The contract was signed. Hands were shook. Cigars were lit.

The movie was officially happening. Only one small problem:

Cash flow.

It’s easy to assume that once you close the deal, your investors simply send you all of the money they agreed to invest, and if you’re relying on tax credits, the bank will lend you all of the money to cover the tax credits — but it’s not that simple.

At no point in the making of Remnant did we have millions of dollars sitting in a bank account, ready to be spent in accordance with our budget. In fact, in order to even receive tax credit financing, you have to spend all of the capital you acquired. This creates an entirely different financial challenge, because you may not have all of the money you actually need up front.

So, let’s break down our sources of financing. For Remnant, we didn’t have any soft money (Telefilm, Creative BC, or other government funding bodies). We had:

• Private equity: Money invested directly into the production.

• Tax credits: Government incentives that help finance the film, but generally aren’t received until after qualifying expenditures and required processing (audit).

• Bank financing: Loans that allow filmmakers to access cash earlier against anticipated tax credit proceeds.

As part of our finance plan, we knew that roughly 60% of the budget would be made up of private equity, and roughly 40% through tax credits. Those numbers aren’t exact, but I’m keeping things simple. However, the actual tax credit funds aren’t received until at least six months after you close the books and file your corporate taxes — which, of course, happens after the movie has been delivered.

So how do you actually access tax credit funds before you file your taxes?

You need a lender.

There are plenty of lenders out there (some predatory, so watch out!), and depending on how you want to structure your finance plan, you can go with a private lender if it makes sense — but I much prefer the bank because the interest rates are lower and… it’s more secure.

National Bank of Canada has a film department that specializes in film tax credit loans, and our producer Mike Johnston already had a relationship with them because of his other films. This makes the process much easier, but even if this is yourst first time, the bank will happily walk you through it. With that said, the bank is going to ask for a lot of deliverables before approving such a massive loan, and one of the key elements is having a distributor already attached

I’ll write about distribution in a later issue, because I have a lot to say about this requirement… *sigh

Here’s one other thing no one really tells you when you’re making an indie — if this is your first film with the bank, you’re going to have to personally guarantee the tax credit loan. Yes, you read that correctly — Chris and I had to personally guarantee a loan for nearly $1M CAD — and if we didn’t deliver the movie, well, all of our assets would suddenly be at risk.

Good times.

Once the tax credit analysis and paperwork are processed, and loan is approved by the bank, the cash doesn’t magically appear in your account. You have to request tranches of funds along the way in order to cover expenditures through prep, production, and post.

How do you determine how much money you need?

A cash flow chart.

Crew payroll, equipment rentals, locations, deposits, insurance, and other expenses need to be paid on specific dates. It’s up to your producer and production accountant to create a detailed cash flow schedule to determine exactly how much money you need every single week in order to cover those costs, and most importantly, make sure your crew gets paid on time.

One other thing to keep in mind here — the bank won’t even allow you to draw funds from the approved loan until ALL of your private equity funds are depleted.

And depending on your production schedule, you’ll want to make sure that all the paperwork is in order weeks ahead of when you actually need the loan draw-down from the bank. There is always a delay of some kind, and you’ll want to give yourself a buffer in case something goes wrong — and things always go wrong!

On Remnant, we were definitely building the plane mid-air because of certain elements that forced us to go into production at a certain time — and because of that, things came down to the wire with the bank. Our first bank draw-down was approved just days before we needed it to make payroll.

Phew!

If it didn’t come through we would have had to either take out a personal line of credit to cover payroll costs, or ask our investors for a short-term loan, but luckily it didn’t come to that. Lesson learned, though!

Give yourself as much time as possible to get all your bank financing in place.

What This Actually Means

Before entering production, you should be able to clearly answer the following:

• Where is the money coming from? Know which financing sources are actually committed and which remain estimates.

• When will that money be available? Build a detailed cash-flow schedule around the dates you expect to receive funds. You need to know exactly how much money you’re spending every single week from pre-production through to delivery.

• What happens if the funds arrive late? Understand your financing costs, contingencies, and the implications of a delay.

Understanding your budget is only part of the job. You also need to understand how that budget gets funded and spent.

If you’re currently putting together financing for your film, what’s the biggest part of the process you don’t understand? Hit reply and let me know.

P.S. I’ve been putting together an editable investor deck template based on the materials we used to raise financing for Remnant. It includes sections covering the budget, financing plan, recoupment, distribution, and more. I’ll be sharing it with subscribers soon!

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

You made your first feature film. Now what?

According to research by film industry analyst Stephen Follows, only about 1 in 4 first-time feature directors makes a second film within five years.

So why do so many filmmakers struggle to get their second movie made?

In this episode of Off The Lot, Anthony Epp breaks down the numbers behind filmmaking careers and explores why getting your film SEEN might be more important than getting it made.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

All of a sudden, we were delayed.

With our funding falling through, we had to push production to early 2026 — but we also couldn’t stop pushing the boulder up the hill. We still had to be ready for when funding eventually came together, in order to move fast and spend money where it needed to be spent.

We had to keep up the momentum, and that meant script revisions, talking to potential department heads, scouting locations, casting discussions, scheduling, and other creative problems that seemed to pop up every day. By the time the movie actually entered official prep, we’d already solved a number of problems. So, losing three months may have felt like losing momentum, but in reality, getting those extra three months saved the movie.

This stage of the production process is “soft prep” — a little further along than development, but not quite in the full-blown pre-production stage. It’s that weird middle ground where the movie is becoming real, but you’re not yet running a fully staffed production office and burning through the budget every day.

On Remnant, soft prep consisted of many different elements:

• reaching out to potential department heads

• preliminary casting discussions

• location scouting

• budgeting… and re-budgeting

• scheduling

• figuring out major production challenges

• financing/tax credit/bank work

• solving expensive creative problems before the clock officially started

The important distinction here is that all of the above cost little to no money. Beyond these elements, financial commitments are needed, and that’s where the line is drawn.

Once official prep begins, the meter is running. You have X amount of days before camera, you’re paying people every day, and every unanswered question costs money.

If you’ve been keeping up with my newsletter and podcast, it’s no secret that we were a low budget indie, and when it came to official prep — we only could afford to pay our crew for 3 weeks.

3 WEEKS?!

The general rule of thumb is that prep should be at least as long as your production. So if you’re shooting for 4 weeks you should have 4 weeks of prep. By this metric, we were short-changing ourselves by 1 week.

If you enter pre-production still trying to figure out major locations, cast, complicated sequences, department heads etc. you’re using your most expensive preparation time to answer questions that potentially could have been answered earlier — which is what we managed to do on Remnant.

By the first day of prep, early January 2026, we had our major locations and our main cast already locked in. Having these two elements in place gave me so much extra time to tackle all the other problems that came up, and most importantly, allowed me to work closely with my DP, Leo Harim Miranda (most recently the uber talented camera operator on Backrooms), to shot list and talk about how we planned to shoot each scene.

Don’t get me wrong — I still wish I had an extra week, but soft prep allowed us to get enough done in 3 weeks so I didn’t feel unprepared by day 1. The big question really becomes: How do you divide the work between soft-prep and hard-prep? It comes down to low-risk work, and hard commitments.

Lost risk soft prep involves conversations, research, creative planning, preliminary schedules, location scouting, crew outreach, budgeting, and technical discussions.

The hard commitments of official pre-production involve deposits, contracts, any non-refundable bookings, expensive builds etc. You’ll want to save as much of these as possible for when you actually have cash-flow… But with any of this, your mileage may vary.

What This Actually Means

The takeaway here is NOT: Spend forever developing your movie. Having extra time helps, but don’t give yourself so much that you never actually enter pre-production (a little pressure is a good thing!)

The takeaway is: Don’t wait for official pre-production to begin before you start solving the problems of your movie. The more you can get done in advance, the more time you’ll have down the road to focus on the most important elements — like rehearsing with your actors, or figuring out what’s for lunch.

Not to mention, if a lot of these elements come together in soft-prep, they may even help you attract more investors or close financing. That’s what happened on Remnant!

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

What do you do when the traditional path to making your movie keeps saying no?

This week on Off The Lot, Anthony sits down with actor, writer and producer Jovanna Burke to talk about what she’s learned after more than 20 years working in film and television — and why rejection may actually be one of the most important parts of building a sustainable filmmaking career.

Jovanna opens up about transitioning from actor to producer, learning the business and financing side of filmmaking, building trust with investors, and the idea of pursuing "1,000 rejections” instead of being afraid of hearing no.

You can also check out Jovanna’s newsletter here.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

At first, Hollywood said, “No.”

Then the Canadian film industry said, “No-yeah-no, sorry.”

But that didn’t stop us from raising over a million dollars in private equity to bring Remnant to life.

Now, we’re excited to announce that our little horror film will have its Canadian premiere at this year’s Vancouver Horror Show Film Festival.

Sunday, October 18th at 3:45pm PT.
Cineplex Cinemas International Village

GET TICKETS

We made this movie in Vancouver with an incredible local cast and crew, so it’s especially meaningful to launch our festival run in front of a hometown crowd.

I’ll be there for the screening and Q&A afterward with writer/producer, Christopher Nash. Also in attendance will be our amazing cast — Talisa Mae Stewart, Megan Peta Hill, Genevieve Fleming, and Nat Boltt!

