.

"Hey, Dad. There's a strange fella sittin' on the sofa...munchy wunching lomticks of toast!"

[–] ratpack00 19 years ago

I'm currently doing a project on comparisons between El Mariachi and Desperado. Do you, or anyone else for that matter, have a rough idea how much Columbia had to spend in order to get El Mariachi in a fit state to show on screen?

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ratpack00 19 years ago

It does (I got the book last week) but it doesn't say how much Columbia spent on prints, marketing etc. I know how much they paid Rodriguez for El Mariachi but what was the real cost to Coumbia to get the film into the theatres?

[–] tempestv 17 years ago

Columbia spent 1 million to convert it to 35 mm- but even $1007000 is a lot less than most comparable movies, and if you watch the 10 minute film school, the footage that was given to Columbia wasn't bad by any stretch of the imagination

[–] oedipus_wrecks2003-1 19 years ago

I'm currently doing a project on comparisons between El Mariachi and Desperado. Do you, or anyone else for that matter, have a rough idea how much Columbia had to spend in order to get El Mariachi in a fit state to show on screen?

The version seen in most cinemas has had approximately $1 million of post-production work and promotion behind it. I don't know if anyone knows the exact figure but this came from the trivia section.

Join the Classic Films community at http://www.communities.com

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tmfak 19 years ago

If you read RR's book, you would know that he states REPEATEDLY that the film was to be made simply as "practice" and if he was lucky go straight to the mexican home video market. It was neve intended to be a demo reel.

Also, I find it hard to believe that his actors felt betrayed by him as the 3 leads all had bit parts in Desparado. If they felt betrayed they wouldn't have agreed to come back.

Lastly, it is irrelevent hom much Columbia spent on post-production. The fact is RR made his film for $7000, and most of that was used to pay for film. RR says hee only spent about $648 on things actually needed to "make" the film.

[–] englisher101 19 years ago

It's clearly obvious that there was way more money put into the post-production work, the distribution, etc., and that the movie's cost would be nowhere near what it was had it not been for a lot of freebies and cheap contributions from talented people. This is the same case with Versus, a cool Japanese zombie action flick which was made for under $7000 (800,000 yen).

Still, the fact remains that Rodriguez had $7000 which he used to make his filmmaking dream come true, and that's pretty damn impressive.

[–] tmfak 19 years ago

READ HIS BOOK!!!
In it, he clearly explains how to make a movie for nothing, even on a low-budget film a lot of money is wasted. The things he got as "freebies" are things that the studio systen has built in phoney charges for. As for the post-pro work, most of what the studio did, they do for every film they pick up, and it is never included in the budget.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] martintibbs 18 years ago

Very unlikely as for starters a Apple Mac would cost well in excess of 2-3000$, the mini DV would also cost in excess of 1000$ too. I can more believe this if it was done on a PC but a mac? half the power for twice the price. Nah.

In the end though, its impressive what he did with 7000$ and even if what you see had more spent on it you can still see that a major company took it off his hands and felt it worth making into a major film.

RR has acheived something that very few ever will, with enough skill and determination anything can happen. RR is living proof.

[–] kikujiro1988 18 years ago

half the power for twice the price? I hated mac untill all my expensive pcs failed horribly and turned out to be garbage. I got a mac 3 years ago and have not had a problem since, ever.

[–] Euphrosyne 18 years ago

" I can more believe this if it was done on a PC but a mac".
OMG! What a load of cr*p.
Obviously you don't really know anything about Macs - except for FUD - or you wouldn't say anything so incredibly stupid and uninformed.

[–] omakenio 17 years ago

oh yeah, Macs are great! The best part-- you can't upgrade them! You want more power? You gotta go buy a whole new system!

Sorry, Macs are for morons

[–] Euphrosyne 17 years ago

That's what I mean by FUD. You know nothing of the truth.

