Hugo Serra: “in Spain it is not realistic to produce anything solely through crowdfunding”

Hugo Serra is a different producer. Off-road. Bold. Passionate. Perhaps that is why he likes to define himself as a good football coach, but in the audiovisual field: someone who visualizes each project in all its phases and manages it with the maximum vision of the game, efficiency and quality in all aspects. 'Baratometrajes 2.0', his latest film, has been nominated for Best Documentary at the Goya, Forqué, Feroz and Platino Awards. A film that critics have defined as “the bible of auteur cinema made in Spanish today.”

An interview by Rodrigo Espinel
ProduccionAudiovisual.com

You define yourself on your CV as an “achiever of the impossible.” Is that the essence of an audiovisual producer?

Of course. You have to be ambitious, yet realistic at the same time. As a producer you don't have to consider anything impossible or give up at the first try. Producing is a combination of “knowing how” (knowing the processes and tricks well), knowing how to delegate (really), being on top and being very persistent (without the interlocutor not liking you), generating a good agenda and using arts such as the word (both oral and written). If you add to this choosing well (and adapting) your business model or your position in this strange industry, being sincere and direct, as is my case, then you will end up with a good producer.

As you know, 2014 has only been the best year in history for the Spanish cinema box office. Are we facing the beginning of the end of the crisis in the sector?

No. We all know that the sector, especially that of pure film production, is suffering an endemic crisis. And if in the general crisis it is well known that we are not only experiencing an economic crisis (it is a crisis of many values ​​and a tough sieve that has put us in our place), in the audiovisual sector there are always four problems: 1.The fit of the audiovisual sector in the Spanish business philosophy (not only producing it but also appreciating it in its advertising part); 2. the politicization and public image of the “Spanish cinema” label; 3. The lack of state vision and official consideration for it to be a strategic sector of the economy; and 4. Market restrictions (especially in theaters) and the need to know how to sell it even better (inside and outside).

As I read recently (it is the claim of a small bank): “Growing is not being bigger, it is being better.” That has always been my philosophy. work better. Then everything can improve if there is quality. And looked at from my perspective, which is that of true independence compatible with large productions, until we have better audiovisual health, there will not be a more real space for small productions, which are always a small miracle seeking to be the exception.

In your opinion, does this box office success correspond to the quality of the films we have seen in theaters?

The “stratospheric” success of this year is. It can also be said, especially this year, that the quality of the promotional campaigns for the 3 films that can be considered “flagship” has been impeccable. Although everything is “easier” with money, you do have to do many things well to light the “I have to see it” and “word of mouth” fuses as the unstoppable and win-back-viewers-who-never-were-going Eight Basque surnames, the predictable, expected but powerful of The Child and the “faithful to the intensity of the proposal” and “aroma of movie of the year” of Minima Island. I also highlight the bombshell that for me and many people it is Wild Tales. Of those mentioned, it is the one that I enjoyed the most as a viewer. I started applauding at the end of the commercial screening (which by the way was packed).

But success has also been in the middle class, in those 10.000 km, in Magical Girl (both masterfully distributed by Avalon), in The flowers, in The fools and the stupid and in many others that go unnoticed by the general public. And in those that I defend the most, beyond the numbers (success is measured with other scales, fortunately), there has been a very good harvest, with a great variety of cheap films (those that are in line with our documentary, which are not even officially released), movies Margins (I classify them that way because of that platform that supports and defends them) and many interesting long documentaries and short films.

By the way, the nominees for the Goya Awards have just been announced. What production do you think is going to sweep the show?

I think it will be very distributed. For once, the one with the most nominations may be the one with the most awards (in many years it was almost the opposite, the favorites in nominations then went almost empty). If I were to vote, I am not an academic, my vote for best film would be for The Minimum Island.

What do you think academics value most when voting for the winners?

