Category: Truly Free Film

We are on the verge of a new film culture and infrastructure.

Categories
Truly Free Film

It’s All One Big Continuum…

My post on “Is There A “Too Many” When It Comes To Playing Film Festivals” generated some good questions and points in the comments.  I hope to get to them all in the days and weeks ahead.

One thing that truly resonated for me though was Jon Jost’s dismissal of the box office performance of Ramin Bahrani’s, Lance Hammer’s, and Kelly Reichardt’s recent films.  These artists, along with a few others, represent some of the great hope for American Art Film in the near future (and Jon probably raises them precisely for that reason).  
It’s a mistake to take the theatrical results of their most recent films as the criteria for their financial success.  No one can think about a single film anymore as the litmus test.  When all filmmakers still dwelled in the world of acquisitions, that way of thinking was understandable; people felt you were only as successful as your last film.  What your film sold for and how it performed was all that seemed to matter.  In a world where it makes less and less sense to license your film for all media in exchange for a paltry sum (should you even be so fortunate to have such offers), new ways to evaluate success are emerging.
Bahrani and Reichardt licensed each of their last films to quality art-house distributors.  Hammer took another approach.  Yet, Bahrani and Reichardt built on their audience from the prior film, as you can be assured that Hammer will too.  These are what the music business would see as catalogue artists.  Their fan base will grow with each new release.  The more they are able to maintain an ongoing dialogue with their audience, the richer a dialogue they can offer, the more that audience will support them.  It is not about the one-off film anymore — nor that film’s results.  It is all about the community of support that artists can develop for their work.  That community will only flourish to the degree that there is both dialogue within the community, and well-maintained flow of content.
Artists who maintain a rich dialogue with their community will benefit in many ways from what they have built.  Some of it will be directly financial, both in terms of amount of that reward but also predictability thereof.  Other ways will include increased access to audience (which has a wide and varied group of benefits), decreased marketing & distribution costs, and new streams of revenue.
The more filmmakers can think of how to maintain and deepen the on-going dialogue with their supporters the better off they will be.
P.S.  I disagree strongly with Jon’s comment that the aforementioned films and filmmakers don’t do anything “aesthetically daring or difficult” — but this isn’t where I chose to look at such issues.   But since it was raised, dare I say that whereas no one is reinventing cinema, that compared to the norms, each one went out a limb without a net — and they flew pretty damn high when they jumped.  And man that ain’t easy  — and it is extremely brave is this world of ours.
Categories
Truly Free Film

Is Art Sabotaged By Thinking About An Audience From The Start?

I have been falling behind on my blogging; I admit it.  Luckily, information never goes away. Nor is there anything like a shortage of things that need to be said.  We have so many hurdles to jump in the indie film world.  Or is it walls to break down?  Even after we made it through once, the same challenges face us again.  Even when one or two lead the way, the path gets overgrown immediately, and the rest seem to be lost all over again.  So here’s to the better late, than never camp, a post on some old but still relevant news…

There is a good post from several weeks back on Spout “Five Thoughts on Independent Filmmaking from SXSW”.  There’s a lot in it that merits further discussion, but one thing said by indie distrib Richard Abramowitz leapt out at me: “It’s always a delicate situation to talk to filmmakers about finding their audience beforehand,” Abramowitz said on a panel about self-distribution. “Presumably, you’re making art. To think about the end user in that particular way is kind of a corruption of the process. It’s the producer’s responsibility to work off the director and understand who the audience may be.”