If you’re ever going to see this movie, you must see it in a theatre, and now’s your chance.

Tickets are expected to go quickly, so if you want to join us (and I hope you do!), don’t wait!

GET TICKETS

See you there!

We were financed.

After seven months of cold emails, phone calls, meetings, and knocking on every door imaginable — we had verbally secured $1M CAD between two investors.

Suddenly, we were making a movie.

The subscription agreements (containing all negotiated terms) were sent, and we began to soft-prep the movie while the investors reviewed the agreements and prepared to send us that hard-earned moo-lah.

But after two weeks of radio silence from one investor, my excitement began to turn to fear. And then the bottom fell out.

As I dug into my scrambled eggs on a bright, sunny morning last September, I heard a ding from my phone — and then the blood drained from my face.

“Hey Ken, we’ve decided to go in a new direction…”

They broke up with me through text.

Half of our financing, gone, with a single text message.

But as I’ve learned since then, I didn’t really have it in the first place.

Anyone who has worked in the film industry long enough knows that a job isn’t real until your first paycheck is cashed — and the same can be said about raising capital.

But in this industry, the greatest capital is actually trust. Without it, the prolonged deal-making process isn’t possible.

Trust is the glue that binds the deal. It’s what allows us to negotiate in good faith. It’s what allows us to confidently say we’ve raised X amount of private equity before the deal is officially signed.

Remember, no one in their right mind would wire tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to a stranger without knowing for certain that the entire project was going to move forward and the deal was signed — but trust is what allows you to believe they will sign the deal as discussed.

And then sometimes, that trust is broken.

*Sad trombone

All of a sudden, I felt my movie slipping away like grains of sand between my fingers. Our proposed October 2025 start date exploded. Our precarious banking/tax credit preparation timeline was out the window. The movie was on life support, and one phone call would decide its fate.

I had to tell the other investors.

And this, friends, is why trust is so important. After breaking the news to our other investors we lost $500k — they weren’t phased at all. It was unfortunate, yes, but they believed in me, they believed in my team, and they believed in the movie. We talked about potential paths forward, rolled up our sleeves, and got to work.

With that said, losing a key investor wasn’t just a fundraising problem, it was also a production problem. When we thought the deal was going to close we began pulling the trigger on different elements in order to set the film up. We had production dates, we were hiring department heads, engaging with a casting director, location scouting, and general pre-production.

You might be wondering, “But Ken, the deal wasn’t closed, why didn’t you wait?” And my answer to you is: There simply wasn’t time. We had an October start date set because of location availability (plus other factors) as well as a weeks-long lead up to tax credit financing from the bank. There are dozens of important things happening at any given time in the soft-prep stage, and checking some off the list early on is key.

Needless to say, when the financing fell apart — we delayed the film to January/February 2026, which turned out to be a blessing in disguise.

As our key investors often say, “It’ll work out. It always does.”

And it certainly did.

Now, do I think those investors that pulled out are bad people? Bad investors?

Absolutely not.

Would I negotiate another deal with them?

100%

Someone can sincerely intend to invest and still not close. This scenario is synonymous with indie filmmaking. But the fact is, when it comes to the investor sitting across the table, circumstances change:

• Their business could change

• Perhaps another investment went badly

• Their lawyer, accountant, or CFO advises against it

• Their liquidity changes

• Their spouse or partner objects

• The lose faith in your management/team

• They get cold feet

• Or something completely unrelated happens in their life, and that’s enough to pull out.

Until the transaction closes, all of those uncertainties exist.

The lesson here isn’t, “Don’t trust investors”, the lesson is that nothing is guaranteed until the deal closes — so be prepared to pivot.

Many filmmakers think raising money is about persuasion. But if an investor has never considered getting into the movie business before meeting you, I don’t believe for one second that your pitch is going to win them over. The good news, though, is that a lot of people out there love movies, and a lot of those people would love to be involved in the movie business somehow — it’s your job to show them how.

That’s closing.

It’s not just about generating excitement around the movie. It’s about converting that excitement into capital. And remember, until the deal is closed, behave like you’re still fundraising.

Was losing $500k via text a devastating loss?

Totally.

But it taught me a very important lesson — it’s obvious, but a verbal commitment and cash are not the same thing. Yes, you can shake hands and agree on the terms, and things are looking great — but that’s exactly the most likely point that it all falls apart. Between that moment and signing the agreement. Until all those beautiful zeros are sitting your bank account, don’t get too far ahead of yourself or you’ll have to pivot like we did.

Now, I wouldn’t have said this at the time, but looking back, losing $500k at that stage in the process was perhaps the best thing to happen to the movie. It pushed our start date, allowed us to spend more time soft-prepping the movie, which led to getting an amazing cast, and financially speaking — it allowed me to build a much stronger relationship with our key investors. And that is something that will pay off down the road.

It’ll work out. It always does.

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

Why do some indie films actually get made while others spend years stuck in development?

In this episode of Off The Lot, Anthony breaks down the stages an independent film goes through between having a screenplay and actually getting the movie greenlit.

We cover what you should be working on at each stage — and, just as importantly, what you probably shouldn’t be doing yet.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

The number one question I hear after people find out we financed Remnant entirely through private equity and Canadian tax credits is: Where did you find the investors?

I get it. I’d ask the same thing too.

What follows is usually a look of disappointment after I reveal that there isn’t some magical list of capitalists waiting to be contacted by struggling filmmakers who are trying to achieve their dreams.

There isn’t a hidden database, film fund, wealthy-investor list, or group of people actively looking to finance your film. And if you believe you’ve found one of the aforementioned groups on LinkedIn, I have a bridge to sell you.

Seriously, if you come across an angel investor on LinkedIn, don’t even bother. The truly wealthy — the ones who would actually consider funding your movie — they don’t advertise themselves.

But they are out there.

After I realized Hollywood or the Canadian industry weren’t going to fund our film, I had to look elsewhere. Literally, anywhere else.

So, naturally, I started to make a list of everyone I knew from friends, family, colleagues, old acquaintances — you name it — anyone who may have enough for an initial investment, or perhaps knows someone who does.

That reminded me that a couple years prior I had a 45 minute meeting with a 20-something, up-and-coming filmmaker who wanted to learn more about getting into the film industry. In that conversation I remembered him saying that his dad was interested in funding his feature films, and I quietly stored that information in the back of my mind — I mean, that’s not something you hear everyday. I reached out, and they responded.

They were interested in learning more.

But let’s look at the big picture. The people I was talking to didn’t have any ties to the film industry. They had never produced a movie before. They didn’t even know how the industry worked, but you know what?

They loved movies.

They loved the idea of somehow being involved with a movie. The idea of seeing their name on the big screen, being on a red carpet, and getting their picture taken with Scarlett Johansson.

Okay, I didn’t promise them Scarlet Johansson, but you get the idea. They wanted to be a part of something that appeared to be much more interesting than their “boring” yet still extremely luxurious lives.

Why? Because with all their wealth they couldn’t just wake up in the morning and be in the film industry. They need to park their money on talented, intelligent, and capable people to get them through the door.

When both sides want something — a negotiation can begin.

My takeaway here is that instead of looking to Hollywood production companies that rely on the studio system, or to Telefilm and other Canadian funding bodies (that don’t actually have a mandate to grow our domestic industry), look to successful businesses and their owners in the following industries:

• Real estate

• Technology

• Manufacturing

• Finance

• Medicine

• Construction

• Family businesses

These are all “boring” businesses. But if you reach out to enough successful ones, you may find an owner who wants a little excitement in their life by way of the movie industry.

Okay, so they’re interested in meeting — Now what?

Generally speaking, the average time between meeting an investor and closing the deal is six months. Which, also happened to be the case for Remnant.

The goal of the first conversation is to simply get a second conversation. And then a third, and a fourth…

And as I’ve mentioned in other posts, you have to go in prepared, ready to talk about creative and financials — and switch between the two easily.

Explain the opportunity. Be upfront about the risk. NEVER promise them a return.

Learn as much as you can about them beforehand, but continue to be curious. People love to talk about themselves.

Find out exactly why the film interests them, and figure out what they’re looking for. Do they want to tag along for the ride, or do they want to be hands on creatively?

This will help you determine if they’re actually a fit, because you’re probably going to be asking yourself some questions too:

• Do they understand the risk?

• Can they afford this?

• Do I trust them?

• Do I want to spend the next two to three years of my life working with them?

Not every person with money should become your investor.

One other way to hook an investor is if you already have some capital committed. Maybe your Uncle John and Aunt Betty have followed your dreams long enough to finally commit $50k toward your film — on the condition that you close financing.

Well, hey. Now you have $50k, and the next investor you talk to isn’t the first one to put money in. Like with anything that carries risk, people love not being the first one to dive in.

Going into a meeting having already secured an initial investment, meaningful cast attachments, accurate tax incentive calculation (depends where you’re shooting), brand sponsorships, or even sweat equity creates leverage — and leverage is the only way you’ll be able to put a deal together.

The project suddenly feels more real. It validates you and your team. The risk feels shared. And now your pitch becomes about completing something that’s already moving forward.

The last major point I’ll make is that if you’ve worked in the film industry your whole adult life, like I have, then your circle is probably filled with other film industry contacts — not necessarily wealthy investors. This is something I had to explain once when they asked why I was having difficulty finding more private equity partners.

