Categories
Truly Free Film

Maximizing Distribution Through Crowdfunding

By Peter Broderick

HopeForFilm has had the pleasure of hosting several of Peter Broderick’s prior newsletters, but today’s is extra-special, working as a continuation of Jennifer Fox’s illuminating posts on MY REINCARNATION crowdfunding campaign. My filmmakers mistakenly think of the crowdfunding platforms for financial purposes, but as Peter points out, it works to build community, involve audiences, and generate publicity and a true sense of ownership.

MY REINCARNATION shows how a well-executed crowdfunding campaign can be used to maximize distribution. In addition to enabling the funding of the theatrical rollout, the campaign increased awareness among core audiences, generated substantial press coverage, and facilitated partnerships.

I’ve known and admired the film’s director Jennifer Fox for many years, and consulted with her on the distribution of her remarkable series, FLYING: CONFESSIONS OF A FREE WOMAN. As tenacious as she is talented, Jennifer has learned, during more than 30 years of independent filmmaking, that it’s “change or die.” After exhausting every familiar fundraising route from grants to pre-sales for MY REINCARNATION, she tried crowdfunding as a last resort.

Filmed over twenty years, MY REINCARNATION is a documentary about her teacher, the Tibetan-trained Buddhist master Chögyal Namkhai Norbu and “his Italian born son who refuses to accept the destiny he inherited from birth.” Although the film was technically completed and being shown at international festivals, Jennifer still needed $100,000 to pay the bills she’d amassed finishing the film after a producer defaulted on that amount.

MY REINCARNATION became a crowdfunding milestone. Through a 90-day campaign, Jennifer and her team raised $150,456, three times the official goal of $50,000. 518 backers gave an average donation of $290, more than any film had ever averaged on her crowdfunding platform, Kickstarter. The average was so high for two reasons. The film attracted two associate producers at $10,000 each (one of which was a group of 50 people living in China). The campaign also offered valuable one-of-a-kind rewards, such as a hand-painted Tibetan chest and a unique statue of the deity Vajrapan, which were available to contributors who gave between $2,500 and $7,500. Contributions were received from 32 countries and more than two-thirds of the money came from abroad.

There is much to be learned from this crowdfunding success. Jennifer contributed seven articles to Ted Hope’s Indiewire blog detailing her 42 crowdfunding tips. They should be required reading for anyone planning a serious crowdfunding campaign. Here are two of the essential lessons:

==> Build a strong team that can put in the necessary time and effort. While filmmakers should be centrally involved in a crowdfunding campaign, they need a substantial amount of help to maximize the effort. Jennifer spent 50% of her time on the 90-day campaign. She had three teammates – a staff member who spent 50% of her time on the effort and two part-time women (compensated by a percentage of the money raised). They handled key tasks including adding fresh content to the website, managing outreach to organizations, and expanding the mailing list.

==> Make a detailed budget for the campaign. This should include the site fee (Kickstarter charges 5% if you meet your goal, IndieGoGo charges 4% if you meet your goal and 9% if you don’t); the payment processing fee (3-5%); the cost of creating, acquiring, and shipping rewards; and any staffing fees. There are also likely to be some defaults in contributors’ payments (Jennifer’s were 2%). If you use a fiscal sponsor, which allows donations to be tax-deductible, there will be an additional fee of 5-7% (IndieGoGo waives its fee if you use one of its partner fiscal sponsors). Jennifer estimates that the total costs of her campaign will be between 20 and 25% of the money raised. It would have been higher if she had been compensated for the enormous amount of time she devoted to the campaign.

MY REINCARNATION is now playing in theaters around the U.S. It opened theatrically in New York City in October, five months after the crowdfunding campaign concluded in late May. It has already been shown or booked in 40 theaters, and was in its seventh week in New York when this went to press. It will surely play 60-70 cities through next April and Jennifer is hoping to reach 100. Erin Owens of Long Shot Factory is booking the film theatrically.

The crowdfunding campaign of MY REINCARNATION facilitated its distribution in ten key ways. The campaign enabled Jennifer’s team to:

==> 1- BUILD AWARENESS AMONG CORE AUDIENCES. Jennifer believes the key to Kickstarter success is a strong, reachable core audience. MY REINCARNATION has two sets of core audiences. One is centered on Namkhai Norbu’s 8,000+ students around the world (they are connected via a listserv and many also meet in local groups). This audience also includes other Buddhists, as well as spiritual, new age, and yoga groups. The second core audience is centered on Jennifer’s fans and supporters, who she has nurtured over many years and films. This audience also includes documentary lovers and independent filmmakers.

==> 2 – GROW A NETWORK OF SUPPORT. This network consisted of all of the contributors to the Kickstarter campaign plus people who were unable to help financially but contributed their time and effort. These supporters helped by blogging and eblasting. The most active ones were recognized online on the Donors Wall and onscreen in the film’s end credits.

==> 3 – ACCELERATE EFFORTS TO BUILD PARTNERSHIPS. Jennifer explained that the crowdfunding campaign “got us into outreach mode early.” Her team made a major effort to develop partnerships with organizations, including Tibet House and the Tibet Fund.

==> 4 – GENERATE SIGNIFICANT PRESS COVERAGE. During the campaign Jennifer shared her crowdfunding tips in her seven-part series. When the campaign ended with such spectacular results, she and her teammates widely distributed a press release and got significant coverage. Jennifer also wrote an article for The Huffington Post.

==> 5 – EXPAND AND REFINE THEIR MAILING LIST. Over the years Jennifer had developed a personal mailing list of 6000 names. Her team worked hard to expand this list of individuals and organizations, starting with California and New York and then moving on to other states. Jennifer’s list has now grown to almost 10,000 names.

==> 6 – IMPROVE THE FILM’S ONLINE PRESENCE. The team started with a solid website which they expanded with fresh content and videos, including outtakes of the film. They utilized user-contributed content through the website’s “share your story” section. They also made excellent use of the film’s Facebook page, which attracted many people from around the world.

==> 7 – RELEASE THE FILM THEATRICALLY. $15,000 from the crowdfunding revenues seeded the theatrical rollout. Jennifer harnessed the excitement created by the Kickstarter results to find the additional money needed for theatrical from a combination of donors and loans.

==> 8 – BOOST INTEREST AMONG DISTRIBUTORS. Erin from Long Shot Factory explained that many of the exhibitors she approached were already aware of the film. She cited the Kickstarter results to show that there was already an audience for the film. The crowdfunding success also helped get the attention of festival programmers.

==> 9 – STIMULATE SEMI-THEATRICAL AND EDUCATIONAL DISTRIBUTION. Following theatrical, MY REINCARNATION will have a strong semi-theatrical release during which nonprofits and universities will arrange special event screenings. Jennifer is also perfectly positioned to do her own educational sales based on the relationships her team has built with groups and organizations.

==> 10 – FACILITATE TELEVISION, DVD, AND DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION. The increased awareness of the film will foster DVD and digital sales, as well as boost the viewership for its POV televisions premiere. The DVD, which is not yet available, is already viewed as a collectible.

As MY REINCARNATION makes clear, a successful crowdfunding effort can jumpstart a film’s distribution. It accelerates everything that will eventually be done to foster distribution, including making a trailer, reaching out to possible partners, building a network of support, generating press awareness, and refining the mailing lists and web presence. Instead of waiting until the film is nearly done and trying to do all of this in the weeks or months before its release, crowdfunding can give filmmakers a year or two head start.

