What Should a Proof of Concept Film Actually Prove?

There is a category of film that is technically excellent and commercially useless. It is well shot, well cut, well scored, and after it plays the room says that was great, and then the conversation goes exactly where it was going before. Nothing moved.

This happens for one reason. Nobody decided, in writing, what the film had to prove.

Two sentences, before anything else

Before a treatment, before a board, before a single frame is designed, we write two sentences and get them agreed. If we cannot write them, we do not start.

The first is the belief gap. After watching this, the viewer must believe X, and right now they do not. The second is the risk gap. The thing that makes this project feel risky is Y, and this film has to reduce it.

What does this film need someone to believe, and what fear does it need to answer?

Why two and not one

Belief and risk are not the same axis, and projects usually fail on the second one while everybody is busy working on the first.

Belief is about possibility. Can this world exist, does this tone land, is this voice distinct. Risk is about consequence. If I back this, what is the thing most likely to go wrong, and what would I have to explain to the people above me.

A film that only serves belief produces admiration. A film that also serves risk produces movement, because the person deciding is not only asking is this good, they are asking is this survivable.

How to find the belief gap

Take the sentence you use to describe the project and watch where people go quiet. The belief gap is almost always hiding in the clause that makes listeners nod politely rather than react.

• If they say it sounds interesting but ask what it looks like, the gap is world.
• If they say it sounds funny or sad or strange and then ask how you would handle it, the gap is tone.
• If they compare it to three other titles at once, the gap is distinctiveness. They cannot locate it yet.
• If they ask who is in it, the gap is register of performance.
• If they ask what it costs before they ask what it is, the gap is scale.

How to find the risk gap

The risk gap is rarely stated out loud, because saying it is impolite. It usually comes disguised as a scheduling problem or a request for more materials. The useful move is to ask directly: if you passed on this, what would the reason be?

Answers cluster. The genre has not worked recently at this budget. The tone sits between two things and might land as neither. The premise sounds absurd summarized and only works when seen. The director has not shot at this scale. The world is expensive and might read cheap. Each of those has a different film attached to it.

One gap, one film

The instinct once the budget is approved is to prove everything. Show the world, and the tone, and the action, and the two leads, and the scale, and the ending. This is the fastest way to prove nothing.

A short film has one memory slot. Whatever you spend it on is what the room walks out holding. Two proofs in ninety seconds means the viewer keeps neither with any confidence. Choose the gap that is actually blocking the decision, build the whole film for it, and let everything else be competent rather than featured.

The test at the end

When the cut is locked, run one check. Show it to somebody who has the doubt, and afterwards ask them a question about the doubt. Not do you like it. Ask them the doubt directly. If the answer has changed, the film works. If the answer is the same but more warmly expressed, the film is decoration and you learned it while you can still fix it.

That check costs nothing and it is the only reliable one we have found.

This is the first stage of every proof of concept we make. The rest of the process is on the proof of concept page.

Write two sentences before anything else: what the viewer must believe and what fear must be reduced. One gap gets one film, because a short film has one memory slot and whatever you spend it on is all the room takes away.