I told them I’m connected to some of the best technicians in the world who will make the movie they’re funding, but I need to be introduced to more wealthy people from the investors’ own circles if we want us to close financing.

Don’t be afraid to ask your investors if they know anyone else who might be interested. Chances are they do, and better yet, they’d love to have their friends join in to mitigate their risk.

One solid investor relationship can be worth more than hundreds of phone calls and emails. That’s why it’s so important to maintain a positive, open, and honest conversation with your investors from day one.

When it’s all said and done, this will take time. You can’t rush it. You’ll face resistance.

Just keep pushing the boulder up the hill.

Slow is smooth. Smooth is fast.

What This Actually Means

Don’t start by searching Google for “film investors.” Trust me on this one…

Start with three questions:

• Who do I already know?

• Who do they know?

• Who among those people has the resources and a reason to be part of my movie?

You don’t need hundreds of investors to make your movie. You only need the right ones.

If you’re trying to finance a movie right now, hit reply and tell me where you’re currently looking for investors, or what’s stopping you from starting.

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

Finishing a movie is like reaching the top of a treacherous peak. But marketing and distribution is like reaching that peak, and then seeing an even taller mountain ahead of you.

In this episode of Off The Lot, we look at marketing, distribution, and brand deals — a source of money that many filmmakers completely overlook.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

When you’re pitching a Hollywood executive, the general rule of thumb is to just tell a great story. And I don’t mean getting bogged down in specific details like what color sweater the protagonist is wearing — it’s about the emotional rollercoaster that the character, and ultimately the audience, go through over the course of 90 minutes.

Pitching an investor is different. But it still requires you to tell a story.

It’s just that is the story about how you’re going to pull off a film production with their hard-earned cash.

Originally, my investor meetings began by focusing on story, characters, imagery, tone, explaining my vision, and just trying to convince them that Remnant was going to be a great film.

That only went so far.

Very quickly we’d veer off into discussions about budget, distribution, release dates, recoupment, waterfalls, marketing expenses — you get the idea.

This approach is natural for filmmakers, because that’s what we do for a living — we talk about story, characters and all the creative elements that go into moving an audience and giving them a memorable emotional experience. And those types of pitches work for executives, producers, actors, agents/managers, and other creatives.

Private investors want you to have all that squared away, but they’re focused more on the other stuff — the nuts and bolts of the production.

How much does it cost?

How much are you raising?

How much have you already raised?

Where is the rest coming from?

When do you shoot?

Who sells the movie and how?

How do I get my money back?

You should definitely have an answer for all of those questions before you meet with a potential investor.

My point is: the creative elements are what got them interested, now you have to deliver on the elements that really matter to them.

The investor deck, which is different than your standard film pitch deck, needs to answer the central question that they have in their minds:

Can you actually pull this off?

In no particular order, the investor deck, or business plan, or whatever you’d like to call it, needs to clearly prove:

That you understand how much this movie actually costs.

That you know how you’re going to finance it.

That you can actually produce it for that number.

That you have a solid understanding of the film marketplace and the realistic path to distribution.

That you understand how revenue is generated by the production, and how the investors would be paid out.

So what actually needs to be in the package?

A. The Movie

• Logline

• Short synopsis

• Genre

• Tone

• Visual style

• Comparable films

• Director’s statement / Why you’re making it

B The Team

Make sure to make it clear why this particular team can execute this particular project.

• Director

• Producers

• Writer

• Key collaborators / Department heads

• Cast, if attached

C. The Budget

Don’t bog them down with tons of information — make it digestible! Charts are helpful!

• Total cost of the film

• Why it costs that much

• Make it look professional

• Breakout what the major expenses are that are driving the high numbers

• Talk about how you’re being efficient, where you’re getting discounts and deals, or freebies

• Contingency

D. Financing Plan aka “The Ask”

• Total production budget: $X

• Minus projected tax incentives: $Y

• Minus other committed financing: $Z

• = Total equity required

Then, that’s the number you’re actually raising. Remember, your investors will want to know where all the money is coming from, not just what you need from them.

E. Recoupment

How do they get their money back?

• How does revenue come into the film?

• Who gets paid before the investors? Explain the waterfall

• What happens after recoupment? What’s their ROI? How does that get paid out amongst other investors?

• How are profits divided?(50/50 between investors and producers or are you making a different deal?)

Make this very simple and easy to follow, most of it will come up in discussion — a lot!

F. Distribution Strategy

How will this movie actually get sold? So many filmmakers think: We’ll just get into Sundance, make a huge sale, and then get rich. You’ll have better luck playing the lotto.

• Target audience

• Genre marketplace

• Comparable films

• Domestic and international sales possibilities (talk to other filmmakers!)

• Sales agents

• Distributors for U.S./Canada/your territory that would be a good fit

• Festivals, where relevant

• Theatrical/Streaming/VOD paths and what that could potentially look like based on recent distribution trends

• Marketing considerations — if I’ve learned one thing, this one is really important.

Some investors that I met with said pre-sales are the way to go when financing a film — and that’s generally a good idea if you can pull it off, it’s just that market trends have made pre-sales hard as of late.

*Pre-sale is when you sell your film to a distributor in a territory for a minimum guarantee in advance of making the film, then you can loan against that MG from the bank or another lender to meet your cash flow — with interest

If there’s one thing I urge you to really think about from this section, it’s how do you plan to market your film if your distributor decides to do the bare minimum?

Making a movie is difficult. Getting someone to watch it is even more difficult.

Your Investor Deck Is Not The Pitch

Your investor deck is not the final piece of the puzzle. It doesn’t raise money by itself. That’s your job when the deck has gotten you a private meeting in their office, a boardroom, or in my case — a backyard in the Midwest, drinking rare bourbon and smoking a cigar.

I’ve had worse meetings.

Remember, the average time between meeting an investor and closing a deal is about six months. That six months is not just a waiting game. It’s active and includes:

• Calls

• Meetings

• Follow-up questions

• Updated budgets

• New worst case scenarios

• Emails

• General relationship building

Don’t spend too much time perfecting the PDF — Get out there and talk to people.

What This Actually Means

Before sending your materials to an investor, you should be able to understand:

• What movie are you making?

• Why are you the team to make it?

• What does it cost, how much are you raising, and what are the terms?

• How could the investment come back?

• How does the finished film reach an audience?

Ultimately, your investor deck isn’t supposed to prove that you’re an amazing filmmaker, it’s supposed to prove that you know how to build a business — a startup — around that particular movie.

Would This Be Useful?

I’ve been thinking about putting together the kind of investor deck template I wish I had when we started raising money for Remnant.

Something that touches on everything I laid out in this newsletter.

I’d probably offer it as a downloadable template for somewhere around $20-30

If there’s enough interest, I’ll build it. And if there’s something specific you’d want included, hit reply and tell me.

When we first decided to raise private equity for Remnant, I thought I need to convince a wealthy investor that the script was good, that I could direct it, and that we could make something that looked and felt much bigger than its budget.

Obviously all of those things mattered.

But after sitting across from enough people with money, I started to realize something: They weren’t nearly as interested in talking about the elements of the movie as I was.

Shocking, I know.

They wanted to know how we’d make their money back. When they’d see a return. When would the movie be released? How did distribution work? Did we have enough budgeted for marketing? And many questions that had little or nothing to do with the story and characters that we spent so much time crafting.

Our first real private investor conversation actually started through a relationship I already had.

A couple years earlier, I had met the son of someone who ran a very successful business. He wanted to get into the film industry and I had given him some advice about how to break in.

When it came time to finance Remnant, I remembered that meeting we had nearly two years prior, and I specifically remembered that he and his family had talked about wanting to get involved in movies themselves.

I reached out. And they replied.

The first conversation was over Zoom and covered the basics. The overview of what we were up to, and why we felt they’d be a great fit. The investment ask was also mentioned, just so we were clear about how much we truly needed to get started.

Then a few weeks later my partners and I met with the investors in person to really get into the details of how Remnant was being put together.

The meeting was casual, but specific. Because of our relationships in the industry, some material costs were far less than usual, and so we had to explain how we were able to get discounts and deals here and there. But in other cases we had to justify why something was so expensive. We talked about management, producing, cast, equipment, delivery — you name it.

We had answers for every question.

And I specifically remember the CEO telling me, “It’s not like we’re down to our last $250k and hoping that this film makes us rich…”

They knew investing was a risk, and if they lost it, they lost it. But they were interested in being a part of something different than their luxurious, yet otherwise “boring” lives.

And it wasn’t long after that they gave us a verbal “yes.”

We had our first investors.

This was huge, because as we all know — no one wants to be the first to say yes.

We finally had momentum, but that didn’t mean I was an expert at pitching investors. Every email, every phone call, and every meeting allowed me to get better at talking to people far outside my circle. And what I now see so many filmmakers mistakingly do is asking investors to solve their problems.

“I need money to make my movie.”

That is the filmmaker’s problem, not the investor’s. Filmmakers tend to approach fundraising by explaining why the movie means so much to them, why the script is great, why they need the money, and why they deserve a chance.

But none of those things automatically give another person a reason to invest. If you want investors to invest in your film — you have to solve their problem.

Why would this person want this investment in their life?

If the answer is solely money, they probably aren’t a very good investor because there are so many better ways to make a lot of money fast — film is not one of them.