A crowdfunding campaign can also provide invaluable information and feedback, enabling filmmakers to better define their core audiences, determine the best avenues to reach them, and refine the positioning of their films.

When MY REINCARNATION’S Kickstarter campaign reached a tipping point, things began to snowball. They raised $60,000 during the final five days of the campaign. Jennifer’s team has been able to maintain the momentum from the campaign into the theatrical release and should be able to continue it through the next stages of distribution.

Filmmakers should design their crowdfunding campaigns to power their distribution. While their short-term goal is to raise money, their ultimate goal should be to create a long and vibrant life for their film.

© 2011 Peter Broderick

Peter Broderick is a Distribution Strategist who helps design and implement customized plans to maximize revenues for independent films. He is also a leading advocate of crowdfunding and crowdsourcing, championing them in keynotes and presentations around the world. You can read his articles at www.peterbroderick.com

Categories
Truly Free Film

One Movie, 12 Directors

By Shruti Ganguly

Collaborative features are in the air. Friday we glimpsed the end of auteur culture with Audrey Ewell's post on the documentary The 99 Percent Film. What happens though when the collaborative film is an omnibus narrative? Are twelve more auteurs born into the world?

How are we going to navigate this new future of team-based filmmaking? What are the Best Practices we have to put in place. Producer Shruti Ganguly shares some lessons she's learned from working on James Franco's latest concoction.

Collaboration is synonymous with filmmaking and one can often find quotations from filmmakers and writers regarding this aspect – David Mamet describes filmmaking “as a collaborative process. Bend over” while Coppola “[likes] to say that collaboration is the sex of art because you take from everyone you’re working with.” Often collaboration occurs between directors, producers and their creative heads, but what happens when one feature film is crafted together by 12 different directors, where characters overlap, stories integrate, and themes repeat? This opportunity arose in a Tisch 3rd-year Directing class that James Franco was teaching this fall. Each of the 12 students selected a poem to adapt from Tar, a collection of poetry by Pulitzer prize-winning poet, C.K. Williams, and then the short film scripts were brought together to create, Tar, the feature film.

As one of the producers on the project, I often describe Tar as the love child of Paris, Je T'aime (working with multiple directors on a common theme), I’m Not There (different impressions of the protagonist as seen through various stages in his life) with Tree of Life (our primary aesthetic reference), with the production schedule of TV – where directors worked with the same cast and crew, crafting ‘episodes’ or scenes.

Based on our experience, and given that we will be doing this class again in the spring, with new directors and new material (another Tisch 3rd-year Directing class), these are some of my takeaways when it comes to collaborating in this way:

Set the tone early on: Directors will have their own interpretations of similar material, and this of course, is what makes their own storytelling styles unique, but it is important that for projects that belong to a ‘whole’ that everyone agrees on a certain tone. This enables everyone to set off in the right direction from the first step. In the case of Tar, James, provided the students with visual and story references. The suggested viewing included Tree of Life, Hunger, Who's That Knocking at My Door, Au Hasard Balthazar and Stranger Than Paradise.

Be familiar with each other’s material: In class and online, we provided feedback to each other regarding the treatments and the scripts. Not only was this input helpful to each director in his or her development process, it also allowed everyone to know the direction their peers were moving towards, and in turn, how their piece fit into the overall project. It is important to also have these discussions in person – that’s when we could provide feedback in the best way, as opposed to our initial online conversations.

Establish themes: In the development process, resounding themes (visual, story and character) came up – from the protagonist’s issues with women and mortality, American capitalism and destruction, to images of airplanes, windows, lips and masks. By discussing these together, directors were then conscious of how to incorporate these elements into their own stories.

Form an overall creative team: Instead of each piece having its own DP, producer, art department and so on, which would probably dissect the film further as well as become a bigger financial strain, we established a creative team that could aesthetically connect the films together. We had two DPs (also Tisch students) who each filmed 5-6 projects, one main production and costume design team, who established the worlds of the films (and in turn hired their crews for the projects) and two line producers who were assigned to each DP and their slate of films. On Tar, we had Team Pedro and Team Bruce named after the DPs and our classmates, Pedro Gomez Millan and Bruce Thierry Cheung, respectively. Each team ended up having its own way of functioning and scheduling, and given the very demanding actor and academic schedules, this allowed us to have a parallel and simultaneous shooting schedule. Essentially we shot most of Tar within two weeks, where each film has 2 full days of shooting.

Communicate: This is the most basic and important aspect of collaboration but it is still the hardest to follow. On Tar, we created a Google group, so questions and ideas were shared in a forum, encouraging people to be on the same page, and also be aware of general concerns. And even then, there tended to be some confusion at times. But at least together, answers were found.

Give each piece its independence: While being aware of the bigger picture, it is also important, especially for a project like this one, to allow each film to have its own breathing room – where something unique and special from the director’s own style is upheld and celebrated. Else why have multiple directors craft a feature film? Now in the post-production process, each director is responsible for putting together his or her own film initially, and then we will have a supervising editor who will look at all the pieces together and connect them.

Set a timeline: It was important for certain deadlines to be met – whether it was turning in a new draft or providing feedback to finishing and viewing test shoots. (James asked each director to film and edit a complete test of their scripts, which we then viewed and critiqued. And this proved very helpful when it came to reworking scripts and stories). For the most part, the directors turned in their material and ideas in a timely way, which enabled us to move through the semester and consequently shoot the film when we had planned. Missing or not following deadlines could have proven detrimental to Tar, given that each piece was so closely related to one another.

Be flexible, embrace change: Coming off of our 2nd-year films, where we managed every single aspect of our short films, we found ourselves in situations we couldn’t necessarily control – Shooting in a locations that worked within the budget better, to switching Day for Night, given an actor’s availability, to cutting out entire scenes last minute if, in collaborating with the actors, we felt that a beat could be achieved within another scene. While this was also a new style of working for many, and at times frustrating, it also was liberating – to make the best of a situation, and then trust the performers to do the rest.

This class and film was an experiment. It was challenging as we were creating something in a way that had never been done before, especially within an academic system. But after wrapping principal photography, it has been infinitely rewarding and as we begin our post-production process, I am certain we will create a beautiful movie together – one that stars James Franco, Mila Kunis, Jessica Chastain, Michelle Williams, Henry Hopper, Zach Braff, and Bruce Campbell, filmed in and around Detroit, Michigan.

Shruti Ganguly is currently enrolled in NYU’s dual-degree program in film production, where she will receive an M.F.A. from the Tisch School of the Arts and an M.B.A. from the Stern School of Business, with a focus on Social Innovation and Entertainment/Media/Technology. Before starting at NYU, Shruti was a producer at NYLON Magazine, heading their TV department. Shruti continues to direct and produce music and fashion videos, while running an cinema advocacy group, EchoChamber, she co-founded with her producing partner Smriti Mundhra.

Categories
Truly Free Film

Auteurs vs Collaborators

By Audrey Ewell

When I talk to filmmakers and industry people alike this year, there has been a new emphasis on collaboration. People are trying to find new ways to work together. With this collaboration comes a new way of looking at ownership and authorship. It is no longer always “my film” but is evolving into “our project”. I even hear it in how filmmakers speak of those who watch their films — in some cases “audiences” are expanding into “community”. Yet for all that speak, I don’t encounter all that action.

