Month: February 2009

Hope said "Hit" and Lipsky "Suck It" … then came the response

Post author By Ted Hope
Post date February 5, 2009
1 Comment on Hope said "Hit" and Lipsky "Suck It" … then came the response

Karina at Spout called me out on my liberal use of an already overused term. You ask me though, the meaning of the word “hit” left this world long ago. And it brought a smile to my face to type each letter as a result. I couldn’t resist.

Her further critique of Jeff Lipsky’s Reasons To Be Bullish, Pt 1 & Pt 2, then reminded me of the response of few friends have called me out on my current optimism: that it left them depressed.

What can I say? In every silver lining broods a deep dark cloud. Karina labeled it “cranky old man-ism”. She might have something there: I am writing this from the rocker on my front porch. But Karina got some good response back too. Old men and their reprimanders are always worth a hoot in my book or blog. Check it out.

Tags Jeff Lipsky, Karina Longworth, Spout

Truly Free Film

Sundance Creative Producing Initiative

Post author By Ted Hope
Post date February 4, 2009
1 Comment on Sundance Creative Producing Initiative

This past summer I was a mentor at Sundance’s first Creative Producing Lab. I was completely impressed. In regards to Jane’s earlier post today, this is that program. Granted it can only be accessed by a very limited number of participants (there were 4 fellows last year), but it was a comprehensive and intensive program that I would advise for everyone.

And you know what? The deadline to apply is quickly approaching.

You can also find the application and additional information on the program at the link below:
http://www.sundance.org/applications/CPI/

The Sundance Creative Producing Initiative much more than just the summer lab though (from Sundance’s own literature):

it is a year-long creative and strategic fellowship program for emerging American producers with their next project.

The program was conceived to develop and support the next generation of American independent producers. For over 27 years, the Sundance Institute has offered in-depth year-round programs for feature screenwriters and directors. In an increasingly competitive and complex marketplace, the health and excellence of the independent film movement hinge on sophisticated creative and strategic producers with whom these directors and writers can collaborate.

The initiative focuses on the holistic producer, who identifies, options, develops and pitches material, champions and challenges the writer/director creatively, raises financing, leads the casting/packaging process, hires and inspires crew, and navigates the sales, distribution, and marketing arenas. The program is designed to hone emerging producers’ creative instincts in the scripting and editing stages and to evolve their communicating and problem-solving skills at all stages of realizing a project.

Five producers will be selected for a one-year fellowship and participate in the following:

Creative Producing Lab (described below)
Producers Conference attendance
Sundance Film Festival attendance (screenings, networking opportunities)
$5,000 living stipend; $5,000 pre-production grant
Year-round mentorship from 2 industry advisors
Community building among producing fellows
Year-round support from Sundance staff
SUNDANCE CREATIVE PRODUCING LAB

Fellows will attend a 5-day lab focused on creatively strengthening their projects from script to screen. The idea is to give producers the chance to explore their own creative take on material and to give them skills and experience in evaluating and developing this material at script stage and beyond. Scripts will be discussed in one-on-one sessions with advisors, as well as in a collective notes process with the group. Case studies will be used to explore creative issues in the production and editing processes, while techniques in communicating with writer/directors and potential production partners will also be addressed.

ELIGIBILITY

Candidates must have produced at least one short or feature-length narrative or documentary film (no more than 2 narrative features total).
Producers must have a completed, legally-optioned, scripted narrative project in hand with a director attached to the project.
Candidates may not be writer or director of submitted project.
Candidates must be based in the U.S., although submitted project does not need to be English language nor filmed in the U.S.
Sundance Institute strongly believes in strength in diversity and actively encourages applications from women, people of color, differently abled people, and all persons who support the Institute’s mission.

I should also add on another front, it is also deadline time for IFP’s Independent Filmmaker Labs. I just blogged about it on Let’sMakeBetterFilms over on HammerToNail. Check it out too. Get those applications in the mail! These are great programs that we are fortunate to have.

Tags Hammer To Nail, IFP, Let'sMakeBetterFims, producing, Sundance

Truly Free Film

It Could Be Getting So Much Better All The Time #5: Training And Mentorship

Post author By Ted Hope
Post date February 4, 2009
1 Comment on It Could Be Getting So Much Better All The Time #5: Training And Mentorship

Today’s suggestion is from Jane Kosek, producer and blogger over at All ABout Indie Filmmaking:

Much of the struggles of the industry are due to the lack of resources, training and mentoring to producers. If we have enough support for the group of people whom actually greenlight the pictures then maybe that will trickle down over everything.