This could be considered a nicely condensed version of Brent Chesanek’s post(s) here several months back, and certainly captures the thoughts and attitudes of many I know and have heard. I get it.  It makes some sense to leave art to the artists, business to the business types, marketing and distribution to the relevant experts, right?
I don’t feel this attitude captures the realities of the time.  In my humble opinion, and particularly for the independent filmmaker, you are not being responsible or realistic if you keep thinking your job is simply to build it (and then to trust that they will come).  You need to build the paths and bridges to get the people there.  You need to have the pen to keep them there once they have entered the field.  You need to have the apparatus to help them tell their friends and family to join them.
You don’t need to do it alone though.  You just need to find the right people to collaborate with and a plan on how to get them to work with you (money helps).  Sure it would be great to find a producer who knows all of this already (and yes this is what they should be teaching in producing programs at the “film schools”), but I have always found there to be far fewer producers than there are writers and directors who are looking for the help.  Presumably all filmmakers work a very long time prepping their films.  Unless they are working in the studio world, all filmmakers invest a tremendous amount of time without any promise of financial return.  With all that energy and effort, doesn’t it make sense to figure out how the work may actually reach an audience?
I am not a marketing expert, but my thoughts on marketing have helped get many of my films made.  Before pitching the financiers, we try to come up with the different handles on how we will get an audience in to see our film.  This effort is for naught if they don’t respond to the script in the first place, but once they want to meet, I better have an answer to those standard questions of who is the audience and how do we reach them.  If I can come up with ten or fifteen decent approaches, the financiers assume their marketing team can up with a host of even better strategies.  
Every step in filmmaking and marketing is a collaborative effort; it is our responsibility to help our collaborators do their jobs better.
Categories
Truly Free Film

Is There A "Too Many" (When It Comes To Film Festivals)?

I moderated a panel at New York Women In Film two weeks back on “prepping for film festivals”.  One of the panelists, Ryan Werner of IFC Films, said something that resonated with me.  Ryan said that there are films that play so many festivals that they diminish his company’s appetite for acquisition.

That raises the question then: Can an undistributed film play too many film festivals?
Ryan’s answer is essentially yes — that is if the filmmakers are looking for acquisition.  The bigger question is whether anyone should be looking for acquisition these days, and if so, are film festivals still the best way to do it?
It sounds like it should be obvious, but I think it’s worth asking what is so appealing about acquisition by a distributor these days.  Until very recently, the money you received for licensing film was the dominant factor.  We all have to recoup our budgets (and our marketing costs), right? But in this day and age, less than a handful of a films are receiving advances of seven figures or more.  Unless you are making your films for very low budgets, how do you expect to get your investment back?  If you don’t get your investment back, why should anyone give you money for your next film?  If you don’t get your money back, why should others invest in similarly themed films?  
Maybe it’s no longer about theatrical, but we have yet to hear the success stories of films that receive significant amounts on the back end of VOD or increased video sales due to ad-supported free streaming either; that may come, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting.  Sure, if you make your film cheap enough it may seem tempting to surrender your rights across all media for twenty long years for $75K and significant cut of future revenue, if any.  But without a theatrical release stateside, will there be any foreign value to it?  I have been getting reports that foreign acquisition prices have dropped 40% in recent times — so where does that leave average foreign value for a US Indie?  36% of costs (that is assuming, foreign value was only at 60% of costs, which is pretty conservative on what hand, but probably generous for most indie filmmakers)?  Eek!
The problem is that most filmmakers still think of festivals as a step towards acquisition.  As Ryan’s comment points out, that is only true for your first two or three festivals.  After those, if you haven’t secured distribution, your chances of acquisition are diminishing with each festival play.
Festivals have an increasingly vital role to play in independent film.  They are one of the critical steps in delivering a Truly Free Film Culture.  As has been said here many times before (and I anticipate saying many more times in the future), festivals must be looked at as the launch in audience-building, marketing, and distribution.  
If you do not have distribution, you are not ready to play film festivals if:
  • you do not have your trailer made and up on the web;
  • you do not have clips selected and up on the web;
  • you have not been writing a blog regarding the film for a significant length of time;
  • you do not have a plan on how to keep that blog interesting for the next year;
  • you do not have a website for the film up on the web;
  • you do not have a simple way to collect email addresses for fans;
  • you have not set up a way for fans to subscribe to updates about the film;
  • you have not joined multiple social networks, both as an individual and as the film;
  • you have not created a press kit with press notes for the film;
  • you have not identified the blogs and critics you think will help promote your film;
  • you have not built a study guide for the film for film clubs;
  • you have not mapped out a festival strategy that builds to local releases;
  • you have not made several versions of a poster, and have enough to sell & give away;
  • you have not made additional promotional items for your film;
  • you have not manufactured the dvd, and made great packaging for it;
and there are probably more to add this list, but….
I look forward to a time when film festivals actually make such things a requirement.  I would love to see a film festival that was only about films that were prepared for self-distribution if necessary.  Film festivals are currently selling the dream and not confronting the reality.  Filmmakers keep buying that dream.  It is all a downward cycle as the business side of it is being neglected.  Distributors, both corporate and personal, need festivals to launch the film to their core audiences.  If filmmakers aren’t prepped to do that, they squander that opportunity and diminish their chances of reaching that audience.  Sure there are other methods out there, but why not use your best tools in the way they have been most proven to work?
Categories
Truly Free Film