I am in London now, and I have been asked what the effect of the Occupy Movement has been in America. I tell them of the change in tax policy of NY Governor Cuomo. I tell them of the greater concern about the wealth divide that I heard in New Hampshire last weekend at the town hall events I went to. And I tell them of the 99 Percent Film.

We are entering the era of the collaborative film and we have Audrey Ewell to tell us all about it today.

My favorite films are those made by directors whose work is iconic and unique. Stamped with authorship. Bold. Brash. Or quiet: sublime. Auteurs.

As a director, I greatly value the work of everyone on a film, but I also know what I want, and that’s to create a singular world. I love the idiosyncratic touches of authorship that I find in the work of auteurs. An example; something about the rhythms of mid-career Michelangelo Antonioni films kicks my brain into high gear; I actually think they create a measurable change in my brain chemistry. I’d love to test that theory, actually.

Anyway, I also believe that others can enhance the director’s vision in ways the director might not come up with themselves. If the vision has been clearly articulated, the parameters defined, and skilled collaborators get the aesthetic and vibe, the collaboration should enhance the vision, while still keeping that idiosyncratic stamp of authorship. I believe in both the auteur and the power of collaboration, but above all, I value singularity of vision.

So why am I now making a truly collaborative film with a bunch of people I’ve never met, many of whom have no experience whatsoever, side by side with other award-winning filmmakers? What happened?

Well, Occupy Wall Street happened. One day a couple months back I was at home, watching on the livestream as hundreds of people were arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge. So that night I went down with my partner Aaron Aites and we filmed, and the next day, I felt a need to make this film… with others. I not only knew that I didn’t have the time or resources to suddenly jump into an ambitious doc by myself, but I also felt that the treatment I’d be interested in would be the one with many voices. It’s just that kind of story. There was also something about the ethos and the kinetic, experimental nature of the movement itself that got me excited and made me want to try a parallel experiment with other filmmakers.

So I put out the word among filmmaker friends, got a website up (99percentfilm.com), did some outreach with press, and within a week we had about 30 people. In two weeks 50, and we’d been profiled in the NY Times, Filmmaker mag, etc. This helped us find more filmmakers all over the country, and ten weeks later, we’re around 75 strong.

And I’m not sure if this has been done before. I know there have been collaborative films, but have there been collaborative films about an ongoing current event, where the footage will be woven to make a cohesive film, not strung as individual pieces? I didn’t exactly research this before I jumped into it; it was just an undeniable impulse. But I think we’re doing something new here. And if not – OMG – someone please tell me how you did it.

Because at first, I thought my head would explode every five minutes. But somehow, we’re figuring out how to make a film about this movement from many perspectives, with people covering events as they happen all over the country (sometimes as coordinated national shoots), others doing outreach or editing, others taking on directorial roles and covering threads. It’s a crazy process, the logistics are challenging, but it’s exciting too. Amazing footage is rolling in, and I can’t wait to see the film we make! In the process of editing a quickie trailer (literally: it was edited with great patience and skill – from quicktimes – by Jill Woodward), I’ve become really excited about how good it can actually be. It’s a mystery that reveals itself piece by piece, day by day. But one thing has become clear: it’s working.

Which is great. Because this film was really scary for the first couple months, when we were just making it up as we went along, and hadn’t seen much footage. It’s a practice in letting go of ego, and it feels good (granted, that’s also because of the exciting footage coming in now, and because I can see the film taking shape. I might be less zen about it if that wasn’t the case.) I even respect the footage that comes in with a perspective other than my own, and I’m embracing and making room for that.

So, is this a contradiction of the things I said earlier about auteur films? I don’t know. Life’s a journey, right? I don’t think this process works for most films, but for THIS film it’s perfect. Even though I’m cursing my way through my days, I’m grateful for this experience (and I enjoy laying down a good swear or two any day). So right now, we’re putting out a general call for FCP editors (and there’s still some room for others). It’s not a free-for all; we have systems and leaders. We’re not Occupy; we’re filmmakers making a film about it in a process that in many ways, mirrors the movement. So if you’d like to, come join this infuriating, rewarding and exciting film. Auteurs welcome.

To give an idea, this Kickstarter trailer has about 20 filmmakers represented. I’ll write a follow-up super soon to talk about a new strategy we’re trying as part of our fundraising campaign. Stay tuned for that, in the meantime:

Audrey Ewell is a filmmaker living in Brooklyn, NY with her film partner Aaron Aites. They recently made the award-winning film Until The Light Takes Us, and they’re now working on a thriller called Dark Places. The 99% Kickstarter page is here.

Categories
Truly Free Film

Sundance and Topspin Bring D2F to Indie Film

By Bob Moczydlowsky

The following post was originally published on TopSpinMedia.com.

 

Sure has been a lot of talk about movies around here lately, huh? ;)

This morning, the Sundance Institute announced an expansion of their incredibly forward-thinking Sundance Artist Services program, and we at Topspin are honored to be included alongside distribution outlets iTunes, Amazon, YouTube, Hulu, New Video, Netflix and Sundance Now as the provider of Direct-To-Fan Marketing and Distribution tools. We’re humbled to have our first major expansion outside of music to be with such a storied and benevolent institution, and we’re quite literally stoked to start helping Sundance filmmakers connect with fans and create new channels for their amazing work.

This quote from Robert Redford really says it all:

“When I founded the Institute in 1981, it was at a time when a few studios ran the industry and an artist’s biggest concern was whether their film would get made,” Redford said. “Technology has lessened that burden, but the big challenge today is how audiences can see these films. The Artist Services program is a direct response to that need. We’re not in the distribution business; we’re in the business of helping independent voices be heard.”

If you’d like to read the official press release, you can DOWNLOAD HERE.

In addition to the expansion of the Artist Services program today, Sundance also launched an online alumni community containing blog posts and essays from some of the brightest and bravest minds in indie film, like Tim League and Ted Hope. The goal is to provide a place where Sundance artists can share data and advice, and interact with distributors, technology partners and each other. Somehow, I managed to sneak my two cents in there, too. Below is a reprint of my “Direct-To-Fan Keynote” that appears inside the Sundance Artist Services site.

My hope is that all filmmakers find it useful. Please share it liberally.

You can it download it as a VIDEO or as a PDF.

Hello. My name is Bob.

I’m here to talk about Direct-to-Fan Marketing (D2F) and Distribution. I work at a software company called Topspin. We’re honored to be a part of Sundance Artist Services.

Topspin makes software used by 
Kevin Smith, David Lynch, Ed Burns, Trent Reznor, Arcade Fire and thousands of other artists to sell downloads, merchandise, tickets and memberships directly to fans. Our company mission is to create an artistic middle class, and we’re doing it by building a self-serve application you can use to market and distribute your work yourself.

You may think I mean self-release. Or DIY Distro. Or “creative” distribution. But those are not the same as Direct-to-Fan. What I’m talking about is a distribution and marketing strategy that should be a part of every filmmaker’s career. I’m talking about making sure you are directly connected to your core audience. I’m talking about selling premium products to super fans. And I’m hoping to persuade you to treat your audience like your most important asset. It is time to invest in your fans.

Here’s the problem I see: Filmmakers have been taught to be wholesalers, not retailers. Filmmakers make films — so the teaching goes — and then it is the job of distributors to market and distribute films.