Film is a long game, which means if they’re interested in having a conversation it’s because they are thinking about where they want to be in five or ten years, and maybe the idea of casually producing movies excites them. Maybe they want to be an executive producer, maybe they want the experience of being a real film set, or meeting a famous actor, or being at the red carpet premiere, or simply seeing their name on the big screen — or on a streaming service where they can show their whole extended family at Thanksgiving.

Whatever the reason is, find out what interests them, and tailor your pitch to help them get what they want out of this deal.

Part of the discussion will undoubtedly come back to the logistics and making sure that you and your team can pull this off. For us, our investors wanted to read the script to make sure that it was good (to the best of their creative taste, anyway), to ensure the team was capable, that the budget was realistic, that the project had a path to distribution, that we understood the business side, and that we could reasonably manage their money.

They evaluated our personalities. They asked themselves if they could stand to work with us for a year or two as we undertook this massive venture — Could we actually pull this off or were we all talk? How did we fair answering their tough questions? Were we fumbling our way through or were we confident? Did we understand our own numbers and could we explain them with ease?

Were we trustworthy?

This is what was running through their heads during each and every meeting. But through all this, we found legitimacy as more elements came together. The strong script by Christopher Nash, along our decades-plus experience in the Vancouver film industry helped attract experienced department heads and collaborators. Attaching Kim Coates became a major credibility boost because suddenly the project had a recognizable actor with a long film and television career.

We also were able to present a professionally made budget. A finance plan. A business plan. Tax credit projections. A distribution strategy; not finalized as we didn’t have a sales agent and distributor until after we were full funded — but after they came aboard that gave us even more legitimacy.

The point being, investors aren’t just investing in your script. They’re investing in your ability to turn that script into a finished, sellable asset.

Between my team and I we were very clear with investors about each of the elements of the package, which included:

• The total budget

• How much equity we were raising

• What other financing existed (including soft money, if any)

• Our path to distribution

• How revenue flows back

• The investor waterfall; who gets paid first and how they recoup

• What happens after recoupment

• What happens if the film performs badly

You should be able to explain all of this in very simple language. And for what it’s worth, I couldn’t at first — but I got better — with each and every meeting.

One other things I had to get better at was delivering bad news. And if anyone reading this has directed or produced an indie film before, you know that bad news is very easy to come by. But the best approach is to be honest and to the point. Whatever happened, happened, and it’s time to find a solution. Your investors likely have been through or seen much worse, and I was lucky enough to work with investors who loved to solve problems — bad news almost always turned into a strong path forward by the end of the phone call.

This leads me to the last major point that I’ll touch on today, which is that your relationship with your investors is much more important than what’s in your pitch deck. Fundraising was not one great meeting. Building that relationship to the point of closing the deal took months. There were a ton of calls, meetings, emails, questions, updated budgets, new scenarios, tough nights, difficult situations, and more questions — but if you’re talking and things are productive, you know you’re heading in the right direction. That relationship is key to building your film career, because you can’t guarantee the movie’s success once it hits the market — but you can foster a healthy and honest relationship with your investors, who may want to give it another try down the road.

What This Actually Means

Before meeting with an investor, you should be able to confidently, and succinctly answer these five questions:

1. Why this movie?

2. Why you?

3. Why this budget?

4. How will the investors get their money back?

5. Why would this specific person want to invest?

Remember, asking someone for money to solve your filmmaking problem is not a compelling pitch. The better question is:

What problem, desire, or opportunity does this investment solve for them?

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

What does it actually cost to make a $2 million independent feature?

This week on Off The Lot, we break down a hypothetical $2M movie using the Telefilm Canada budget structure and real lessons learned producing Remnant. We go line by line through above-the-line costs, cast, crew, equipment, locations, transportation, post-production, music, financing, tax credits and contingency.

If you’re trying to figure out how much your indie film should actually cost — and where that money should go — this episode is a practical starting point!

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

The original plan was to make Remnant for $1.2M CAD, including tax credits. This meant we’d need to raise somewhere in the neighborhood of $700k cash.

That was way more money than any of us had ever raised before — my most recent short film, The Doukhobor, had a budget of $47k, with roughly $12k raised from crowdfunding.

But we were up for the challenge.

The strange thing is, for a feature film, especially one with horror elements, VFX, multiple locations, and a fairly ambitious visual approach — $1.2M is actually not a lot of money.

Obsession — a little horror film you may have heard of — was made for substantially less than that. But if you look at the elements in that film: it’s very small, very simple, with a great script and performances to really tip the scale.

Remnant is undoubtedly bigger, because from the beginning I wanted it to be a horror thrill-ride. A full-fledged theater movie. An “indie” studio film. So we figured we’d need at least a million dollars…

However, what was working against us — or me, specifically — was that I hadn’t directed a feature film before, so I didn’t have a track record to ask for millions of dollars.

The door to Hollywood was slammed in my face. Over and over. And investors would do the same if we weren’t smart.

So we worked hard to make the film as lean as possible. Strip out anything unnecessary. Use every relationship and resource available, and figure out what the cheapest possible version of Remnant could look like.

At one point we even had a $500k all-in version of the movie. It wasn’t the version we wanted to make, but it was a backup plan.

Ultimately, we had well over a dozen different budgets during development and into pre-production. And in hindsight, this was actually incredibly useful because it forced us to answer important questions:

What does the movie actually need?

One of the biggest changes to the film happened after we met with our original investors. They liked the project but they wanted us to bring in a recognizable actor for the role of Nikolai, the father character.

Up until that point, we were planning the movie around non-famous actors, which obviously kept the budget lower. Adding a recognizable actor changes things because you’re not just adding their salary — there are travel costs. Accommodations. Scheduling considerations. Drivers. Trailers. The list goes on…

Suddenly, our little indie was much bigger than we originally thought. But we were still doing everything we could to keep costs down.

A filmmaker can sit down with a screenplay and say, “This movie costs $2M” — Okay. But have you tried making it for $500k? For $750k?

Have you gotten discounts or freebies? What relationships can you lean on to help bring the budget down? What locations can you access for free or for a low cost?

Because of my years of experience in the Vancouver film industry, we managed to get top-tier department heads to come out for far less than what they’d normally make on a studio feature. We had equipment houses giving us major discounts (which we knew we couldn’t ask for again). Our producer had a great relationship with the bank because of his previous films, which helped fast-track our tax credit approval because the workflows were already established.

All of these elements helped make Remnant what it is today. But that didn’t mean I got everything I wanted. I constantly had to make tough choices.

There were three things I fought hard to protect:

Shooting days.

Our main location.

And our second camera team.

For most of prep, I was determined to shoot the movie in 20 days. Eventually, reality won and I had to cut it down to 18 to help the budget. I did not enjoy that conversation! But at a certain point, the math is the math.

Our main location was also quite expensive, all things considered. Between scout days, prep days, shoot days, wrap days, and liaison fees — it quickly became a massive line item, but my argument was that this location was more than 70% of the movie and this is putting money directly on the screen.

It paid off in a big way. The production value we got out of this house, led by our incomparable production designer, Cheryl Marion was truly astounding (you’ll see soon enough!)

And in order to properly see the location on screen, I fought hard to keep a second camera team for almost the entire shoot.

15 out of 18 days I was able to have B-Cam, and it made a huge difference. We were able to move twice as fast and often get twice as many shots. I had choices in the editing room, more cool angles, and it truly gave the film a feeling that is much larger than its budget.

There’s no doubt in my mind that we wouldn’t have been able to make the movie the same way if we didn’t have two cameras. From a visual standpoint, it wouldn’t have been nearly as dynamic.

But look, there is always a cheaper version of your movie, and so often filmmakers will be near the starting line of production when the worst case scenario happens — an investor pulls out. Suddenly the budget you thought you had was just slashed. But you must find a way to continue.

If you told me I had to cut 25% from Remnant, I could do it. I absolutely wouldn’t want to, but I could, if it meant getting a finished film at the end.

First, I’d probably have to lose any big name talent in the movie and rely on lesser known (yet equally talented!), more affordable local actors.

Second, I’d have to lose my main location and find something more affordable from a location and production design perspective.

Third, I’d have to start cutting crew, equipment, materials, and anything else I could find that stands in the way of us completing the film.

Goodbye second camera team… :(

So, a version of the movie would exist, but again, it wouldn’t be this version.

On the flip side, if I was able to raise an additional 50%?

I’d add shooting days. Big time. I’d add extra days to shoot the first act, and extra days to shoot the finale. After all, there are only so many setups you can do in a day. There are only so many takes. And there are only so many times you can say “I think I can live with that” or “I’ll fix it in post”.

And then with any leftover funds I’d add even more shooting days! And then maybe lobster for lunch… Okay, scratch the last part — but I would add more to the special effects, make up, and VFX budgets!

Which brings me to another budgetary lesson I learned first hand:

Never forget post!

One of the biggest mistakes I see first time filmmakers make is spending almost everything on production and under-budgeting post, or just thinking you’ll figure it out later.

Editing, sound, music, color, VFX — they all cost money! A lot of money!

And usually more money than you originally planned to spend. But these elements are necessary, and will elevate your film in ways you can’t even imagine.

Don’t skimp out on post!

The other thing that became clear through this process is that there really is a floor for certain kinds of movies. Like if you’re making a contained thriller with two actors in one house, you can absolutely make something great for under $1M.