Why I Started Blogging

Yesterday, Matt Dentler fired five questions at me on his blog.  A couple were on ADVENTURELAND (opening Friday!).  Another was one what to consider on your first feature.  And yet another was on what gave me the initiative to embrace the worlds of social networking and the blogosphere.  Check out the whole interview, but here’s what I had to say yesterday about the latter.

I have always been a bit of an internet junkie, but have an aversion to personal information and for that reasons had steered clear of social networking; I don’t have enough time for my friends as it is. Meanwhile, I had been growing restless watching the indie infrastructure wither away, but had frankly felt comfortable in my seat of privilege—i.e. we were getting our movies made.

When Mark Gill made his “Sky Falling” speech, it was clear to me that no one was speaking for the filmmakers, for the real indie community. I had read and met with a slew of good thinkers and innovators and felt the picture Gill painted was only for the business side of the establishment. Someone needed to get the word out about the new model that was emerging for filmmakers. When Dawn Hudson asked me to speak at Film Independent last fall, I felt I need to put up or shut up.

The state of things needs not be looked at only with despair. We are at a major time of transition and the possibilities are huge. Collaboration has always been what has improved our movies and enhanced our potential and the tools for collaboration have never been better. Social networking and an open source attitude offers filmmakers the freedom from an entertainment economy structured around scarcity and gatekeepers. We are all owners but we have been acting as slaves. We allow ourselves to corrupted by wealth and ego instead of strengthened by the wisdom of the community. The pursuit of instant gratification and success leads most to foolish choices that sacrifice opportunity for all along the way. Greater participation & focus on building a better system will greatly increase everyone’s power and improve their art and process. That is, in my humble opinion, and the social networking blogging open source stuff is the means.

Categories
Truly Free Film

Pricing DIY DVDs & Other Fetish Items

Adam Chapnick twittered about NeoFlix’s  DIYFlix blog posting about most popular pricing techniques for their clients.  It ran counter to my instincts as I would have thought more gravitated to the high and low end, but by far the most popular price point is $15-$20.  The DIYFlix blog itself has a pile of good advice & food for thought, so check it out.

Some of the best advice in this category comes from the example of HELVETICA.  As Scott Kirsner points out in his indispensable right-of-the-moment guide to building an audience (Fans, Friends, & Followers) “Selling just one thing is old hat”.  
Multiple versions and merchandising is the way to go.  So much more can be done with this.  By all means there should be multiple versions of all films, with different additional content, commentary, even cuts.  Why is that we only get the dvd with the film, and maybe a t-shirt or action figure?  If fans want to show their appreciation for a work there should be something more substantial.  One of my favorite pieces of film fetish paraphernalia is this: Brendan Dawes’ Cinema Redux print of Kubrick’s 2001 The film is reduced to one image from every second of the film in high resolution.  Each row has sixty frames in it.  
Why can’t we have more beautiful works derived from the films we love?
Categories
Truly Free Film

Prepping Your Film For Distribution

Jason Brubaker has “Prepping Your Film For Distribution” in current edition of The Independent.  It’s all good advice and the equal attention paid to self-distribution demonstrates the reality-check that has finally seeped through the layers of denial most indie filmmakers have held on to for too long.  I wonder why “getting pick up” is even looked at on even ground with the DIY approach.  Let’s face it, the odds are practically 1 in 400 that your film will be picked up by a major distributor.  The time to start to prep for self-distribution is now, not later.