There is actually a stigma attached to doing it oneself, as if every direct release was a sign not of true independence and autonomy but instead an indicator of the film’s quality or filmmaker’s professionalism. “Did you hear about XX film? They couldn’t get distribution. They have to self-release.” Sounds familiar, right? The goal is to make films and sell them to distributors. That’s the model.

That shit is broken. Permanently. I mean it. Yes, the “traditional model” still exists as a best-case outcome for a few films. But most likely not for your film. Sorry. Just being honest. It’s time to stop calling the best-case, long-shot, home-run option “the model”. Let’s get realistic about what’s happening:

Everyday, the odds of the traditional indie model working for your film get longer and longer. Even at Sundance, upwards of 80 percent of the films fail to find traditional distribution deals. A ton of interesting and excellent films don’t reach audiences and fail to grow the careers of the artists who made them. That’s sad. And yet, more and more excellent films get made everyday. Because technology makes production easy.

And the Web makes distribution easy, too. My phone will shoot video and upload to YouTube. Production and distribution is in your pocket! But here’s where the trouble starts: Free content, empowered fans and unlimited choice make marketing very, very hard. Fans can watch and share all day, effortlessly. But competing for their attention is really tough. Fans who want to watch a movie used to choose from the 10 films at the theatre on Friday night. Now they choose from the entire historical catalog of filmmaking on their laptops, phones, set-top boxes or VOD services. Or they skip the film altogether and play Words With Friends online. Think about your own habits. Getting fans to pay attention is harder than it has ever been.

“So, how will anyone see my work?” you ask. It’s simple, actually. You need to grow a database of fans, and market to them. Here’s how you do it:

First, make amazing films. I don’t mean pretty-good films, or better-than-average films… I mean INCREDIBLE films. Invest in quality, and invest in new. New sells. But also please make sure to budget appropriately, based on the size of your audience. Don’t have an audience? Then keep the budget LOW.

Second, give away free downloads in exchange for connection via email, Facebook and Twitter. This might mean a soundtrack, or the opening scene of the film, or some killer making-of footage. The point is to get fans excited, connected and sharing. You can’t make dollars until you have fans, and giving away incredible content is the best way to attract new fans.

Third, offer premium products fans actually want to buy, and sell these premium products at a mix of price points FIRST. Many of the folks who will end up with the $2.99 rental on iTunes would be even happier with a great-looking shirt, HD download, photo book and a Skype-call-with-the-lead-actress for $75. Don’t miss the opportunity to convert your core demand into a high-revenue product. Get creative with your products and your prices. You’ll earn more money and create happy fans who spread the word online.

Now, once you’ve grown your database and you can monetize your core fans, it’s time to look around for distribution partners. If you can prove there is demand for your art, you will have traditional distribution opportunities. But long-term success requires reversing the common logic:

Direct-to-Fan is NOT the last resort. Direct-to-Fan is the foundation of your career. Think about this way: Imagine your career is a ladder.

Each rung represents more audience paying attention to your work. Which rung are you on? For the sake of example, let’s say the ladder has 100 rungs. On rung 100 is Steven Spielberg, smiling down from the top. At rung zero is every first-time filmmaker just trying to get a project made. At rung 25 is someone like Miranda July (one of my personal favorites) and at rung 75, someone like Kevin Smith, who has a rabid fan base and relative autonomy.

Everyone starts at the bottom. From rung zero to 25, Direct-to-Fan will likely be 100 percent of your income. You won’t have traditional distribution offers, so you’ll do it all yourself. If you do it well, your audience will grow and you’ll move up the ladder. Once you start climbing, you become much more attractive to potential partners.

In the middle, you’ll mix it up. From rung 25 to 75, the mix of Direct-to-Fan income and other distribution deals will vary depending on the project.

You’ll have to license rights to move much past 25, but you’ll do it in a way that allows you to retain your control of your core audience and monetize them via premium products you control.

At the top, you’re really in control. If you make it to rung 75 or higher, Direct-to-Fan will start trending back toward a larger percentage of your revenues.

You’ll have a dedicated, connected following, and you’ll want as much creative control over your fan experience as possible. Read Kevin Smith’s Red Statements for a perfect example of this return to Direct-to-Fan in action. Sure, he’s done deals, too… but on his terms and with his audience as the top priority. In music, we’re seeing well-run D2F campaigns with top-tier artists earn 15 to 35 percent of gross revenues — and the lion’s share of the profits. There is no reason those numbers can’t be replicated in film. And during this year.

And there are many more practical examples out there, too. The film Broke* is giving away its soundtrack to grow its database. NYC filmmaker and musician Cory McAbee opted to take his serialized film Stingray Sam out exclusively via Direct-to-Fan, and he gets you hooked on the first two episodes before asking for your money.

Ed Burns has killer posters and t-shirts bundled with downloads of his new film Newlyweds, and William Morris and Barry Ptolemy have created a killer Direct-to-Fan experience for the Ray Kurzweil doc Transcendent Man.

 

With a database of fans, you can raise money on Kickstarter, sell premium products and ticket your own event screenings with a director Q&A. Like Kevin Smith is doing RIGHT NOW, TODAY. But most importantly… you’ll be able to RETURN to the same group of core fans for all of your future products. Build an audience. Build a brand. Always compare the money you’re offered to the value of your fan database down the line.

You may find that you’re better off keeping your film under your control than doing that no-advance, all-rights distro deal. Especially if we’re talking about short films!

Now, I know I’m getting long-winded, so I’ll wrap it up.

Here’s the summary: It’s time to make Direct-to-Fan Marketing the foundation of your career. It’s time to assume your films will be marketed by you, not acquired in a Sundance bidding war. It’s time to start building a database of core fans that you own and nurture throughout your career.

Stop calling it Self-Release. Stop calling it DIY Distribution. It’s called Direct-to-Fan Marketing, and it works for filmmakers at every rung on the ladder.

Direct-to-Fan Marketing is:

– Growing your email, Facebook and Twitter database by giving away free downloads and encouraging sharing

– Maintaining a great website that sells merch, downloads, memberships and tickets directly

– Owning your fan marketing data, and using it to raise money and promote your work throughout your career

Good Direct-to-Fan Marketing will make you more attractive to distributors. But you may find yourself telling them “No, thanks.” Your audience is your biggest asset. If you sell it, make sure you get full price.

Questions? I’m accessible. Let’s chat.

Thumbs up for rock ‘n’ roll,

-bob

@bobmoz

VP, Product & Marketing

Bob Moczydlowsky has been kind enough to offer HOPE FOR FILM readers his service for free:

The code HOPEFORFILM entitles you to three free months of Topspin Plus, the most powerful direct-to-fan platform on the planet.

Topspin empowers you to:

– Promote your film across websites, social networks and mobile devices

– Connect with fans and offer free downloads for emails, Likes & Tweets

– Customize your store & sell digital media, physical items, tickets and more

To redeem your free account, go to topspinmedia.com and submit your email. Follow the instructions in the email to create your account, and then click “Upgrade” in your account header. Scroll down and enter this code: HOPEFORFILM

Categories
Truly Free Film

An Incredible Opportunity… Or Not? Producing Indie In The Era Of Economic Collapse

By Josh White

Timing is close to everything. Good movies go unseen. Talent is squandered. Revolutions fail to materialize. All of this because of bad timing (and perhaps bad strategies). At the same time, great things occur, movements are born, we delight in the artistry of new talents — all because people were in the right place at the right time. Is this a cause for celebration or something to lament?