Like, waaaay under…

But if you want an elevated genre film with multiple locations, action, VFX, experienced crew, strong production value, and one or two recognizable actors, there is a point where the numbers just stop going down without fundamentally changing the movie.

For us, I’d say we hit the floor. We certainly couldn’t go any lower without making some big sacrifices.

At the end of the day, budgeting a film is simply problem-solving.

But here’s what you have to continue to ask yourself:

What matters most?

What can change?

What can’t?

And where should the money go?

What This Actually Means

Before you tell someone your movie costs $2M, figure out what the $500k version looks like.

Figure out what you already have. What people will give you for free. What parts of the movie will move the needle, and create value on screen.

Then figure out what you absolutely cannot compromise on. And if you do this properly, you’ll find the floor. The point where cutting another $100k is impossible without ruining your creative vision.

If you’re budgeting an indie feature right now, hit reply and tell me what number you’re trying to make it for — and what one thing is you refuse to compromise on.

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

This week on Off The Lot, we sit down with writer-director Nat Boltt (Riverdale) to talk about the 10-year journey behind her debut feature, Holy Days.

The film stars Oscar nominees Judy Davis, Jacki Weaver and BAFTA winner Miriam Margolyes. It hit #1 at the New Zealand box office, and went on to a global theatrical release — but Nat’s biggest lessons came from everything it took to get the movie financed, made, and ultimately seen.

We get into co-productions, losing investors, shooting an ambitious road movie in 26 days, and why she believes the indie distribution system is still fundamentally broken.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

At the beginning of the year, in the very first issue of The Film Founder, I wrote about finally getting Remnant financed, and how we stopped waiting for permission to make our film.

We tried to set the movie up in Hollywood — but Hollywood said no.

Then we tried to set the movie up in Canada — but the Canadian industry said, “No-yeah-no, sorry!”

Eventually we found private investors in the Midwest and figured out another way to get the film made.

At the time, that was the big lesson:

Find another path. Learn the business side. Raise the money yourself.

Now that I’m near the end of the process, I now know there was so much more to learn:

Directing an indie isn’t solely about directing. It’s about building.

Working in the studio system teaches you that if you write, direct shorts, build up your work, meet people, get better at your craft, wash-rinse-repeat, you’ll eventually find someone to trust you enough to direct a movie.

Then Remnant happened and suddenly directing was only one small part of what I was doing.

I had to learn private financing, investor decks, business plans, financial structures, sales, distribution, and how to pitch investors when for most of my career I pitched studio execs and producers — a very different process.

And a lot of this I learned as I went.

Trial by fire.

I was constantly researching. Calling people. Asking stupid questions. Then asking slightly less stupid questions a few weeks later. I was trying to understand the business side enough so that I could confidently sit across from an investor and explain what the hell we were actually doing.

Then we got the movie financed and it was smoooooth sailing…

Not exactly — this is an indie, which meant that I was also a producer.

After we finished production and moved into post, I ended up editing, post supervising, even assistant editing, and all of these roles came with a completely different set of problems — like relearning, Avid, for starters…

For the last year I’ve spent huge stretches working close to 80 hours a week on this movie — and while I LOVE it, it’s not exactly the healthiest way to live your life.

It’s just what happens when you don’t have quite enough money to hire staff full time through post production. **sad trombone

If you’re trying to get an indie movie made, you can’t really afford to understand only your little corner of it. You have to know enough about the whole thing to see where the problems are coming from.

If the financing falls apart, what happens next?

If the distributor isn’t doing what you hoped they would do, what are your options?

If the post schedule starts slipping, what actually needs to change?

If nobody is building an audience for the movie, who is going to do it?

You don’t have to personally do every job. In fact, don’t!

But you do have to know enough about each of those jobs, because what I’ve also learned is that no one cares about the movie as much as you do.

That’s why as filmmakers we have to think like founders. We can’t just come up with an idea and hand it off — we need to see it through.

It’s up to us to convince people to join our team. To raise money. Solve problems. Hire the right people, and keep the thing alive long enough for it to see the light of day.

Taking all that into account, directing an indie is much different than directing a feature for a studio/streamer.

And just to be clear, I don’t think the answer is to reject the traditional system.

If Hollywood wants to finance my next movie, GREAT.

If Telefilm wants to fund one, okay, sure — I mean, GREAT.

I’m not interested in being independent just for the sake of being independent.

I’m interested in getting movies made.

When Telefilm said no to Remnant, that didn’t mean Remnant couldn’t be financed. It simply meant Telefilm wasn’t going to finance it.

Same thing with Hollywood. The studios weren’t interested in taking a chance on me because I hadn’t directed a feature before. A total catch-22…

So that’s what I did. I made a feature. And every time my team and I solved one problem, another one showed up. That’s basically been the last year and a half of my life. Financing. Prep. Production. Post. Sales. Distribution. Festivals.

Every stage has forced me to learn something I didn’t know before.

What This Actually Means

Being a writer/director isn’t enough anymore — it’s about figuring out how to build a career that allows me to keep making movies.

It’s about understanding how movies get financed. Where the money goes. How movies get sold. How they reach an audience.

I don’t want to spend another ten years waiting for someone to decide when I get to make my next feature — that needs to be up to me, and how hard I work to make it happen.

If you’re trying to get an independent film made right now, hit reply and tell me the biggest thing standing in your way.

I’m genuinely curious where people are getting stuck, and I want to use some of those answers to figure out what I write about next.

NEW EPISODE — OFF THE LOT

Anthony Epp and I dive into five key lessons I learned from making Remnant — From development all the way through post production. You do not want to miss this discussion!

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON PODCAST PLAYER

With locations and casting mostly out of the way by early January, my pre-production schedule was fierce, and I felt I was always running out of time to shot list with my DP, Leo Harim (A-Cam for Longlegs, The Monkey) — we’d spend a couple hours every day talking camera angles, blocking, tone, intention, the final edit… and eventually we had blocking floor plans, shot lists, and lighting diagrams for every scene. On paper, I could tell you exactly how this movie was going to look, sound, and feel.

And then we got to set…

No matter how much you prep, things are bound to go wrong. From stunts, to special effects, to wardrobe, to make up/hair, and even actors — every department contains multiple people, and guess what? People make mistakes, which can be a beautiful thing.

On Day 2 we shot a scene where Talisa Mae Stewart’s character, Anna, comes home to her rundown basement suite. She enters through the door, flips on the light, drops her bag and exhales from exhaustion. However, when we actually ran the scene, Talisa forgot to turn on the light and ended up stepping into a warm kicker coming from a side door — the way the light hit her face but kept the rest of the room in darkness instantly made Leo and I lean forward. We looked at each other during the take with wide eyes, both thinking “Holy shit, this looks amazing!” Better than we had ever imagined.

Later in the schedule I had a shot planned for when Talisa’s character enters her old bedroom. Talisa is supposed to walk camera left, while we pan camera right and eventually catch up with her on the other side of the room — countering her movement. So as she walked out of frame, the camera start to pan right, but on this particular take the pan was far too slow and we missed Talisa entirely, leaving a totally empty frame.

Guess which take is in the movie? Yes, the “mistake” ended up being the perfect shot for us in post-production when we reconstructed the scene.

I can’t even begin to tell you how important it is to keep the camera rolling for at least 3 or 4 seconds after calling cut. Those extra frames you capture have saved my ass multiple times — and the audience will never be able to tell. All that matters is how the movie cuts together.

No matter how much you prep or design your shots and transitions, once you get to set, things are bound to go wrong. It’s important to strive for your original vision as much as possible, but keep your antenna up to pickup on those happy accidents that might serve you later. You never know what might just make it into your movie.

Share

THE DOUKHOBOR IS NOW ONLINE!

In 2023 I was the winner of the Directors Guild of Canada BC Emerging Greenlight Award, which gave Christopher Nash, Cole Hewlett, and I the chance to make our calling card horror short film, The Doukhobor.

This is a story about what happened to my family, and my community (the Freedomite Doukhobors) 70 years ago here in British Columbia. It’s a story that hardly anyone knows, even Canadians, and it marks a terrible stain on this country’s history.

You can watch the film here or click the thumbnail below.

THE DOUKHOBOR
One year ago, the girl escaped the dark creature in the forest. Now it wants her back. A horror-drama inspired by the nearly forgotten history of the Freedomite Doukhobors.

To stay up to date on the movie:
👉 www.remnantmovie.com

Or follow me on Instagram:
👉 @ken_kabatoff

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

Subscribe now

- Ken -

The announcement was picked up by Deadline Hollywood, as well as Bloody Disgusting and Dread Central — some of the most prominent film and horror news sites out there.

Watching Kim Coates, Talisa Mae Stewart, Megan Peta Hill, Genevieve Fleming, and Nat Boltt step into the world of Remnant has been one of the most exciting parts of the process so far. From the first meeting to blocking on set, there’s a level of intention, confidence, and curiosity that immediately elevates everything around them. Scenes are sharper. Choices are bolder. The material pushes back in the best possible way. It’s absolutely thrilling!

We’re one week into production and I’ll share more soon about how everything is unfolding, but this felt like the right moment to talk about the cast. Because at the end of the day, they’re the ones carrying this thing.

