Ugandan Filmmakers Are Tired of Waiting. So They're Building a New Film Economy.

When Grants Aren't Enough

Funding a film with $200 isn’t just rare, it sounds impossible. But that’s exactly what Isaac Nabwana did in Kampala. He didn’t wait for a grant. He found a way. That spirit, resourceful, gritty, and unglamorous is becoming more common among Ugandan filmmakers. Many have grown tired of relying on limited and competitive NGO or institutional grants.

Crowdfunding, self-financing, and other grassroots strategies are becoming real options. It's not easy. Production gear, actor fees, and promotional costs don’t disappear. But stories are still being told. The shift is quiet, not always headline-worthy, but it’s happening. Behind the scenes, the government has begun paying attention to film as an economic sector. New programs are being introduced. Access is slowly improving. Isaac isn’t alone anymore. He’s part of a wider change of filmmakers in Kampala that are rewriting how films get made, one budget-stretching solution at a time.

That shift away from waiting and toward doing doesn’t mean grants have disappeared. They're still part of the picture, and for some, they’ve made a difference. Patience Nitumwesiga, a Ugandan filmmaker, was selected in 2024 for the EAccelerate Fund, one of only four East African filmmakers to receive it. The fund came through a collaboration between the East Africa Screen Collective (EASC) and DW Akademie. These funding options exist, but they’re rare and often come with strings attached.

Filmmakers like Hosea Jemba, who’s worked as both producer and director, point out how funders sometimes shape the stories they support.

“These funders typically seek to align the projects they support with their own values, narratives, and priorities. It's a dynamic relationship where filmmakers have many times found themselves in a situation where the values promoted by the founder do not entirely mirror their own.” he said.

That control can shift a film’s message. For anyone trying to stay true to a specific voice or perspective, that’s a serious trade-off.

Government grants also present challenges. In 2024, Uganda’s entire cultural and creative industries received just 0.0018% of public funding. Not 1%. Not even half a percent. Less than one-thousandth. That doesn’t stretch far. The Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) created the Content Development Support Program in 2021, which named just four winners that year. In 2023, the number rose to 14, across formats like animation and TV drama. But the competition? There were 168 applicants.

These numbers speak for themselves. There's interest, there’s talent, and there’s effort but the money isn’t following at the same pace. Filmmakers are left calculating their odds, weighing compromise against visibility, and looking at grants as just one piece of a larger puzzle.

Those odds have pushed more filmmakers to look elsewhere toward funding models that offer more room to breathe. Instead of relying entirely on grants, some are now blending sources or going all-in on approaches that let them stay in control. Crowdfunding, interest-based investing, and hybrids are gaining traction.

Crowdfunding brings in money from many supporters, usually online. It works well for those who can engage audiences digitally. Platforms that can be used for crowdfunding include M-Changa, Kickstarter, and social media campaigns. Wakaliwood, based in Wakaliga, raised $13,000 on Kickstarter after setting a goal of just $160. That campaign had 374 backers. Numbers like that come from connection. When people feel part of the story, they’re more likely to back it. These campaigns also create a network of supporters who help promote the work beyond money.

Still, it’s not equally accessible. A filmmaker in a rural area, with limited digital access or no strong online presence, may not see the same results. Even Nabwana, the man behind Wakaliwood, leans on more than just the internet. He’s built a hyper-local network. His team includes family members. His distribution channels? People in villages who earn a cut of the profits. Community isn’t just a concept here, it’s the model. Wakaliwood also uses platforms for promoting its films, as it currently boasts 230,000 subscribers on its YouTube channel.

Then there's interest-based investing. Filmmakers receive funding in exchange for future returns. That might mean revenue-sharing or giving up equity. Investors back the film expecting to earn something back. It's a business deal. But like all investments, there’s risk. If a film doesn’t perform, nobody gains. Still, this route opens doors for filmmakers with clear ideas and the confidence to pitch them.

Some are now mixing everything: grants, investments, and crowdfunding. Hybrid approaches offer flexibility. If one source falls short, another might fill the gap. Instead of choosing just one path, they’re stitching together what they can find, and making it work.

Beyond Individual Hustle

That kind of patchwork funding is only part of the story. Filmmakers in Uganda have also seen some institutional and government support, though it hasn't always been widespread or easy to access. In 2020, when the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) launched the Content Development Support Programme, 60 applicants submitted film projects. Just four received funding. Fast forward to 2023, and the same programme was backed with UGX 1.2 billion. Still, even with bigger numbers, the demand has often outweighed the available help.

Some platforms have existed longer. The Uganda Film Festival, started in 2013, continues to attract both local and international filmmakers. It’s become a fixture. Between 2022 and 2027, the government pledged Shs 3 billion toward developing the local film industry. That figure might sound promising, but spread over five years, across the entire country, it doesn’t stretch far.

Newer projects aim to address gaps. In 2024, the Ministry of Gender, Labour, and Social Development launched the “Revitalising the Film Industry for Livelihood Enhancement” project. REFILE, a partnership with UNESCO, targets Eastern Africa’s film scene. It’s designed to promote growth in Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Ethiopia. A major goal is to create “Stream East,” a regional video-on-demand platform that could widen access and reach. There's also an emphasis on youth, women, and digital tools.