I will not discount the good fortune I had to start making movies when I did. It is also so difficult to judge where we are now as a culture, an industry, or a movement — or what the wisest strategy is for these times. I know we are not going to find the answer on our own. I trust we can build it better together. I was very moved by producer Joseph White’s tale of trial and tribulation and I we are lucky he’s chosen to share it with us.

My filmmaking partner and I always laugh about how our generation showed up at the end of just about every affair. American empire…falling, free love…sorry, peace movement…f*%k off… good drugs… bad thing, fast fortunes on Wall Street…occupied, great movement in music…almost missed it…In the beginning of 2008 we started to make a movie about the time of what is arguably the last great trend in rock n roll (and music — in my opinion). Unfortunately, we made that film at the worst time to make an independent film and take it to market, not to mention what is going on with the world and the economy.

Today I read a statement that said:

MUSIC IS THE LANGUAGE OF EMOTION. THE POWER OF MUSIC SHAPES OUR LIVES AND CONTINUALLY TOUCHES OUR SOUL. MUSIC ICONS EXPRESS FREEDOM, DEFINE GENERATIONS, QUESTION AUTHORITY, AND INFLUENCE FASHION AND ART (it was written on the inside of a T-Shirt).

I feel the same way only better about the effects of movies. I remember first coming to NYC as a student and going to the Angelika to see independent films. I remember how much I connected with the characters, the stories, and the stages of my life. In some cases, those films helped me with understanding life. In some cases they were better than therapy would have been. Maybe part of it was my own coming of age, it doesn’t matter, the effect was real.
I realized the power of the medium. It made me want to make films. I don’t believe in god. I do believe in religion. I believe in anything that is for the betterment of mankind. I think we all need help at times dealing with humanity. I go to concerts and I always think that I should feel like this when I leave church.

Sir George Martin said that music is the language of emotion. Pictures say a 1000 words. Add motion to photography and it says a lot more. Put these things together and then add a story and actors and the finished product becomes like many other works of art. It becomes immortal.

I understand that for most people who work on films that it is just a job, but it’s not. I think however, that here is a moral and societal obligation. Like it or not art is reflecting life. Life is reflecting art. We are shaping and interpreting the world. Rock n Roll evolved from music that came out of pain and a need for expression and the desire for something to feel good about. Music, ever the platform for articulating the zeitgeist evolved to implore us all to be at peace with one another. Now popular music all too often reflects some of our shallower values; wealth, objectivity, misogyny, even murder. WTF!?

How great would it be if we could treat artisans like the greatest days of the Roman Empire?! Imagine a society where our government would cloth us, feed us and provide shelter, if we would just paint the buildings, make everything beautiful and interesting and keep the streets clean. I know I’d be a lot happier if I knew that my kids would be sheltered, fed and educated if I just kept making films.

Somewhere along the way art became synonymous with business. Ask any film maker what they do and they are more likely to tell you that they are in the film business, before they will tell you that they are an artist.

In the fall of 2008, during our post-production, we were constantly hearing “You guys are in a great position. There is no product in the pipeline.” We heard that a lot. We had one of the top companies out there call us and say that they were tracking the film and wanted to see it. Things were falling into place. We thought “This is going to be great!”

Then reality set in. We spoke to people who knew people and found out that most reps were having trouble selling what they already had. The financial downturn had very quickly and unilaterally savaged the appetite for risk taking in every industry, and not surprisingly, the indie film industry too, had fallen off a cliff. When we finally had a conversation with a film rep, our worst fears were confirmed, there were a ton of films out there and no one is buying!

Why wouldn’t they be buying? I was reading all over that we just had a record year at the box office. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! Things are better than ever!

How could the business of show, the people who control the media, go on public record, and tell us that things are alright when they really aren’t!? How can they publish stories that claim that things are better than ever?! Oh wait…

It seems that when you are willing to stick your neck out for an art form that you believe in you are going to get a lot of free advice. “Oh you made a movie!? You should just play the lottery!” or my favorite which was said to me by Bob Dylan’s representative Jeff Rosen. He said: “You know you should work at Subway. If you add up the hours you are putting in you would be making more money.” Fuck me, he might be right.

So here we are again, just getting to another great party and someone has turned off the music. It’s the closest thing that I can imagine to getting to Rome to open your dream shop, only to find it sacked and burning. Everyone started to say the same thing, that even the experts don’t know anything anymore. Then what became painfully clear was that they haven’t for a while.

Just like the financial system and the housing market the film industry fell apart. What I don’t get is rather than heeding the warnings everyone played business as usual. I cannot help but wonder if only our industry leaders had spoken up, would things have been different? Maybe some of them tried. If MOMA and Indiewire had been able to call together the NY Independent Producers, distributors and the trades a year or two earlier could we have had a more graceful evolution? Did those meetings do anything? Is there a collective effort or did we all just run back to tending our own fires?

When you show up to a playing field that’s just been leveled, you have to look at it for what it is. Every time I hear someone speak of how bad things are right now, I like to think that the competition is weeding out. At first I was horribly discouraged about the future of the film industry and my career. Now I am trying to see the opportunity. It would seem that the evolution of an industry has changed gears to become the revolution of an industry.

Like every art form we learn the techniques of our masters and then break the mold. In this case the mold has been broken for us. The best thing to do is to embrace it. There is no going back. Truth be told, we have more going for us as artists than any artists have ever had before in history. We have technology. We can shoot, edit, after effect, and even market and exhibit our films at pennies on the dollar.

I met a young LA producer who is cranking out films with great casts for under $5MM. It’s nice when you meet someone who tells you that contrary to popular belief that it is easy to raise finance right now. He told me how he is working the foreign sales markets, which is great to hear because the last few people that I spoke to about it told me that foreign is dead and that unless you can prove a domestic Box Office of $5MM then, no one will be interested.

The whole thing makes me think of searching web pages until you find one that has a better weather forecast for your area(try it, it works). The fire has come down from Olympus again, and though Olympus (Hollywood) is doing a good job of remaining a mountain there seems to be better fires down here. I think that as independent filmmakers we are in a great position. I think its time for us to create a better system than the one that just fell.

No one likes to be forced to change. None of us have a choice. It’s happening…there is nothing you can do. The music industry was told to embrace Napster and they continued to try and stop it. This reluctance ravaged the industry and cost countless lost revenues.

A lot of people think that the day and date model is the way to go. A lot of theater owners think it’s a stupid idea because it means the end for the brick and mortar establishments. Fear is a very powerful emotion. All too often it clouds judgement and stands in the way of progress, even when that progress is clearly unstoppable. It’s revolution evolution. The explosion in technology has given the consumer greater choice and flexibility.

People are watching movies on smart phones and tablets now. Right now you can get my movie almost anywhere in North America via the internet. As a filmmaker, of course I’d prefer to have my movies seen on the big screen, in a dark auditorium, with awesome sound, filled with people having the “shared experience.” People will always want this experience. It will never go away. The theater chains will adapt. What that adaptation is, I don’t know. I can tell you it’s not 3-D. I’m curious to see where this all ends up…


Joseph White is a film maker with over 12 years of experience making films and commercials. He is the Co-founder of Red Hawk Films. Red Hawks first feature www.ThePerfectAgeofRocknRoll.com is available On Demand, DVD and On-Line. He is currently working on his follow-up film, an untitled documentary about the Elders of The Delta Blues and the influence their music had upon rock n roll and the world.