Here’s the full announcement:

February 3, 2026. Vancouver — Studio 104 Entertainment and Kabatoff/Nash Productions are pleased to announce the casting of Kim Coates (Sons of Anarchy, Solo Mio), Talisa Mae Stewart (The Casket Girls, Foreigner), Megan Peta Hill (56 Days), Genevieve Fleming (The Recruit) and Nat Boltt (Riverdale) in the lead roles of their upcoming indie horror film, REMNANT, now in production on location in British Columbia.

REMNANT follows Anna, played by Stewart, whose father, Nikolai, played by Coates, disappeared as a fugitive wanted for mass murder ten years ago. When her estranged mother mysteriously dies, Anna inherits her childhood home, where a malevolent demonic presence brings her face-to-face with the terrifying truth of her family legacy.

“I can’t believe I said yes to the dark mental stuff I’m putting myself through for this crazy movie,” said Kim Coates. “Seatbelts on, because when this thing gets going it does not stop.”

The film is directed by Ken Kabatoff (Travelers), written by Christopher Nash and produced by Mike Johnston of Studio 104 Entertainment (Send the Rain, Wild Goat Surf, I Am Just Here for the Riot). Executive producers include Matthew Cervi of Mad Samurai Productions (The Colony), Beau H. Starkel, Andrew H. Chupp, and Jaida Hay.

“REMNANT is a relentless horror thrill ride,” said director Ken Kabatoff. “We’re building on films like Insidious, Sinister and The Conjuring to deliver a totally new kind of terror.”

Writer Christopher Nash added, “We love this genre, and we’re going to give audiences a movie that’s scary, unexpected, and a hell of a lot of fun.”

“Canada has always been a place where horror thrives,” said Mike Johnston. “We’re thrilled to be collaborating with such experienced talents at Kabatoff/Nash and our amazing crew in BC to create something truly spine-chilling.”

Mike Johnston negotiated the talent deals on behalf of the Producers. The production is financed through a combination of private equity and tax credits, including support from the Natural Selection Fund. The film is being distributed in Canada by Blue Fox Entertainment Canada. Kim Coates is repped by OAZ, Mainstay Entertainment, and Paradigm.

In Episode 5 of Season 2 of Off The Lot, Anthony Epp goes solo while Ken Kabatoff wraps the first week of production on Remnant.

Anthony uses the episode to pull back the curtain on a part of filmmaking many creators avoid: raising money. He shares a candid breakdown of his current sprint to finance The Quiet Canadians, reframing fundraising as direct action instead of endless preparation, refinement, or “pseudo-activity.”

The episode focuses on mindset shifts, investor outreach, and why real progress comes from conversations, not pitch decks. Anthony discusses private investment, confidence through repetition, and how filmmakers can reposition themselves from asking for permission to offering meaningful partnerships.

If you’re an indie filmmaker struggling with financing, avoidance, or the leap from planning to action — this episode is for you.

Click Here To Listen!

Follow Ken’s Indie Horror Feature Remnant here:

www.remnantmovie.com

Follow Ken Kabatoff’s newsletter The Film Founder here:

https://kenkabatoff.substack.com/about

Follow Anthony Epp’s newsletter The Filmmaker’s Notebook here:

www.anthonyepp.com

Follow Ken & Anthony on Instagram here:

@ken_kabatoff

@epptri

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

If you think someone else would appreciate this newsletter, share and subscribe below!

More soon.

-Ken-

Subscribe now

And somehow… we pulled it off.

The reason is simple: the team. Every department stepped up in a way that still kind of blows my mind. There’s no other explanation.

Late last night I got photos of our main location — the Kedrov family home. When we took possession on Monday, January 26th, it was a completely empty shell. Light, peach-colored walls. Bare floors. Zero personality.

Five days later, it’s unrecognizable.

Wallpaper everywhere. Every room painted. Fully dressed with furniture, cabinets, chairs, lamps — all of it sourced almost entirely from Facebook Marketplace because, shockingly, we don’t have any money. Our production designer and set decorator have basically turned bargain hunting into a competitive sport, and the results are unreal.

Here’s the thing I do know for sure: this movie is going to look great.

No matter what else happens — weather, schedule, stress, chaos — production design and cinematography are going to be top tier. I cannot wait to film in that house with proper lenses and finally see the frame come alive.

The original plan was to start the movie at the house on day one and stay there for roughly 14–15 days, treating it like our own little studio. Then we’d head out to locations for the final four days of the shoot.

But very quickly it became clear that the art department needed more time to properly finish the house, so we made the call to move days one and two to exterior locations instead. That decision bought art two extra days and relieved a huge amount of pressure. It was the right call.

So now the breakdown looks like this:

• Day 1: exterior scenes — parking lots, interiors of vehicles, driving shots, and a hardware store in Langley that’s full of character (and yes, it’s the same one used in Longlegs).

• Day 2: a full day inside a church in Abbotsford — about six pages, fairly simple coverage, but with a very cool horror sequence built in.

• Day 3: we move into the house and stay there for about 14 days.

• Final 2 days: Canopy Studios, covering multiple sets including a hospital and ambulance station.

My thinking on day one has evolved a lot over the last few weeks.

There’s one school of thought that says you should ease into production with a soft, friendly first day. And I get that. But I also really like the opposite approach — starting with a challenging day that forces everyone to lock in immediately.

There’s something powerful about wrapping a hard first day and collectively thinking, Holy shit… we did it. Once you’ve survived that, the rest feels manageable.

We’re splitting the difference.

Day one starts relatively simple — exteriors, straightforward coverage — and then ramps up with driving shots, a camera rig inside the car (not a process trailer), and one of only two company moves of the entire movie.

I hate company moves. Truly. I did everything I could to avoid them on this film. But this one works because while the main unit moves, we’re still shooting with a skeleton crew. No sitting around watching trucks load. At least some of us will still be shooting!

Efficiency really is the only way you survive an 18-day shoot.

One thing I protected in the budget from the very beginning was two cameras.

Not because we’ll always be shooting A and B simultaneously — lighting often makes that impossible — but because leapfrogging setups is how we save time. While A-camera finishes a shot, B-camera is already lighting and framing the next one.

Upstairs, downstairs, next room — always moving forward.

There’s an eight-page exorcism sequence in the middle of the script that I’m already losing sleep over. One day… ONE. For that sequence, we’ll absolutely be running two cameras at the same time to maximize coverage and survive the schedule.

It’s terrifying. But also exhilarating!

Earlier this week, our DP Leo and I went to our post facility to build the LUT with our colorist. This was one of those moments where the movie suddenly stops being theoretical. We landed on four distinct looks for the movie that are going to be amazing to see on the big screen!

The LUT is intentionally built one stop darker, which allows us to expose in a way that captures more information in the shadows. More data. More control in post. I want dark shadows. Real contrast. I don’t want to see into every corner of the frame like a Marvel movie.

We’re shooting on the Alexa 35 with Ultra Primes for most of the film, and anamorphics for the “nightmare” sequences. We’ll also be utilizing a 2.39:1 aspect ratio — wide, cinematic, and perfect for stacked frames with depth.

Now it’s the quiet part. Reading the script again. Marking actor motivations. Finalizing shot lists for week one. Getting my head into director mode and reminding myself what every scene is actually about.

Because no matter how insane the logistics get, the job is simple: tell the story honestly.

Call time is 7:00am on Tuesday.

Let’s do this.

PS. It’s looking more and more likely that my weekends are going to be stuffed with more film prep, so I don’t think I’ll be able to continue the in-depth newsletter through production — However, Anthony and I will continue to record podcast episodes and keep you informed of the inner-workings of production that way. So for the next few weeks, be sure to listen to the podcast and get the audio version of my newsletter there! :)

See you on the other side!

Time To Shoot! Remnant’s Final Week of Pre-Production!

In this episode of Off The Lot, Ken Kabatoff and Anthony Epp reflect on the final days of prep as Remnant officially heads into production, opening with a discussion on the passing of Catherine O’Hara and her lasting impact on film and television.

They discuss the intensity of week three of pre-production, from major art department transformations and schedule reshuffling to creative decisions around camera strategy, lenses, aspect ratio, and visual texture. The conversation also touches on the current moment in Canadian film and television, legacy creators, and why risk-taking still matters.

The episode closes with a look at how preparation, collaboration, and creative commitment shape the first days of a shoot — and what it means to step onto set ready to make decisive choices.

Check out the latest episode here!

To stay up to date on the movie:
👉 www.remnantmovie.com

Or follow me on Instagram:
👉 @ken_kabatoff

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

If you think someone else would appreciate this newsletter, share and subscribe below!

More soon.

-Ken-

Subscribe now

You can spend months (even years!) talking about tone, theme, and the big-picture version of the movie — but eventually you hit the point where every single decision becomes specific, practical, and expensive. That’s what this week was all about. The devil really is in the details, and we spent the entire week staring him directly in the face.

We kicked things off Monday with a props meeting focused on one of the most important objects in the film — the Navoka — a custom-built device that’s unique to Remnant. I won’t get into too many spoilery details here, but this thing is really cool and integral to the story. It’s been designed and fabricated over the last month, and it finally landed in our hands just over a week ago. Seeing something that has only existed in your head suddenly become real is always a bit surreal — and honestly, an incredible relief.