Of course you can upgrade Macs.
I have a 7300 that's at least 7-8 years old running OSX. I think that 7.5 was the system when the machine shipped.
I have been able to upgrade the memory, the video card, the processor and add USB & Firewire support (that didn't even exist when the machine was made). Don't tell me you can't upgrade a Mac - it just isn't true.

Again, I have to say that if you really knew anything about Macs, you wouldn't say anything so obviously stupid and uninformed.

You don't know what you're talking about at all.

[–] jezzdogg 17 years ago

I always thought this movie was amazing and all his stuff afterward was crap. I figured he got hijacked by Tarantino and forced into becoming Tarantino 2. But reading this thread it sounds like that was his goal all along. Too bad. It's a shame when a guy's first $7000 movie is better than anything he's done since with millions at his disposal.

[–] monty-57 15 years ago

"I always thought this movie was amazing and all his stuff afterward was crap. I figured he got hijacked by Tarantino and forced into becoming Tarantino 2. But reading this thread it sounds like that was his goal all along. Too bad. It's a shame when a guy's first $7000 movie is better than anything he's done since with millions at his disposal."

I agree 100%!!!

[–] tempestv 17 years ago

and today, this movie might have been even easier to make- RR spent 6400 on film- that kind of money would buy a very nice digital video camera, and film becomes a non issue. Not only that, but I doubt that if you tried hard enough, it would be that hard to borrow such a camera.

so you can't get police guns- fair enough, go to shotgun news and you can buy full auto blank firing movie prop guns for about $100, and you really don't need that many guns if you cut the scenes right and trade guns between characters. furthermore, like in el Mariachi, many of the guns could be non firing toys, such as water pistols or cap guns. Or you write the script so that more shotguns are used- they would fit into the story fairly well, and it wouldn't be that hard to find some people with pump shotguns that you could borrow, provided that you are filming in the right areas. as a bonus, blank shotgun ammo is easy to get and it doesn't cause the jambing problem.

[–] CSMV 16 years ago

But digital video looks like crap.

[–] football_star25 18 years ago

RR wrote the script around the things he knew he could use, like the bus he knew he could get his hands on it. To get around keeping the actors around all day he shot by themselves because he knew he'd always be able to shoot the mariachi anytime and that way the mariachi could act as his crew member

[–] odisburg 18 years ago

This is the most impressive No Budget movie I've seen thus far. I was blown away by it. Rodriguez is a champion. I must say I never really got into Desperado or Once Upon A Time In Mexico although the action is bloody impressive. I thought Sin City was dissapointing except the last act with Willis and Alba, I liked that one. But this guy is a total champion and I take my hat off to him anyday.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jonnyrotten2002 18 years ago

Why do some find it necessary to piss on someone else's parade? Personally, I don't care WHAT this movie cost; shouldn't Rodriguez be congratulated for making it in a dog-eat-dog industry? Who cares how the actors in this thing felt when he made it? They got what they were promised, which was nothing. Funny how people think they deserve a loan as soon as their brother wins the lottery. There's a sayng in Mexico I was told when I visited there: In an American lobster trap if one lobster starts to find his way out, the other lobsters try and follow him. In a Mexican lobster trap if one starts to get out, the other nine grab him and pull him back in. How apropos to some of the comments in this thread.

[–] spign 18 years ago

movie's cool, and so is the director....making a film for 7000? that's more than impressive, specially back in 1993...

http://filmmakermagazine.com/winter1993/mariachi_budget.php

check this link out

[–] hobbiest 18 years ago

Any of you guys with the big thoughts ever make a feature, even one without this much action in it, or any for that matter, for $7k? $70k? $700k? Neither has Hollywood. That is why they went insane over it. I am sure that most of my friends who are into film and acting would be in a film for free, especially if the shooting schedule didn't interupt their daily lives too much (Mexico is a "siesta time" local, you know), just to help me out. I feel that the fact that some of the people from Mariachi, were involved in Desperado, is a really big thank you, and shows much loyalty, and a degree of humility. I know that if I could handle the lack of income for a short amount of time, I would be in somebodies film for free, and my wife and four kids would encourage me.