Categories
Truly Free Film

New World Distribution in the Old World

By Orly Ravid

Quick tell your investors! Indie Film is safe again. The big waterfall of profits is starting to mount. Haven't you heard the news? VOD is making it all good again. Simple as making a good film that people know of and want to pay for. Seriously though, the news has been coming in and now we are getting numbers about how films perform here. And they look pretty sweet…

The Film Collaborative's Orly Ravid fortunately wants us to know even more and has done some research on the prospects of EU Digi Distro. And now I am smiling. You will be too.

New World Distribution in the Old World

As DVD sales continue to crumble (allowing us to use less petroleum), VOD is growing (now in 65.7 million US homes — about 55.7% of TV homes, according to MagnaGlobal). Digital distribution revenues are starting to percolate and be more reliable. Worldwide revenue from video-on-demand movies and TV programs will reach $5.7 billion in 2016, up 58% from revenue of $3.6 billion in 2010, according to a new research report. The tally does not include pay-per-view sports events, adult entertainment or subscription-based VOD services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Google, among others, according to London-based Direct TV Research Ltd. It should be noted this is not all related to new film but rather making catalog or library content available digitally. According to the study, “Internet-based TV (IPTV) is projected to overtake digital terrestrial TV (DTT) in revenue nextyear to become the third largest platform globally. Indeed, VOD revenue from DTT is expected to be largely confined to Western Europe” (source.)

In South Korea of course we know almost all have Broadband and watch films digitally but the US digital distribution market has been slower to mature, though it is finally, and so how is new world distribution faring in the old world? I wanted to explore the digital distribution trends in Europe. “The EU records the second highest TV viewing figures globally, produces more films than any other region in the world, and is home to more than five hundred online video-on-demand services” (European Commission “Green Paper” on the online distribution of audiovisual works in the European Union, 7/13/11). It should be noted that this 500 number is more theoretical and that probably only 100 are worth talking about and half of those being the main revenue generators. The EU funds new platforms but not all of them emerge successfully, much like our US government’s funding of alternative energy. “A range of platforms offering transactional on-demand services span multiple territories e.g. E.g. Acetrax, Chello, Headweb, iTunes, Playstation Network Live, Voddler, Xbox Live. These tend to continue the practice of addressing customers "in their own language", and tailoring content to local preferences such as language, film classification, dubbing or subtitling requirements, advertising, holiday periods, and general consumer tastes. This is consistent with the experience of producers and distributors whether large or small scale, who have indicated that although they license content on a multi-territorial basis where there is a business case to do so, targeted and local investments in distribution and marketing are nevertheless required in order to promote and sell films in each country” (IBID). (To read the paper in its entirety go here.)

On a side note: many European countries are used to having films dubbed not subtitled and there is apparently a new software that facilitates dubbing in the same voice as the actor / speaker. I’m looking into it further. In any case, subtitling for digital is getting less and less expensive and can be done via software or labs. If one has played a film at a film festival in another country and then plan to distribute the film there I recommend you ask the fest for access to the subtitles (if cleared for other distribution). Traditionally, Nordic, Benelux, and some others are fine with and prefer subtitles, while others (such as Germany, Spain, and Italy) require dubbing. In the higher educated arthouse/filmfest world, one can often get away with just subtitled versions even in the dubbing countries.

At The Film Collaborative we have noticed that iTunes has just recently expanded its footprint into Europe and is now available in the following EU countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Republic of Ireland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom. Non-English stores include: Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium, Switzerland, Portugal.

NETFLIX, Amazon (via Lovefilm), and Hulu are expanding their EU footprint too. In the US Hulu is ramping up its competitive edge with Netflix on the SVOD HuluPlus and these days it’s looking for more films that it can do stunts around.

So what are the other key EU platforms? Trends? And which kinds of films are viable?

I asked TFC Board of Advisor / EU digital distribution guru and TFC partner Wendy Bernfeld of Rights Stuff to weigh in. Wendy noted that various international platforms are increasingly interested by now in licensing art house and festival films, not just mainstream, and that they also have room for niches. (For an example, TFC received an offer for 300 EU from one small platform but sometimes the money is quite better, and/or is coupled with rev shares and small upfronts. The point is that the deals are non-exclusive and can ripple through various windows and regions. Keep in mind some platforms are transactional (pay per view) and revenue sharing, others ad supported (free to consumer) and others subscription (e.g. pay per month) and hence the license fee, just like TV, but smaller often though sometimes greater. Wendy notes that whilst some earlier pioneer platforms have gone out of business, others are launching or strengthening, and diversifying into thematic genres instead of only mainstream. Wendy cites that some of those non-USA platforms include Orange, Viasat, XIMON (for art house/festival/docs) in the Netherlands, Voddler (Nordic), Blinkbox (UK), mubi.com (EU), not to mention many telecom and cable VOD platforms that have online offerings of their own Wendy adds that “LOVEFILM in the UK (now owned by Amazon) usually only takes larger packages, not one-offs, if dealing direct with producers/ distributors, otherwise one can go through aggregators/digital distributors and sometimes one is pressed to have had a DVD or local theatrical release already, while in other case they are willing to premiere online or Day & Date. Lesser-known or library (catalog) films can usually find a home on a non- exclusive and on ad-supported (AVOD) basis, but more current films usually start with transactional (TVOD) basis and/or subscription platforms (SVOD)… Many of these platforms are willing to take delivery of art house films via DVD” or a hard drive or digital master (instead of requiring the expensive encoding/digitizing the way Apple does).

Wendy believes that 2012 will see more of the same consolidation that 2011 witnessed. Also some key platforms (such as Hulu, Netflix, Yahoo, Endemol/AOL, Nokia, Canal+, Orange) are selectively commissioning Transmedia and/or branded film opportunities. Ad- supported (AVOD) platforms such as YOUTUBE and subscription platforms such as Lovefilm in the UK (owned by Amazon) are adding premium transactional VOD (TVOD) in order to handle current films and not just library or PAY TV window titles, and some are competing against the premium PAY TV window and occasionally buying an SVOD window exclusively instead of nonexclusively, to beat out a PAY TV licensee (e.g. as with Netflix, Lovefilm recently, in some key indie deals). More platforms are open to REVERSE WINDOWING (a trend growing and succeeding in the US, e.g. Melancholia), which is launching online first and then opening theatrical. Interestingly, EPIX began licensing international festival documentaries in 2010 but have now focused their attention on co-productions instead of acquisitions. As in the US, many traditional PAY TV platforms are going cross-platform and on multiple devices (a la “TV EVERYWHERE”, and similarly the nonlinear online channels are often seeking multiple device rights and/or at least have an App). In terms of trends, it still seems like the bigger funds and bigger platforms are still more focused on more mainstream content. Yet having said that, here’s a summary from Wendy on key platforms for Art House films:

For films not released theatrically Wendy cites among others, XIMON & MUBI (TFC is direct with them and they also often deal directly with filmmakers) and also notes there are the local equivalents of Fandor and IndieFlix in various regions. Some PAY TV film channels have online offerings that explore more niche or arthouse material, even where the film is not on the main channel. MUBI is co-owned by the rights holder to one of the most expansive libraries of art house cinema, Celluloid Dreams. MUBI is technically available everywhere, and is sometimes syndicated as a channel carried on a telecom platform (as in the case of its SVOD service on Belgacom in Belgium). It is also on Sony Playstation, has (last time I checked) 60% of its audience in the US and most of the rest in Europe. Wendy explains that for bigger indie titles and mainstream ones there are about 5-7 or so VOD outlets per country, usually in the form of television related, IPTV, Telecom/Cable companies, (as well as the online and/or mobile sites, and offerings that are being put together by OTT box and consumer electronics/connected TV manufacturers.)