This meeting was all about refinement. Aging certain pieces down, making sure individual elements felt distinct, and dialing in the level of wear so nothing looked too “new” or too uniform. These are the kinds of details most audiences will never consciously clock — but if they’re wrong, you feel it. Props meetings are some of my favorites for that exact reason. You’re handling objects, talking through story logic, and in the case of a horror film, casually debating some pretty weird and gory stuff like it’s totally normal. Which, on a film set, it is.

From there, we moved straight into a set decoration meeting. Our set decorator officially started this week, and he’s the real deal. Huge résumé, great instincts, and an incredible attention to detail. We went through every key location in the film, breaking down how each space should feel and what story it’s telling.

All of this is built on the foundation laid by our production designer, who created the overall concept for the house — and then the decorator’s job is to bring that vision to life by filling it with the right objects, textures, and history. That challenge is amplified by the fact that our main location is an empty heritage home. A true blank canvas. We’re painting the entire interior, putting up wallpaper, dressing every room… and then at the end of the shoot, returning it exactly to how we found it. No drilling new holes. No permanent damage. Respecting a very old house while turning it into the setting for a horror film is a very delicate balancing act.

Later that day, we had our special effects meeting — always a fun one. For anyone less familiar with the breakdown: special effects are physical effects done on set, while visual effects happen later in post. Fog, atmosphere, blood gags, fire — that’s all SPFX territory.

Because this is a horror film, that department is doing a lot of heavy lifting. We talked through atmospheric haze for interiors, fog for the exterior of the house, blood effects coordinated with makeup, and several major fire elements. Fire is one of those things that looks incredible on screen but requires an extremely experienced team to pull off safely. Thankfully, we’re in very good hands.

One small personal win that came out of that meeting: I managed to cut a few effects and save the production some money. That might not sound glamorous, but on an indie film it’s a real victory. Every creative decision you make as a director is also a financial one, whether you like it or not.

A perfect example of that came up with blood on the floor of our main location. The house has original hardwood floors that absolutely cannot be damaged. On a big studio film, you’d just build the house on stage. On a mid-tier film, you might build a matching section of floor. On our film, neither of those options exist — so the solution becomes visual effects blood instead of practical blood.

But that choice has a ripple effect. Suddenly you’re planning shots for a VFX team. You’re deciding how often we see the blood, whether an actor interacts with it, and how complicated the VFX work becomes. Shift one problem from special effects to visual effects, and you’re immediately balancing a different part of the budget. This kind of problem-solving happens constantly in indie filmmaking — and this week was full of it.

Midweek, we did a stunt scout at the house with our stunt coordinator, Jon Kralt, and it was one of the highlights of the week. We walked through several key sequences, including a stair fall that’s going to be a big moment in the film. You can’t fake gravity — at some point, someone really is going down those stairs — but there are a lot of smart ways to make it safer and more affordable.

Painted mats that look like hardwood. Camera angles that hide padding. Decisions about whether a shot requires VFX cleanup or can be done entirely in-camera. Change the angle, save thousands of dollars. These are the kinds of conversations that quietly shape the movie long before anyone yells “action.”

We wrapped the week with a full tech survey — a day-long technical scout of every location with all department heads present. This is where everyone double-checks measurements, plans power and rigging, identifies access issues, and flags anything that could become a problem later. Lighting looks at generator placement. Grips plan rigging points. Stunts assess safety and wire options. Everyone does their pass.

It’s a long day, but it’s invaluable. And doing it early means people still have time to adjust their plans, tweak budgets, and ask questions before production starts. Fewer surprises later is always the goal.

Week two wasn’t flashy. But it’s where the film really started coming together.

This coming week is where decisions harden. Where the margin for error shrinks. And where you fully realize just how many moving pieces you’re responsible for — and how much you’re relying on your team to pull it all off.

Pre-production week two is officially in the books.

Only one week left until production…

New Episode!

“The Devil’s In The Details: Remnant Pre-Production Week 2”

In this episode of Off The Lot, Ken Kabatoff and Anthony Epp share updates from the front lines of indie filmmaking, including early details on the psychological thriller Blue Box, which Anthony produced.

They discuss investor strategy, why genre matters, and the importance of building sustainable, repeatable paths to get films made outside traditional systems.

The episode also checks in on pre-production for Ken’s horror feature Remnant, covering department coordination, planning challenges, and the constant balance between creative ambition and logistics.

Check it out now at the link below!

www.offthelotpodcast.com/listen

To stay up to date on the movie:
👉 www.remnantmovie.com

Or follow me on Instagram:
👉 @ken_kabatoff

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

If you think someone else would appreciate this newsletter, share and subscribe below!

More soon.

-Ken-

Subscribe now

Even with limited resources and prep time, it really felt like our all-star crew brought their A-game. This was the first official week of pre-production for Remnant, and while a lot of heavy lifting happened in the weeks and months leading up to this moment, we were suddenly staring down an intimidating task list. Somehow, through sheer teamwork and a borderline unhealthy amount of caffeine, we got through it — and we’re clear for Week 2.

We kicked things off with the concept meeting. This is usually the first big, all-hands moment of pre-production, with every department head in the room. It’s essentially a full page-turn of the script led by the 1st AD, and it’s where everything gets put on the table. Questions, concerns, red flags — this is the time. As we went through the script, I talked through my vision for each sequence and flagged anything that might affect art, SPFX, VFX, makeup and hair, stunts, or anything else that could spiral later if we didn’t catch it early.

These meetings are long — usually two to three hours — and this one was no exception. But by the end, everyone was aligned on the movie we’re trying to make. That feeling, when an entire team is locked into the same vision, is honestly one of my favorite parts of the process.

Day two was an art department meeting with our incredible production designer, Cheryl Marion — and she absolutely blew us away. Her concept designs for our key location weren’t just beautiful, they were smart. They opened my mind to new possibilities within the space, and even helped me see opportunities for deeper character work baked right into the environment. When production design does that — when it actively makes the story better — you know you’re in good hands.

Next up was the schedule review. All department heads weighed in on the oneliner, which is the detailed, day-by-day shooting schedule. If you’re not familiar with how films are made, most movies are shot completely out of order — based on cast availability, locations, set builds, lighting logistics, and a thousand other variables. This meeting was invaluable for hearing everyone’s concerns and pressure points. We landed on a schedule we’re genuinely happy with… which means it will almost certainly change for some unforeseen reason very soon.

Our wardrobe meeting was another highlight. I’m incredibly excited about how our characters express themselves visually throughout the film. Outside of dialogue, wardrobe is one of the fastest ways to communicate character to an audience — and our costume designer / executive producer, Jaida Hay, is absolutely crushing it. Every choice feels intentional and story-driven.

Wednesday brought a stunt meeting with our top-tier stunt coordinator, Jon Kralt, who recently wrapped work on a tiny indie film you may have heard of called Tron: Ares. Jon is exceptional at what he does — not just technically, but creatively. Designing these sequences with him has been a blast. He fully understands the tone and world of Remnant, and somehow manages to be both a total pro and one of the nicest humans you’ll ever meet.

After that, we went on a scout to lock down our final locations. This included a hardware store packed with character, a few nearby parking lots for exterior work, and then — no exaggeration — one of the best studio locations I’ve ever seen: Canopy Studios.

It’s a $300M cannabis production facility that went bankrupt at about 95% completion, and is now being transformed into a production hub. The place is massive, flexible, and filled with distinct rooms and textures. For us, it’s perfect — it allows us to shoot two full days of the movie in one location while making it feel like multiple worlds. Fingers crossed that negotiations go our way, because this location would be a huge win.

Thursday was the props meeting, which is always pure joy for me. These tiny details add so much texture to the story and characters, even if audiences never consciously clock them. People don’t always notice good props — but they definitely notice bad ones. Thankfully, our props team understood the assignment immediately and came in with thoughtful, story-specific ideas for every key prop in the film.

That was followed by a location review meeting to get all department heads fully up to speed on what we’d seen during the scout. And then Friday wrapped with a VFX meeting — another full page-turn, this time focused solely on identifying every VFX shot so our supervisors can build an accurate budget.

There are a lot of subtle VFX moments in this film — the kind you’d never notice if they’re done right — and a few that are unavoidable. For example: I want a pool of blood on a heritage hardwood floor. We can’t do that practically without destroying the location, so… VFX blood it is. Decisions like that happen constantly, and they’re the kind of problem-solving that defines indie filmmaking.

We ended the week with another incredible meeting with one of our lead actresses. I know I say this a lot — but we truly have an amazing cast. I cannot wait for the announcement later this month.

And just like that… Pre-Production Week 1 is in the books.

Now it’s time to take a deep breath — and tackle Week 2.

For a more detailed breakdown of pre-production week 1, check out this week’s episode of Off The Lot below!

In this week’s episode we dive into the early realities of getting a film off the ground — from reclaiming responsibility over financing to stepping into the chaos of official pre-production.

We discuss stepping back from oversubscribed government funding programs to focus on private investors, brand partners, and audience-building, and why waiting for permission can stall momentum.

The episode then breaks down the first week of pre-production on my horror feature Remnant, covering script breakdowns, department meetings, scheduling pressure, and the process of turning a script into a work order.

If you want an honest look at real-life filmmaking and the transition from planning to execution — this episode is for you.

www.offthelotpodcast.com/listen

To stay up to date on the movie:
👉 www.remnantmovie.com

Or follow me on Instagram:
👉 @ken_kabatoff

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

If you think someone else would appreciate this newsletter, share and subscribe below!