I recognize how getting your film made is an all consuming task.  Yet, I am struck time and time again how filmmakers don’t recognize that  “prepping your film for distribution”, reaching out to your audience, and marketing your film BEFORE you shoot, all significantly increases your odds of getting picked up.  It’s like wearing the right clothes before you go to the bar.  It shows that you are serious.  It shows that you are going to do everything possible for people to see your film, that you will give your all to get your investors money back.
Back in the Good Machine days, and every day since then, we have approached delivery like production.  If you arrive at a film festival having done the due diligence that Jason discusses, your chances have acquisition are improved.  Every distributor has had the nightmare of the unclearable  or undeliverable film — and they will avoid the repeat like the plague.
We have had our films bought or financed because we showed how the film could be marketed, where the audience was and what they responded to previously.  We didn’t wait until the movie had screened to address this. We thought long and hard about this before we shot anything.  Waiting until your movie is done to approach these issues is going to hurt your prospects.
I am also of the firm belief that thinking about these aspects, whether they are marketing, legal, or delivery issues, makes your film better.  It focuses the thought.  It requires choices to be made.  There is no excuse not to do everything that is raised in The Independent BEFORE you even approach investors.  Take Jason’s advice to heart, but do it sooner, much much much sooner.
Categories
Truly Free Film

The Chaos Scenario

I found Bob Garfield’s AdAge article “The Chaos Scenario” filled with clear and precise observations — an effective summation of this media biz moment.  Although it is ultimately geared for the ad biz, it speaks to the prospects of mass media in general.  Itmight has well have been subtitled “The Sky Is Falling, Part Two”, yet, as may be my way, I find it ultimately hopeful.

As ad revenue has supported both our culture and the drivers to our culture, and since the days of ads having any sort of mass impact are over, the old way of the media biz is over.  We have witnessed the colossal drop of stock value across all forms of media companies (well, I guess except Netflix).  They will soon be all changing dramatically.  It is going to be a long haul before the new model is found and grows stable.  It is the end of the world as we know it (which happens to be one of my son’s favorite songs of the moment — another sign of the happy apocalypse fantasy…)
It’s well worth reading and pondering.  Among it’s many great quips:
The future is bright. But the present is apocalyptic. Any hope for a seamless transition — or any transition at all — from mass media and marketing to micro media and marketing are absurd.

Mass media thrived on the economics of scarcity. The internet represents an economy of unending abundance.

The audience doesn’t imagine that all cars want to be free, or that all toasters want to be free, or that all paper towels want to be free, but it somehow believes that all content wants to be free.

Wenda Harris Millard, co-CEO of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia: “Advertising simply cannot support all the media that’s out there.”

The average price of reaching 1,000 households with a 30-second spot in prime time, according to Media Dynamics, has jumped from $8.28 in 1986 to $22.65 in 2008 — but effectively more like $32, because between 150 and 200 of those 1000 households use DVRs to skip past the ads.

Glenn Britt, CEO of Time Warner Cable: “People are saying, ‘All I need is broadband. I don’t need video (aka “cable”).'”

Rothenberg,president of the Interactive Advertising Bureau, details, “Today the average 14-year-old can create a global television network with applications that are built into her laptop. So from a very strict Econ 101 basis, you have the ability to create virtually unlimited supply against what has been historically relatively stable demand.” — So the biggest online publishers, with all their vast overhead, have no more access to audience than Courtney the eighth-grader.