Charlie Chaplin Sound

Sound is part of our movie experience these days. And good sound is important to that experience, although it's not something you usually notice. (Unless it's bad sound.)

And bad sound can be a filmmaker's nightmare. We know how true this is... on our first feature film, when we discovered the importance of a single battery.

The battery in our boom mic was dying. Just replace the battery! Problem fixed. Right?

Wrong. There was a problem we hadn't anticipated. That this very battery wasn't just any old, ordinary, buy-it-at-the-corner-store battery. Nope. It was so specialized that no store in all of New York City had a replacement! (We would have had to order it from the company. Not good, since we were filming on a tight schedule.)

That day was enough to make us wish we were back in the days when films were silent!

And speaking of the silent film era, there's a story about Charlie Chaplin's first visit to a sound stage. This is what he observed:

"Men geared like warriors from Mars sat with earphones while the actors performed with microphones hovering over them like fishing rods. It was all very complicated and depressing. How could anyone be creative with all that junk around them?"

Okay, so maybe it just takes some time to get used to... You really can be creative with all the "fishing rods" and "junk" around. You just have to work a little harder. And, of course, it helps if your batteries are not misbehaving...

And when that happens, it's nice to be able to fall back on a few scenes that can be shot MOS...

P.S. Curious about what happened the day our battery gave out? Well... That's a long story...

What Makes A Good Partnership?

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

The NYTimes Sunday Magazine has a must-read article on my former Good Machine partner James Schamus. The author, Carlo Rotello, does a thorough job on the difficult task of capturing most of the complexity that makes James someone that is fun to collaborate with: he is not easily defined, has many interests (sometimes conflicting), and enjoys deeply both the process and the product.  People so often look for people they get along with to collaborate with; I think that is is mistake.  Harmony may work in other types of relationships, but in a creative one, it is a formula for mediocrity.   If you truly care about the end result of your work, you should look for someone you enjoy arguing with to partner with.

Rotello sums up our Good Machine partnership by defining David Linde as the business mind, Schamus the intellectual, and me “Hope, an advocate of radically decentralized media democracy, was the revolutionary;”.  I like how that sounds, but what really worked at Good Machine, and in other creative relationships, is when people can argue clearly and without ego for what they feel will make a story work best.  Trust is the next most required ingredient in a successful partnership, quickly followed by a willingness to accept that you may not be right (that non-ego thing again).

Good Machine had a great number of really smart and passionate people working together who realized that if they spoke up and advocated clearly for what they believed in, they could get things done if they were able to work REALLY hard.  Everyone spoke up, but also learned how to listen.

Arguing about creative choices should be a fun process, because you are chasing a truth and an ideal.  The challenge is making sure the participants are all chasing the same thing.  When partners start chasing different outcomes is one of the ways things go wrong.

Collaborating among producers though is different from the collaboration between a producer and a director, or a producer and a writer.  I have had the good fortune of collaborating with A LOT of producers.  When producers collaborate and recognize that they lifted the project up and made it better, you know you’d always like to do it again together.  That result does not always bring the same result with other categories of collaborators.

Quotable Thursday | A Thankful Heart

"A thankful heart is not only the greatest
virtue, but the parent of all other virtues."
Cicero
(106-46 BC)

Todd Sklar on “Box Elder”

What was your filmmaking background before making Box Elder?

TODD: I grew up watching lots of movies; didn't get into film school, but made a lot of bad short films in college and started watching even more movies (about two per day for a while), and also starred in an independent feature that was made expertly as far as low budget production was concerned; all of which led to the notion that I could potentially make a feature.

That said, we re-shot 80% of the film after wrapping the first leg of production, so to be honest, the first round of shooting is what prepared me the most for making the final product.

Where did the idea come from? What was the writing process like?

TODD: Part of it was the desire to make a college comedy that was honest and more relatable than an American Pie movie. Something that felt more like Dazed and Confused or Swingers. I felt like I wasn't seeing that movie anymore, and felt like I had a good grasp on that type of story based on my own college experience.