Beyond funding, the government has pushed for some tax changes. In 2024, the Ministry of Finance removed VAT on production supplies for filmmakers. Capacity building is also part of the push. The UCC reported training 6,898 filmmakers by 2023, covering various skills. Formal education still plays a key role too, through Makerere University’s Department of Performing Arts and Film. Outside government, private efforts like The Maisha Film Lab and Swangz Creative Academy, launched in 2022, are helping fill the training gap.

That momentum has also spilled into jobs, tax revenue, and informal income streams. Right now, people working directly in Uganda’s film and audiovisual space are estimated at around 5,000, with another 10,000 earning indirectly from it. These aren’t just actors and directors. Creative companies hire makeup artists, set designers, editors, marketers, even caterers. And they pay taxes.

There’s been a visible impact from international productions too. The Last King of Scotland was one of the earlier films that put Uganda on the map for foreign shoots. Then came Queen of Katwe in 2016, which brought in over Shs 29.5 million to Kampala’s economy. Over 400 locals were hired during filming, including street vendors, transport operators, and on-set crew, with some earning up to one million shillings per day. That kind of ripple effect stays with a city.

But these aren’t isolated examples. When filmmakers can raise consistent funding, they don’t just make one film. They keep going. They reinvest, train others, and build something bigger than themselves.

To encourage this, the Ugandan government rolled out a rebate program to cover a slice of production costs spent locally. The goal? Make Uganda more attractive to international filmmakers while promoting collaborations between Ugandan and foreign creatives. Other efforts followed too. The Uganda Tourism Board, the Uganda Communications Commission alongside other public-private partnerships teamed up to pitch “Destination Uganda” to filmmakers and tourists alike.

As filmmaking continues to gain ground in Uganda, it has also created opportunities for cultural exchange and creative expression, boosting tourism and economic growth. Events like the Uganda Film Festival continue to grow. It's now in its 13th year. This time, the festival held competitions across different regions and even hosted free community screenings. Those screenings might look simple on the surface, but they give local filmmakers room to showcase their work while building an audience. They also keep the conversation going, outside city centers and into places that don’t always get access to films.

What Money Can't Fix

In 2022, a UNESCO report showed that Africa’s film and audiovisual industry generates and employs more than 5 million people and accounts for $5 billion in GDP for the continent. Despite the film industry's ability to employ more youth than any other sub-sector in the economy, according to the 2020 Uganda National Culture Policy Regulatory Assessment Report, it is still plagued by challenges, including lack of access to funding, limited capacity amongst filmmakers, and a high level of piracy.

Theack of reach beyond the capital keeps showing up. Despite talent and growing interest, many filmmakers still can’t get their work seen outside Kampala. Even when there’s content ready for distribution, the formal systems just don’t stretch far enough. Piracy fills that gap fast. According to the Uganda Registration Services Bureau, the country loses up to Shs 60 billion every year from piracy and copyright violations. That’s money that could fund production houses, pay crews, or develop platforms.

The Uganda Communications Commission has offered some training, and it helps. But when filmmakers don’t have access to equipment or post-production tech, training can only go so far. You’re taught to build, but the tools aren’t there. So people end up adjusting quality or skipping projects altogether.

Filmmakers like Dr. Jesca Ahimbisibwe have tried to solve the distribution problem directly. She and her team at Cinema UG once developed an app to stream local films. It was a smart move, but they didn’t follow through with the launch. Why? Too many worries about piracy and the lack of copyright enforcement. Why stream a film if someone can steal it the next day and resell it? That kind of vulnerability shapes decisions.

Jesca’s team has had to work around the gaps. They promote films, brand them, help with cinema screenings, and collaborate on international festivals. But she’s seen how creators hold back.

She says, “There are filmmakers who spend quite a hefty sum to produce a movie... there’s no way they would just release it for free.”

There’s also the 2017 broadcasting policy, which technically requires 70% local content on TV and radio. But the enforcement is weak. That 70% often sits on paper while foreign content gets more airtime. Without clear follow-through, policies don’t shift much on the ground. You end up with good films, but not enough screens willing to show them.

Most of the 362 entries at the 2025 Uganda Film Festival came from local creatives, 330 of them. None were commissioned. These were self-funded, self-driven projects. That tells you something. People are telling stories on their own terms, with their own voices, even when resources are tight.

Funding is changing shape too. The Uganda Communications Commission keeps expanding its support. Crowdfunding platforms like M-Changa are opening up new ways to finance projects. These shifts matter, especially when creators have limited access to grants or formal investors.

Still, some problems won’t fix themselves. Piracy, weak policy enforcement, and a lack of reliable training keep slowing things down. Many filmmakers still learn on the job or depend on informal networks. That gap needs attention.

But the direction is clear. Financing models rooted in community, supported by policy, and open to innovation are not just working, they’re growing. And when stories are funded well, everyone benefits. Not just filmmakers, but vendors, editors, schools, and entire communities who get to see themselves on screen.