Low-Budget Movies

Budget is pretty irrelevant. There're a lot of very good movies made on a low budget.

I never base a decision to watch a movie on the cost of its production and often the Hollywood blockbusters are predictable and rather dull. Low budget movies often reach cult status due to the low cost of production. Two great examples are "Braindead" and "Bad Taste" by critically acclaimed director Peter Jackson. Both films were made on a low budget in his native New Zealand and many of the actors and extras in the film were friends of Jacksons. During the 1970s there were an endless stream of B movies produced on low budgets and then the 1980s saw the arrival of the hammer horror films again on small production costs. These films rarely receive promotion through the media but find a loyal fan base through word of mouth before they reach cult status.

I watch both. I watch the blockbuster hits and flops. The random movie that never made a theater release and went straight to dvd. I don't particularly care if I know any of the actors in the movie either. I'm all for the story line. If it sounds good (generally the little blurb on the back of the dvd case) I'll give it a go. Why not. Why risk closing my mind off to only the hits and potentially missing a great movie along the way. What about you?

I watch low-budge movies. I think it is very obvious that you can tell the difference in the amount of money spent to create, develop, and film the movie, but as long as the material is well written, and the actors aren't performing too amateur then I think they are worth the watch. I have seen some though that were very boring, but then again, I don't think it had anything to do with the budget, but maybe a huge factor that played in the boredom was the material and how it was written and portrayed throughout the film.