Ariston Anderson conducted a fascinating interview with Francis Ford Coppola that was recently published on Behance’s The 99 Percent blog.

Among some excellent tips on improvisation, working with powerhouse actors, and developing your artistic style, he offers these three rules to aspiring filmmakers:

1. Write and direct original screenplays
2. make them with the most modern technology available
3. self-finance them

Read the whole article Francis Ford Coppola: On Risk, Money, Craft & Collaboration via The 99 Percent

Filmmakers, product placements are here to stay. At least in the realm of studio-produced films. Shrewd and cost-conscious studio executives are increasingly looking at well-known brands as a reliable source of money to offset spiraling production costs.

According to Top Gun co-writer Jack Epps, quoted in a recent New York Times article, “if you want to catch an executive’s attention right now, it’s not just selling the script, but you’re showing them how to create a brand.”  The article goes on to mention the lucrative product placement deals struck with Hilton Hotels and American Airlines for 2009′s Oscar-nominated Up In The Air.

Opponents against product placement, notably from the WGA-West, argue that such practice can essentially reduce the creative screenwriter’s job to that of advertising copywriter.

The writers make an interesting, if hollow, implication. Writing good advertising copy takes no less talent than writing a good screenplay. Really good advertising copy creates an emotional reaction in readers much the same way a well-written film moves people. I can’t help but think of Hugh Macleod’s “Sex & Cash Theory”.   Macleod reminds us that the commercial v. artistic debate has raged for years. In fact, the Times article points out that cinematic pioneers the Lumière brothers placed a laundry soap product in their 1896 film “Washing Day in Switzerland.”  Yes, products have been placed in movies for over 100 years. I don’t think placements are going away any time soon… or ever. I think Macleod’s advice to ignore the debate all together is well placed.

Photo by A3sthetix

The federal tax provision for the motion picture and TV industry, called Section 181, is set to expire January 1, 2010.  This incentive allows a production company to deduct up to $15 million in costs of any qualifying film or television production instead of having to capitalize and depreciate such costs over several years.  This can be a major incentive for investors to put money in your project.  However, the deadline was extended once already, and barring any last-minute tax maneuvers, if you don’t start principal photography by January 1, 2010, you’ll have to account for the expenses under the old depreciation rules.

In 2004, Congress gave filmmakers a wonderful gift in the form a tax break which allows the owners of a qualified film or television production to deduct production costs in the year the costs were incurred, rather than capitalizing and recovering such costs over time through depreciation.  This is a substantial incentive for investors because they can more quickly recognize tax benefits from their investment in your film or television production.  There’s no minimum to spend, and the maximum is $15 million ($20 million for shooting in a “historically underused” area of the country). Substantial portions of the expenses must be spent within the United States.

If you’re a filmmaker approaching investors about your project, this is a wonderful incentive to remind them about.  But time is of the essence because the change in regulations, officially known as Section 181, is only temporary.  In order to qualify, principal photography, or in-between animation in the case of an animated production, must begin before January 1, 2010.  Although there’s plenty of discussion about extending this provision again (it originally expired January 1, 2009) there are no firm measures in place yet to do so.