The Living End Pitch Deck Teardown: A Horror Film's $760k

The Living End Pitch Deck Teardown

The Living End is a horror film project that utilizes a data-driven approach to pitch an independent feature. Unlike many creative decks that focus solely on mood boards and plot, this deck provides a granular look at the business of indie filmmaking, including tax incentives, distribution windows, and specific budget line items. The project, written by Jon Rizik, seeks to capitalize on the high-margin nature of the horror genre as it stood in the mid-2010s.

Slide 1: Title and Hook

The cover slide features a dark, textured background with a broken bass guitar covered in blood. The tagline "Fighting to keep their careers alive" establishes the dual conflict of the film: professional struggle and physical survival. It identifies Jon Rizik as the writer and points to HKDProductions.com.

Slide 2: The Profitability Thesis

This slide presents a bold claim: "The top ten most profitable films in the last five years were horror films." By leading with economics rather than art, the deck immediately signals to investors that this is a business proposition. It sets the stage for why the horror genre is a safer bet for independent capital compared to other genres.

Slide 3: Market Gap

Titled "Horror Fans Deserve More," this slide uses Rotten Tomatoes screenshots to show that recent horror releases like "As Above, So Below" (39% audience score) and "The Lazarus Effect" (24% audience score) have underperformed with audiences. The implication is that there is a demand for higher-quality horror that the current market is not meeting.

Slide 4: The Concept

The concept slide provides the logline: An indie rock band on a recording retreat at a beach house sees their music come to life while under attack by masked intruders. The background image of a lighthouse reinforces the secluded, atmospheric setting of the film.

Slide 5: Talent

This slide introduces Jon Rizik (Writer/Director) and Evan Rindler (Producer). Both are noted as Northwestern University film students. Rizik's experience with a micro-budget feature and Rindler's history with grant funding are cited to establish their ability to manage a production of this scale.

Slide 6: Production Plan and Tax Credits

This is one of the most critical slides for an investor. It lists a total budget of $760,000 . It breaks down the 23-day shoot in February and, crucially, highlights the New York Film Tax Credit . It states that 30% of the budget ($210,000) is guaranteed for investors, which significantly de-risks the entry point for capital.

Slide 7: Potential Cast

The deck lists "Potential Cast" members to give investors a sense of the film's intended tone and caliber. Names include Christopher Abbott (HBO's Girls), Mark Duplass (The League), and Lucy Walters (Power). While these actors are not confirmed, they serve as a "type" for the characters Matt, Dan, and Trish.

Slide 8: Market Analysis

This slide defines the target demographic as males/females aged 18-24 with an active online presence. It notes that horror films average 4.5x their budget in worldwide gross and mentions that 24 million tickets were sold as of August 2015. It also links the indie rock theme to market size by citing The National's 75 million Spotify listens.

Slide 9: Marketing Plan

The marketing strategy is three-pronged: horror blog engagement (set visits/interviews), music engagement (Spotify playlists and original film music), and the film festival circuit to generate word-of-mouth and press coverage.

Slide 10: Distribution Strategy

The deck proposes a "Compressed-Window" strategy. This involves releasing the film on theatrical, VOD, and iTunes simultaneously or in quick succession. The goal is to promote the film once for all platforms to maximize marketing spend. It also mentions a long-term home on Netflix to minimize physical media manufacturing costs.

Slide 11: Revenue Plan

The revenue plan is straightforward: Investors receive their full investment plus a 20% return first. Once that threshold is met, additional profits are split evenly (50/50) between the investors and the filmmakers.

Slide 12-13: ROI Scenarios

These slides outline two paths to profitability. Scenario 1 assumes a distributor advance covers the full budget (citing "You're Next" and "It Follows" as examples), leading to recoupment in 9-16 months. Scenario 2 assumes a partial advance, with recoupment taking 18+ months through various deals (TV, Foreign, Airline).

Slide 14: Comparable Success Stories

The deck provides hard numbers for comps. "You're Next" ($1M budget) returned over $7M to investors. "It Follows" ($2M budget) returned over $5M. These figures include box office and video sales, though VOD and TV rights are noted as unknown.

Slide 15-16: Project Timeline

The timeline spans from August 2015 (Pre-Production) to early 2018 (Investment Recouped). It includes specific milestones like a 2016 production date, a 2017 festival run, and a late 2017/early 2018 distribution landing.

Slide 17-19: Appendices and Sources

The deck concludes with a list of sources for all data points mentioned in the previous slides, ranging from Rotten Tomatoes to industry news sites like IndieWire and The Numbers. This adds a layer of professional transparency to the pitch.

Slide 20-22: Detailed Budget Breakdown

The final slides provide a line-item budget. Key figures include: Total Above-The-Line: $162,044 , Total Production: $295,849 , and Total Post Production: $195,295 . The grand total is listed as $759,572 . Specific costs like $80,109 for camera operations and $105,515 for editing show a high level of planning.

What The Living End Pitch Deck Does Well

The Living End deck excels at treating a creative project like a financial product. By leading with the profitability of the horror genre and immediately introducing the New York Film Tax Credit, the founders address the investor's primary concern—risk—before they even get to the plot. The inclusion of a full, multi-page budget appendix is rare in early-stage film pitches and demonstrates a high level of operational readiness. Furthermore, the "Initial Take" revenue structure (120% recoupment before profit sharing) is a standard but very attractive term for independent film investors.

What is Missing from The Living End Pitch Deck

While the deck is financially robust, it lacks a strong visual "look book" or director's statement. There are no concept art pieces, color palettes, or storyboards to show how the "music coming to life" will actually look on screen. For a horror film, the visual execution is as important as the budget. Additionally, while the deck lists a "Potential Cast," it does not mention a Casting Director or any existing relationships that might make these actors attainable for a $760k production. Finally, there is no mention of a sales agent or production company partner already attached to the project, which would further validate the distribution claims.

What Other Founders Should Copy

Founders in both the creative and tech spaces should emulate the way this deck uses guaranteed incentives to anchor the pitch. Highlighting a tax credit or a secured grant as a "floor" for investor loss is a powerful psychological tool. The comparable success stories slide is also a masterclass in using data; it doesn't just list movies, it lists budgets vs. investor returns, which is the only metric that truly matters to a financier. Lastly, the compressed-window distribution strategy shows that the founders understand the modern landscape of their industry, rather than clinging to outdated models like a traditional long-lead theatrical release.