THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT Big movies on a small budget. Do you need millions of dollars to make a movie? No. Do you need millions of dollars to make a successful movie? Most people would answer 'Yes' to that question. But would they be right? We're used to hearing about really expensive Hollywood films. The 1997 Oscar-winner Titanic cost $200 million to make, and more recently, Spider Man 3, one of the most successful films of 2007, had a budget of more than $250 million. To be successful, however, a film doesn't need to be as expensive as the big Hollywood blockbusters. An example of this is the 2010 movie Monsters, which cost less than half a million dollars to make. Monsters is set in Mexico and is the story of two people trying to escape from aliens and get back to the USA. The film won several awards and got very good reviews from many film critics-for example, the website Moviefone put Monsters at number 3 in its list of the best sci-fi films for 2010. How did they make the film so cheaply? First of all, it only took three weeks to film, and the film crew was just seven people in a van. Secondly, the man who made the film, Gareth Edwards. decided to film it with digital video, which is cheaper than the usual 35mm film. (The film equipment cost only $15,000 altogether) There is also the fact that they used real locations, not a studio. And the cast of the film were Edwards himself and two friends of his all the extras in the film were people who were just there, and they weren't paid. Most importantly, Edwards did most of the production work himself. He spent eight months editing Monsters and then five months creating the special effects. And he did it all at home on his computer, using non-professional software. The amazing thing is that the final film looks nearly as professional as big, fancy Hollywood productions. Not everybody liked Monsters, of course. One person said: "That's 90 minutes of my life that I'll never get back. But overall, it was very well received. And at least it wasn't expensive to make.