I can’t think of one organization that strongly focuses on the development of indie producers. Film school producing programs are just the beginning of training. And most indie producers don’t attend film school anyway. You must already have films distributed in order to join the Producers Guild as a producer. By then you have already typically made a few crappy ones that never got distributed. IFP and Film Independent and Sundance try to offer help but they also heavily service directors and writers. And much of the best resources are given in tiny labs that are very hard to get into.

I think we need an organization specifically for producers — that will be the most effective.

Most of the interviews in film magazines are with writers and directors. I know more about the writers and directors of indie films than producers. That needs to change. More publicity and knowledge of what a producer does will help. Maybe those less experienced won’t jump in so quickly if they really understand how big a job it is.

I think that if we start an organization that is helmed or guided by successful producers that really gives back to the next generation of producers then we are on to something that can help indie films get better. Teach indie producers how to develop strong films and be a strong creative partner to the director. Help them understand the importance of a strong cast. Distributors have said they want projects with name actors. How do indie producers make this happen? They need help. Bigger producers could help make inroads with the agents so they are more open to having their clients in smaller films. Give indie producers resources that really help them secure distribution.

You help to teach and build the skills of indie producers and I guarantee there will be significant change in the quality of films being made. They will develop projects longer. Staff it right and cast it well, etc. We lament the loss of billions of dollars each year on indie films. Who is gathering this money and using it? Producers! Let’s get us trained and organized and perhaps these losses will diminish. I’m ready to do what it takes to fix the situation. This is my livelihood. If I don’t help fix it, who will?

If there were an organization providing more significant training and support from the top at the producer level, we would see a huge difference in the quality of films being made. I know my producer colleagues and I could use more support and the problem is that we haven’t been able to find this “ongoing” support. We lean on each other and we join all the usual associations that do exist, but we still struggle finding the mentoring that we really want and need.

Sure, most of us have worked with amazing producers in the past who try to be approachable but it’s not an effective system. These amazing producers are extremely busy and have their own projects to worry about. I think these producers would be more available if they were working within an established system of giving back. I personally find it much easier to give back through an established means rather than random email and phone requests that have a high chance of getting lost in the shuffle. In addition, an established system would allow mentoring from multiple sources, which benefits everyone.

I am a case study in what is broken in our system. I work extremely hard and have the best of intentions for making entertaining films that appeal to a wide audience. I want my investors to make their money back, and I believe I am making the right decisions but if I had a system to lean on a bit more, I know I would increase the odds of my films being a success. And if producers like me have a hard time building a proper support system, how do those just starting out have a chance? It’s a real dilemma.

We need a system that offers producers a means for receiving guidance and training, and in turn, allows those producers who have “made it” to give back in a significant way. By the time a producer has made a name for him or herself, he or she has usually already made a few films that have lost money. I am sure this “learning” period is where we are seeing the greatest loss in the billions of dollars of investment money. We catch producers at this phase in their careers and we provide a foundation for a thriving independent film industry.

Tags Jane Kosek

Bowl Of Noses

NYC Goes Micro Scale Lego

Post author By Ted Hope
Post date February 4, 2009

Do you ever read the New York Times? You know that paper that your folks read? Maybe if they printed more articles like this instead just putting up on their blog then they could tap into that 8-12 year old market. Maybe we have to talk to them.

Anyway, we do a lot of minimalist Lego building in our bowl, but this Christof Neimann dude’s got it done real good. Check out the full site as there are at least ten more than what we have included here — and many are more pure NYC than what we’ve posted here.

Micro all the way!

Big thanks to Mr. SkipHop for this one!