Well, I don't know, I think that mainly it is a vote that recognizes the movies that have worked and that "make an industry", but sometimes very conditioned by cronyism and colleagues or special cases: "Pepito never won the Goya, let's vote even if we haven't even seen the movie" (as happened with Sacristán in The Dead and Being Happy) and finally to let yourself be carried away by the flow and “whatever happens”. Nobody watches all the movies. And the first round is not the same as the second, already voting for the nominees and with all the pools and campaigns launched.

in your documentary CHEAPfilms 2.0. you analyze the low-budget films made in Spain. Is the future of cinema low-cost?

It is not the only model, but it is an option that, despite all its imperfections, is being unstoppable as a formula for “doing and trying things” also in the long run. As it is said in the documentary, what is healthy in a real industry is the coexistence, commercial gap and respect between large productions and very small ones.

On the one hand, many of us who had been around for a while, had our own small name and knew how to produce and shoot cheaply, or adjust our scripts to an “achievable” figure, because we have continued forward and have been inventing formulas for how to distribute and sell as well. On the other hand, there are always freeloaders, super-newbies or unprofessionals on duty, who hide behind the fact that there is no money to try to carry out their project in the current era. Some do it, others fail and get tired, as always happens.

What I defend against low-cost is to look for feasible ideas with this philosophy, since there is so much talent. And then they can be seen and moved, creating a circuit of this size and with that sensitivity (now I can say what is happening by adding various distribution-exhibition-online platforms initiatives). But do it with a “producer perspective” behind it. Pay, even if it is little (get out of not even a penny for anything, that is “no cost” and it is worth nothing). Return real favors. Learn to distribute yourself (because even if a distributor comes in, you have to do it and pay yourself anyway). Think and get out of “absolute zero”. If you can't handle a feature-length film, make a short film or a simpler web series. It is never too late to roll and many times a step-by-step trajectory makes sense.

What is true is that any small producer is not to blame for the current situation and the “broken dishes” of the past of Spanish cinema (that historical and cliché combined dish of a bad film or one that no one was interested in, poorly sold, with inflated budgets and corrupt subsidies, etc.), of which there are many and it also seems that they are still being paid for. So the great crisis (and the ICAA's best controls) seems to be destroying that average movie, moving on to what it should always have been: producing with a GOOD script, if there is a risk and business vision and therefore believing a lot in the product and its commercialization, whatever the size.

Through crowdfunding… can we really finance a production with commercial potential to compete with films financed in a “traditional way” or is it only valid for more modest/risky/auteur projects?

In Spain it is not realistic to produce anything solely with crowdfunding. If you choose to do so, it must be a complement to other forms of financing. To summarize a lot: no matter how well crowdfunding goes, figures are not achieved that allow the actors and crews to be paid. That's why it is “only valid” for modest projects. We are also returning to another historical starting point, that of the creator/director himself betting his savings. I think it's good and it makes you a true producer-entrepreneur. It makes you be very critical and cautious with the project and forces you to go to the end (which sometimes doesn't happen with other things in which you haven't risked that money from your pocket).

In your documentary you propose, among other measures, that the ticket to see a film should be agreed based on its budget, what do you think?

Well, I would do it more, I would give a talk to each exhibitor so that instead of giving hackneyed answers, they could try Spanish films, for example. But communicating it well to the client and drawing conclusions. But we are business as usual, the distributors are involved. Would Warner do it with a Spanish film? Would Good Films do it with a festival gem. In countries like China it already happens, one movie does not cost the same as another.

Finally, through your website www.necesitounproductor.com You offer consulting services for audiovisual projects. What are the main challenges that your clients must face when carrying out their projects?

Be very self-critical with our own projects in the script and dossier phase. Set a realistic goal, through a solid roadmap. Launch only if the projects are really tested and have a clear interest “abroad”. Study the points of sale and what their clientele or options will be. Doing a great financing exercise and betting those savings, for good, is an investment in oneself, combining it with other financing avenues (new or “old”). Know or seek help (that's what I'm here for) in the phases that are most unknown. Never give up.