I’d love to hear the perspective of producers and filmmakers here on Stage 32.
I’m currently developing a feature film inspired by my own life and experiences across Egypt, Italy, and Spain.
The story begins in Egypt and follows a deeply personal journey through different cultures, countries, and stages of life. But the international setting is not simply background—it is part of the character’s transformation and the story itself.
This raises an interesting production question for me:
When a film genuinely needs multiple countries because they are essential to the story, can that become a creative and production advantage rather than simply making the project more complicated?
For example, can the different locations, cultures, film commissions, and potential co-production relationships actually strengthen the project and its international appeal?
And from a producer’s perspective, what would you want to see first before considering a project like this—an exceptional screenplay, a clear production strategy, a director attached, financing possibilities, or the right international partners?
I’m curious to hear from producers who have worked on internationally set or co-produced films.
Sometimes the complexity of a story may also be part of what makes it worth producing.
Hi Emil Soliman
I think the three-country setting could actually become one of the project’s strongest assets if it is handled strategically. When each location is essential to the character’s journey, the international element can add both creative depth and potential production opportunities.
From a producer’s perspective, I’d say the screenplay and the clarity of the story should come first, followed by a realistic production strategy showing why each country is necessary. From there, exploring local film commissions, co-production structures, incentives, and the right international partners could make the complexity much more manageable.
I’d be very interested to hear more about the project and how you’re currently approaching the screenplay and production side.
Hi Mary,
Thank you for such a thoughtful and insightful perspective. I completely agree that the three-country setting can become one of the project’s greatest strengths rather than simply a production complication, provided that each location is essential to the character’s journey and to the story itself.
That is exactly why I’m taking my time with the screenplay. My priority at this stage is to develop the strongest possible version of the story — creatively, emotionally and commercially — before moving too deeply into the production strategy.
Because the project is ambitious in both scale and story, I want the screenplay to be strong enough to make producers see the potential immediately. Once the script reaches that level, I can then look seriously at the production side: why each country is necessary, the right co-production structure, incentives, film commissions and, most importantly, the right international partners.
I’m currently focused on getting the story and screenplay exactly where they need to be. When the material is ready, I’d be very happy to share more with you and hear your perspective from a producer’s point of view.
Thank you again, Mary. I’m very glad we connected, and I appreciate your interest in Beyond the Five Senses.
Best,
Emil
1 person likes this
Emil Soliman To be entirely honest, budget and logistics can easily kill the idea from the start, unless you have very strong attachments and very strong proof of market, or two of the three can be done with small B-unit and chromakey process. Certain genres and franchises (eg. the Bond films) require multiple countries. Others don't.
Thank you, Shadow. I completely understand your point, and I actually appreciate the producer’s perspective behind it.
You’re right — three countries can become a serious budget and logistics challenge if the story doesn’t genuinely justify them. In Beyond the Five Senses, however, the locations are not there simply for visual variety. They are connected to the protagonist’s real journey and transformation, and removing them would change an important part of the story.
That said, I’m not approaching the production side blindly. My priority right now is to make the screenplay strong enough to establish why each location is essential. Once the screenplay is ready, the production strategy can then determine the smartest way to achieve it — including what truly needs to be filmed on location and what could potentially be handled through controlled units, doubles, or other production solutions.
I also agree with your larger point: before asking anyone to take on the complexity of a three-country production, the project needs strong creative material and a convincing path to the market.
That’s exactly what I’m working toward now — making the story strong first, and then finding the smartest way to produce it.
Thank you again for the honest perspective. Coming from someone with your production experience, I really value it.
Today, more and more filmmakers are starting new location sequences with wide shots establishing the city or area, and then shooting much of the rest in neutral, more affordable locations.
Designing sets and, even, using LCD panels as backgrounds in fewer locations can significantly reduce travel and accommodation costs in far-off lands for cast ane crew.
Thank you, Jack. That’s a very valuable perspective. I especially agree that the distinction between what truly needs to be filmed on location and what can be recreated through production design or technology can make a major difference.
For a story that genuinely belongs to three countries, I think the challenge is finding the right balance: preserve the identity and authenticity of each location, while being smart about where the production actually needs to travel.
Sometimes the production limitation itself can become part of the creative strategy. Really appreciate you adding this to the conversation.