For example in even the small country Holland (where Wendy, former Canadian, resides) there are: KPN, Tele2, SBS/Veamer, Ziggo, Upc/Chello/Film1, . Others in EU include e.g. Orange, Canal Plus, (France etc), Telenet, in Nordic, etc.), Telefonica, Viasat… Most buy TVOD and sometimes SVOD and/or AVOD. Some web-based sites for VOD, according to Wendy, include: Veamer (NL); Popcorn (just launching in UK), Blinkbox and Lovefilm(UK); Voddler & Film2Home & Headweb and Viasat nonlinear offerings (Nordic),. In Benelux, Cinemalink, Veamer , Pathe (soon launching) , idfa.tv and Ximon (Netherlands); Maxdome (Germany); Sony-related Qriocity, Daily Motion & Orange (many countries in EU) , Movieeurope, Zatoo, and sales agent Wild Bunch has launched a platform service called FilmoTV. And there are plenty more!

Wendy’s final and most important kernel of wisdom is this: “It is really important to WINDOW (i.e. Transactional, Subscription, Advod, Sell Through) carefully and balance traditional with new media. But also, windows can be in reverse for certain films, especially indies, i.e. producers can build (and engage with) the audience before the film is even out and perhaps premiere ONLINE first, (or day and date with another cross-promoted window), and then one can still end up in theatres. The key is to know the audience and try to tailor the marketing and distribution patterns accordingly…producers can be more active these days to heighten the chances of film success.

There are a lot of small markets and platforms and all this takes a lot of work but if one has built community around a film and awareness then the effort may pay off and add up to a nice revenue stream. Once the first deals are in place with platforms (deal structures, relationships, contacts, contracts) it’s easier to build on that and add new films to the deals with just short amendments or riders, so the effort at the front end makes years of future dealings run smoother.

My first interaction with Viewster was during its previous incarnation as DIVA.pro which seemed to function more like an aggregator. Now Viewster serves that purpose in some ways but is also a platform. In that way it’s similar to SNAG FILMS, which is now both a platform and an aggregator. Kai Henniges of Viewster describes the company as follows: “today we are largely a consumer-facing cross platform VOD services, a content retailer. Our focus is on a number of CEE markets where we see the opportunity to emerge as the leading one-stop-shop. In parallel we supply movies to leading platforms in the UK, US, Germany (Netflix, Hulu, Virgin, Lovefilm). In these heavily competitive markets we rather work with the leading retailers as an aggregator than position ourselves against them”. Viewster has 18 manufacturer deals and estimate being on 50,000,000 devices now. They are especially excited about their cross platform deal with Samsung. Viewster works with local mini majors such as Kinowelt in Germany, Aurum in Spain and also sometimes individual filmmakers. They have 160 content suppliers so far. When I asked what sort of films Viewster seems as working best Kai noted “a mix of classics such as Death Proof, Crank, or local films such as Empty Nest work well and course Day & Date releases”. Kai added the need for a good trailer and key art, ideally an inspired title (e.g. “Dirty Deeds did fantastic”), preferably a known actor. “Without any of these attributes, films are likely to languish in VOD, the selection is even more harsh than in the old home entertainment business”.

TFC recommends picking a specialist in new media / digital distribution to handle these rights as opposed to letting a more traditional company handle them unless they prove to know what they are doing and offer you fair terms (we like the 15% commission and under model or flat fee).

Filmmakers, whatever you choose to do with respect to your digital distribution, do not forget, one can reach the whole wide world via one’s own website(s) and social networking pages by utilizing DIY digital distro services (for more on this topic please refer to numerous past blogs about digital distribution and DIY platforms and services. For past blogs about these topics go to www.TheFilmCollaborative.org/blog

REMEMBER: Films do not market themselves. There is a proliferation of films (thousands per year, and hence an emerging glut and your film will die on the digital vine if you do not connect-the-dots and create your community around your film (a la Sheri Candler). We had a lovely discussion about this at the Lone Star Film Festival. Ted Hope was especially charming and humorous as he rolled off the staggering stats. Anyway, even when there are better curation mechanisms on platforms or via services, marketing is king.

For those not into monetizing piracy (though we recommend trying it!) well, you can try to stay ahead of the pirate ad-supported sites (because that’s the latest trend in piracy and it’s huge, to the tune of tens of millions). Key would be to 1. Watermark screeners or use private streaming service; 2. Do some serious SEO work (Search Engine Optimization) and hopefully with some other technological assistance redirect traffic your way (as did Wendy’s former ADVOD client in the UK www.IndieMoviesOnline.com) 3. Release your film at the same time worldwide and in as many places as possible and for a reasonable fee that is competitive to free. When we (The Film Collaborative) help filmmakers sell internationally we try for a UNIVERSAL STREET DATE. And per Wendy (and also in Sheri Candler’s case studies in our book www.SellingYourFilm.com), some filmmakers partner with Bit Torrent, Pirate Bay etc to launch their films online, tapping into the audiences already there (e.g. Nasty Old People, The Tunnel).

And, a little something extra never hurts.

Bon Chance!

Orly Ravid has worked in film acquisitions / sales / direct distribution and festival programming for the last twelve years since moving to Los Angeles from home town Manhattan. In January 2010, Orly founded The Film Collaborative (TFC), the first non-profit devoted to film distribution of independent cinema. Orly runs TFC w/ her business partner, co-exec director Jeffrey Winter.

Categories
Truly Free Film

Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 – Part 2

By Jacques Thelemaque

Jacques Thelemaque returns today to complete the download of his lessons learned from Digi Hwood knowledge fest. What's the future? Does anyone know? This much I DO know: I would love to have one person cover for our HopeForFilm community all the film related seminars over the course of the year, be they in NYC or LA, and compare what can be gained from these conferences and how they vary. I wonder if we can find a sponsor… I wonder more if we could find one person who can endure — even with the enticement of tasty sandwiches!

The second day of Digital Hollywood started earlier, but I was there on time, excited by the film-specific panels and those bagels, croissants, muffins and pastries with my name on them.