Tags LEGO, micro, NYC

Truly Free Film

It Could Be Getting So Much Better All The Time #4: Web-based Theatrical Screenings

Post author By Ted Hope
Post date February 3, 2009
100 Comments on It Could Be Getting So Much Better All The Time #4: Web-based Theatrical Screenings

Today’s suggestion from filmmaker and blogger Pericles Lewnes:

What if an internet site could be set up to premiere a movie that an internet audience could watch together on stream at a pre-determined time? There would be a limit to admission – say 200 “seats.” This would prevent any disruption from server traffic. The admission would be low ($2?) and buzz can be created on a shoestring. After the movie is over, the filmmaker can open a chat with a q&a. Instant reviews can be posted on a WordPress style section of the site. Fans of “The Site” itself would end up building their “brand” as reviewers.

An idea of the virtual run life of the movie could be determined by how many virtual ticket sales can be calculated.

Say for instance, you have sold 200 seats and 150 more people try to buy tickets. Well, after judging from the reviews and reaction of the first screening a second screening may be in order. After the movie has had it’s “run” it can be made available through DL or DVD sale in a bside style set-up if the filmmaker wants that. Again, I am still trying to formulate the concept and it is only half baked – but there is plenty of room for the DIY filmmaker to get excitement built for their movie and to immediately act to create that important relationship with the audience immediately after. Everything can monitored.

Tags Pericles Lewnes

Truly Free Film

Jeff Lipsky: WHY SO SERIOUS? Part 2

Post author By Ted Hope
Post date February 3, 2009
49 Comments on Jeff Lipsky: WHY SO SERIOUS? Part 2

Jeff Lipsky continues what he started…:

6. I predict the death of mumblecore movies by 2011. Independent films will once again boast strong scripts and, as such, will reach a broader audience. This is probably as good a time as any to reiterate to critics who invoke the name of John Cassavetes in their reviews of so-called mumblecore fare: John’s only improvised film was “Shadows.” Suck it.

7. Wonderful myriad primers about self-distribution are available in current issues of magazines like FilmMaker, MovieMaker, and at this link provided by DYI guru Peter Broderick (http://www.peterbroderick.com/writing/writing.html). Such detailed first-person reporting, including specific anecdotal detail and how-to information is worth its weight in gold to independent film producers. This shared information will become much more prolific and abundant and available in the months and years to come. We don’t need more filmmakers, we need more knowhow about gaining access to audiences for the all-too-few great independent films that still manage to get made.

8. Just when digital projection saturation in all cinemas across the U.S. was about to be a tangible thing, a reality, looming not on the horizon but happening TODAY, banks aren’t lending money to anyone. That’s where the billions of dollars for this wholesale transformation was going to come from, from banks. Fewer digital screens (for a while longer, anyway – I know it’s still coming) will mean fewer bad digital movies. Audiences will be happier, critics will be happier, incisive and insightful bloggers will be happier, and more people will return to the movies, especially to good independent movies.

9. Praise the Lord, the studios became fed up with so-called independent distribution in 2008 (just as they did in the early to mid 80’s) and everyone began biting their fingernails. But let’s look at what else happened in the distribution world in 2008 (and January 2009). Two new indie distributors hung out their shingles and laid down their gauntlets during Sundance this year, Senator made a bold statement with its acquisition of “Brooklyn’s Finest,” and Summit broke through with its first $100 million grossing film (yeah, it was “Twilight,” but that shouldn’t blunt the impact of that encouraging watermark). Relatively obscure indies like Oscilloscope enjoyed a succès d’estime with “Wendy & Lucy,” Overture rode the wonderful “The Visitor” to a (nearly) $10 million gross and a Best Actor Oscar nomination, and Music Box cashed in on its rock ‘em, sock ‘em success “Tell No One.” Studio boutiques were never independent distributors anyway; by definition they were dependent on the support of their parent company. Every ten years or so that support dries up and (most of them) go away, clearing the way for a brace of new, innovative, distinguished upstarts. Even with the demise of ThinkFilm there are a greater number of pure play independent distributors now than there were one year ago.

10. Kodak continues to produce thrilling new film stocks (Vision 3, 5260) which just might encourage more independent filmmakers to dabble in this antiquated art form for just a bit longer. After all, it’s kinda nice when you don’t have to have to worry about whether the pattern of your leading lady’s costume is going to wreak havoc on your wave form. (I know, I know every film will be shot digitally someday, but that someday, I suspect, is still farther off than some people would like to think.)

A final prediction and admonition: as soon as newspapers and magazines fold up their tents for good the World Wide Web (2.0) will be longer be free. And then even more people will return to movie theatres.