More soon.

-Ken-

Subscribe now

Our indie film podcast Off The Lot just launched Season Two, and the timing honestly couldn’t be better. I co-host it with director/producer Anthony Epp, and this season we’re getting extremely granular about what it actually looks like to make an independent feature film right now.

Everything I’ve been writing about in regards to Remnant — soft prep, the time crunch, shot lists, floor plans, department head scouts, the anxiety, the excitement — I go into much more detail on the podcast. We talk through the decisions, the mistakes, the things that keep you up at night, and the stuff no one warns you about when you’re gearing up to shoot your first feature.

The whole point of Off The Lot has always been transparency. No mythologizing. No pretending this is easy or glamorous. Just honest conversations about how movies get made when you don’t have a studio safety net — and why we keep doing it anyway.

If you’re a film student, an indie filmmaker, or someone who just likes hearing how the sausage is actually made, I think you’ll really like it.

You can check out the new season here, or anywhere you get your podcasts:
www.offthelotpodcast.com/listen

And yes — if this newsletter is the diary version, the podcast is the long, unfiltered conversation.

On Monday, January 12th, we begin official pre-production — which means department heads are on the clock, the calendar gets terrifyingly real, and suddenly there are only three weeks to put the final pieces of this movie together.

Is three weeks enough time to prep a whole feature film?

Absolutely not.

That’s why the last few months of soft prep were so crucial. We’ve already done a lot of the heavy lifting: locking almost all of locations (including our primary house where most of the movie takes place), starting the casting process early, developing production design/prop concepts, and making the big creative decisions that would otherwise crush us under this timeline. Now it’s less about what we’re doing, and more about executing it.

But execution is a next-week problem.

This week was all about crossing T’s and dotting i’s so that when the crew walks in on Monday, we’re not scrambling to get things ready.

Our producer Mike Johnston spent a huge chunk of the week wrestling with paperwork and basically getting this film on its feet — from setting up accounts, finalizing contracts, and locking down our tax credit loan application. It’s the kind of work that no one ever sees on screen, but without it, the entire movie collapses instantly. And I can assure you, without Mike and his production manager, Martin, at Studio 104 Entertainment, this movie would definitely collapse. After years of producing short films and wearing multiple hats, it’s quite nice to know that these extremely important tasks are getting done at the highest level, without issue.

Christopher Nash — writer, producer, and my longtime creative partner — and I were in meetings nonstop. Some were creative, some deeply logistical. We spent time with our 1st AD, Cadderly, breaking down the reality of the schedule. Hint: There is never enough time.

On the casting front, we closed on ALL of our lead cast members!

Three weeks before going to camera!

I’ve worked on so many productions that were barreling ahead without actors in place until the very last moment — but not this one! I am so thrilled about who we have in this movie, and I can’t wait to share that news with you soon. Huge shout out to our wildly talented casting director Tina Marie McCulloch — I cannot recommend Tina enough! Check out her casting website here!

Chris and I were also lucky enough to meet with a couple of our lead cast members to talk about their characters. Without a doubt, each meeting ended with us elevating their character and even finding ways to strengthen the overall story.

Over the holiday break I managed to get a lot of the shot list done, because I knew that if I didn’t use that time wisely, pre-production would eat me alive. So I worked feverishly to build out a full shot list for the movie — because with the amount of time we don’t have, I need to be ready to answer any question at any moment.

And that’s exactly what happened this week: Whenever I sat down to do more creative work, I’d get pulled away by another email or text message with an urgent matter to address.

This is directing. Answering 1000 questions per day, and hoping that most of them are leading you down the right path.

When it comes to the shot list, this is normally something the director and DP build together. But my incredible DP, Leo Harim, was out of town over the break — so I handled the last big chunk solo. This week, Leo and I finally got on Zoom and started to talk further about the visual style of the movie, especially the finale and how it differs from one of the earlier set pieces in the movie. This discussion, of course, forced me to revisit some scenes creatively, and ultimately made them even better.

Working with my DP is one of my favorite parts of the process: taking the black and white page and slowly shaping it into something visually stunning and cinematic.

Along with the shot list, I also began building floor plans for every single scene in the movie.

Floor plans (also called overheads or schematics) are simple diagrams that map out where characters move within a space. Some directors put camera angles directly onto these diagrams — but my brain doesn’t work that way. I like my blocking and my shots separated, but next to each other on the same page.

And maybe this is the writer in me, but I always like to leave about 5% undefined.

If I outline a script to death, I lose the chance to discover something unexpected — and that’s often where my best work comes from. Directing is the same. I know I need a medium shot. I know where the character is moving. But I want the freedom to find the best angle when I’m standing in the location, shoulder to shoulder with my DP, feeling the space. Sometimes the location gives you a gift you never could’ve planned for.

To cap off the week, we spent four hours today at our key location for a preliminary department head scout. Art, lighting, special effects, and VFX all walked the space together — asking questions, flagging challenges, and starting to build real, workable plans that fit our very real constraints.

And honestly?

It was just so damn fun.

After months (and years) of imagining this movie, there’s something surreal about standing in the location and seeing it click for everyone at once. You can feel the movie starting to exist — a dream finally becoming reality.

So with that, soft prep is done.

On Monday, pre-production officially begins.

See you next week!

To stay up to date on the movie:
👉 www.remnantmovie.com

Or follow me on Instagram:
👉 @ken_kabatoff

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

If you think someone else would appreciate this newsletter, share and subscribe below!

More soon.

-Ken-

Subscribe now

If you’re reading this, it means that my feature directorial debut, Remnant, is officially real enough to talk about in public without knocking on wood every sentence.

This feels like the right moment to start documenting the journey — not in a polished “here’s how we did it” way, but in a very honest, sometimes messy, sometimes exhilarating production diary.

So, let’s start at the beginning…

Two Years Ago, There Was Just a Kernel

Roughly two years ago, Christopher Nash and I had the tiniest kernel of an idea based on a couple horror short films we made. We didn’t have a script. We didn’t have a pitch deck. But we knew there was something there.

Chris did what great writers do: he went into the cave and started coming back with pages. Then more pages. Then entire drafts. And then — because this is Canada and because this is how you’re supposed to do it — we started to write funding applications.

Our team submitted applications to:

• Telefilm Talent to Watch

• Telefilm Regional Fund

• Creative BC Production Program (twice!)

And the result?

Nothing. No funding. No partial yes. No “almost.” Just rejection after rejection from the over-subscribed government funding bodies in this country.

I want to be clear about something: those programs do matter. They help give up-and-coming filmmakers a shot at achieving their dreams. But to be frank, Remnant, just wasn’t one of the stories that connected there. And learning to accept that — without letting it kill the project — was the first real test.

Trial by Fire (a.k.a. Indie Film Finance)

About a year ago, we made a decision that changed everything: if this movie was going to exist, we couldn’t wait for permission.

I turned over every single stone I could find trying to put Remnant together through private equity. I learned more about finance, structures, risk, investor psychology, and the business side of filmmaking than I ever expected to. None of it was theoretical. All of it was trial by fire.

Some days felt like progress. Some days felt like walking in circles with a blindfold on. But slowly — painfully — things started to click.

We found a couple investors and raised $1 million dollars!

Yay!

Then we lost one of them when it came time to collect the money, throwing the entire film into chaos.

Boo!

But something incredible happened — the investors that remained truly believed in us, our team, and the potential for this movie franchise. And after rolling up our sleeves and getting back to work, we found a way to put it all together.

It took belief, persistence, and a very stubborn refusal to let the project die quietly.

And that’s how Remnant is getting made.

Where We Are Now

We’re currently in soft prep, with official prep starting January 12th, 2026, and production scheduled for February 3rd, 2026.

Right now, my days are packed with:

• Location scouting (the fun kind and the “can we actually afford this” kind)

• Casting - I’m so excited about the calibre of actors auditioning!

• Locking in key crew - we have some top shelf department heads from the big budget Vancouver industry. It’s amazing who a good script can attract.

• And long, detailed conversations with my director of photography Leo Harim about how to elevate this film visually in every possible way.

We already have a star attached, and we’ll be making that announcement very soon — honestly, it feels surreal to even type that sentence.

Why I’m Writing This

Over the coming weeks and months, I want to track how this all unfolds — the highs, the lows, the compromises, and the small victories no one sees.

I’m hoping this can be a sort of production diary in real time. If you’re a film student, an indie filmmaker, or someone who just wants to make something one day and doesn’t know where to start, my hope is that this becomes useful. Or at the very least, reassuring.

If it helps you avoid one bad decision, or push through one moment where quitting feels easier — then it’s worth it.

One More Thing

As a companion to all of this, Anthony Epp and I will be launching season two of our Off The Lot indie film podcast this month, where I’ll be talking even more openly about the filmmaking process behind Remnant — the creative decisions, the producing realities, and what it actually feels like to direct your first feature.

You can find that here:
👉 www.offthelotpodcast.com/listen

And if you want to keep tabs on the film itself:
👉 www.remnantmovie.com

Or follow me on Instagram:
👉 @ken_kabatoff

Glad to have you on this journey with me.

If you think someone else would appreciate this newsletter, share and subscribe below!

More soon.

-Ken-

Share