The first panel I went to was "Film Festivals In The Digital Age" presented by IndieWire, moderated by IndieWire staff writer & chief film critic Eric Kohn and including Sebastien Perioche – CEO/President/Founder of Eurocinema On Demand, Amy Dotson – Deputy Director of IFP, Geoff Gilmore – Chief Creative Officer Tribeca Film Festival and Terence Gray – Founder and Executive Director of the New York Television Festival (NYTVF)

Luckily, the panel didn't speak solely about festival issues, but broadened the discussion to address a number of issues swirling around independent film. The panelists all agreed that festivals are more important than ever as curators. But in these challenging times, they also need to be a bit more of a partner for films and filmmakers. After the panel, I asked Amy Dotson how active in the distribution process festivals are willing to be (given that festivals are commonly the only meaningful theatrical distribution a film will get and that the larger festivals often demand a "premiere" to screen your feature). She said that's the million-dollar – but still unanswered – question since it generates so many internal arguments at festivals. In essence, the answer defines the role of the festival – and there does not seem to be a unified perspective on what that role should or could be. Certainly, festivals are still not talking too much about how they can help monetize a filmmakers' work. Sebastien tried to put forth the idea that Eurocinema On Demand can provide exposure and royalties (for European filmmakers only). But many of us filmmakers have heard that promise before. Geoff Gilmore, however, seems to be taking the filmmakers financial interests very seriously. He rightly argued that advertising driven platforms suck. Transactional models work better, but thinks the split with filmmakers is typically underwhelming. He claims Tribeca is trying to create a model that provides guarantees as well as meaningful ancillary cash. Sebastien asked what he means by real cash. But that was never answered. Gilmore feels it is the festival's responsibility to embrace and provide a central platform for new media story-telling (gaming, transmedia, etc.). Amy Dotson said commercial agents for filmmakers is a good idea, if you can find one – not just to make commercials but to generate commercial endorsements for films or new media. Over-all, the panel suggested festivals can best support filmmakers if they have clear goals – whether it be to generate exposure or cold, hard cash.

The next panel – in the very same room (I took a break to pee and lost my really great seat) – was "The Future of Content Distribution". This was the panel I was definitely MOST excited about. On the panel were Daniel Laikind – Founder of Stickfigure Productions (Moderator), Rick Allen – CEO of SnagFilms, Gary Delfiner – SVP Digital Distribution at Screen Media Ventures, Erick Opeka – VP VOD and Digital at New Video, Debra Fisher from Oscilloscope Laboratories, Matt Dentler – Head of Content at Cinetic Rights Management and FilmBuff.

When I got back from the bathroom, the panel was already deep in discussion and were busily listing a few of the interesting new video content sites out there: – Machinima, Vuguru. FilmBuff. SnagFilms. Also, some discussion of YouTube, Netflix and Hulu. That led to a discussion about deal models for filmmakers and the importance of separating rights so that you don't give them all up to a single entity. Non-exclusivity is apparently now more accepted – especially with these new companies/sites – allowing filmmakers to negotiate their rights separately with various companies whose core competency allows them to adequately manage the rights they acquire. They went on to say that Netflix, Hulu, and YouTube are making deals with individual producers. But not up-n-comers. They tend to be fairly established filmmakers or name talent. Deals don't bring as much money as broadcast, but, again, you can negotiate to limit the rights they hold. Matt Dentler said content creators (filmmakers, naturally) need to be a lot smarter. And they have to work with companies that have a true digital strategy. Debra Fisher says we must educate ourselves (filmmakers, naturally) on the various platforms and the "metrics" of each. Afterward, I asked Matt if he can provide a case-study that illustrates how a digital strategy is created. He simply said that digital strategy is broken down into two primary approaches based on whether a filmmaker is trying to make money or trying to build exposure (didn't we hear this at the film festival panel?). They can both feed back into each other, but it is incumbent upon the filmmaker to make that decision. He also said his company (FilmBuff) likes to get involved at the rough cut stage – and not any earlier – to begin devising a strategy. Sadly, never got to hear what a typical strategy might sound/look like.

Then I had lunch. Contemplated going somewhere else to eat. But between being a cheap-ass filmmaker and not wanting to leave the event (it was kinda cold last Friday), I dove back into the potpourri of mini-sandwiches, but was sad to find no tuna sandwiches left. Damn, this conference-going can be so challenging at times.

Next up was the HBO panel – which I knew would be one giant commercial for HBO. I didn't mind. I LOVE HBO and I'm not ashamed to admit it!! It started with a tour of HBO Go. When it was finished, and despite my love for HBO, I had to ask myself "What am I doing here?" But I realized that how HBO crafts it's web presence, apps, interactive experiences and over-all social experience around their shows is a sometimes very applicable model for indie filmmakers. Of course, the social experience for HBO shows cannot be replicated exactly by indie filmmakers because they build them around shows that have already reached a certain level of cultural identity. But here are just a few things to consider:

•Keep on point. Do not create social tools/apps whose relevance to your film/show is a big reach.
•"Seed" your social activity with friends/family/crew/etc. – those with only no degrees of separation from you or the project.
•Every social tool used on the web should have a smartphone/tablet app analogy. And every app should be able to talk to the website.
•Tweeting is a bad experience for direct conversations with audience.
•Don't forget the lurkers – people watching the social interactivity, but not participating.
•HBO connect is a new tool that allows audience to connect with what other HBO fans are buzzing about and even connect with stars. "The water cooler re-imagined" is the tagline for HBO connect. Very clever. And this connectivity with filmmakers and important members of the cast of any film (even the smallest) can be truly meaningful.

I finished the day torn between a "Branded Entertainment" (web ads and short ad-sponsored films) panel vs. an "Oscar Campaign" panel. I think I made the wrong choice. "What did I care about Oscar campaigning?", I thought. And I figured the branded entertainment panel would be good information for filmmakers looking to make some cash for their filmmaking. But, of course, the branded entertainment panel was another mind-numbing onslaught of corporate-speak with no clear treasure map for filmmakers and other content creators to follow. So, I left and came in on the tail end of the oscar panel and they seemed to be saying some very interesting things about marketing in general. And the featured film was a doc – which are always indie and more analogous to indie narrative filmmakers than other forms of "content". But I, sadly, got there too late to fully grasp the whole arc of the discussion.

So, here's just a few takeaways from the second day, and from the conference over-all.

•DVD is dead. Or at least that's what everybody was saying. Don't know if I buy that quite yet for nobody filmmakers.
•A new site called YouToo.com was ubiquitous It offers it's users a "fame spot". It made me depressed.
•Know what your goals are as a filmmaker and work backward from than in your digital strategy. Heck, work backward from that in figuring out what you even want to make.
•Stick to your core competency. Stop pretending you'r a filmmaker, a fundraising genius, tech wizard, a marketing guru and a business wunderkind. Surround yourself with people who are much better at things than you are.
•Nobody has a model for consistent, repeatable money-making in the Digital Universe, yet. But all agree, that's where the money will be. I do, too.
•Engagement is all the rage. But some form of engagement is indeed key, even for us shoe-string indies. It's incumbent upon us to create reasons for people to care about our work.
•In the end, it's clear that content is indeed king. Even though few seemed able to talk specifically about content, it's obvious that every success had a really good story behind it or in it. It's just that there is no easy, repeatable formula for "good". But that shouldn't stop us from trying. And good work will find its way into any platform.
•Fresh baked goods are always pleasant to have around.

At the end, no party. No dinner. Just over. Exchanged a few business cards with some interesting peeps and I was gone. Was I glad I went? Absolutely. Was I totally satisfied. Not completely. I got some great info, but I was a bit frustrated by the dearth of clarity and specifics – and the lack of substantive discussion of content. I guess my recommend for the future is that they use moderators who truly reflect the audience (instead of industry peers) who will dig in there and get the kind of specifics we need. But there's no doubt we're all – including the panelists – still on a big learning curve. Which means the future is wide open and full of possibilities….