Part of it also had to do with wanting to make a film that I knew I could do for a limited budget and with elements that were accessible to me at the time (good comedic actors, campus locations, etc). The last piece, and potentially the most important one, was wanting to make something that I knew I could get to its audience, and thus the first tour was born.

Can you describe the thinking behind the tour -- what you hoped to accomplish and then the reality of how it worked out?

TODD: The main goal was to get the film to its audience, and do so in a manner that enhanced the experience (i.e, we didn't want it to be just a movie screening; we wanted events and tailored marketing that fit the film and its target audience).

As far as how it worked out, the first tour was a complete success; it exceeded any and all expectations. The subsequent tours have been successful in different ways, but nothing close to what we pulled off on the first one.

How did you fund the film?

TODD: The first round came from an investment group, and the second round came from friends, family, mine and my producer's pocket, and lots of credit cards.

What sort of camera did you use for production and what were the best and worst things about it?

TODD: We shot with the Panasonic HVX and used the Brevis 35 adapter, and the best part of it was probably the P2 Workflow, and in specific, being able to watch footage immediately and edit rough cut scenes on the fly. Our editor would cut scenes overnight and we could watch 'em the next day and decide what to pick-up before that day's call time, and that was huge.

As far as the worst thing goes, there were the general hiccups that come along with using new technology, but I can't say that I can think one negative thing in specific. It was a pretty wonderful experience working with that camera setup.

Did using the Brevis 35 adapter add to your crew size or make it more difficult to "run and gun"?

TODD: Definitely not. Other than needing a really good 1st AC to handle focus pulling and what not, the Brevis was extremely lightweight, and the setup was much smaller and easier to maneuver than the Redrock or other adapters I had played with.

We had a steadicam that we used on probably 30-40% of the film and a shoulder mount unit as well and we were able to whip around pretty good.

Did the story change much in the editing process?

TODD: A ton. We cut out an entire portion of the second act and did re-shoots to fill in what is now the middle of the movie. The irony being, the storyline I had the most trouble with at the script stage ultimately was the one that got ditched in the edit room. I'm not exactly sure why I thought "shooting it" would make it any better....

What was the smartest thing you did during production? The dumbest?

TODD: The smartest thing was probably not listening to people 95% of the time, whether it was re; something we couldn't do, or shouldn't do or couldn't afford etc; and the dumbest thing was without a doubt the other 5% of the time that I didn't listen.

And, finally, what did you learn from making the film that you can take to other projects?

TODD: A big one was to work as much out in the development process as possible, because anything that doesn't get solved in the writing is only becoming a bigger problem after you shoot. And then an even bigger problem while you're editing.

Job Ops In Indieland (pt. 7): Start The Indie Film Promotional Army

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

The “build it and they will come” opportunities long ago fell off the individual films, but they are there when it comes to the infrastructure. The whole system of how we bring work to the community needs to be built to take advantage of the world as it is now, not how it was before. The fact that no one is doing it yet is a splendid opportunity to set yourself up to work in the field you love the most.

Some Job Opportunities in Indie Film with Ted Hope (part 7) from Hope for Film on Vimeo.

Watch the six prior parts of Some Job Opportunities In Indie Film here:
Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Five, & Part Six.
Thanks again to Chris Stetson for shooting, editing, posting this.

An Award Ceremony

Here are some photos that document that Under Jakob's Ladder received a Redemptive Storyteller Award for 2010...

A programme listing the movie...

An acceptance speech... (They said to limit it to 3 minutes.)

An award. Which, apparently, was produced by the same people who produce Mr. Oscar... You know, the golden, bald, shiny guy.

A bunch of filmmakers gathered for an official picture. Except that this is an "unofficial" version of the official picture.

Film Finance Overwhelm (pt.2)

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

Stacey Parks returns with a guest post — and a sequel.

Because Film Finance Overwhelm (Part 1) was such a popular post, I decided to do a Part 2. And because many of the comments and emails I got came in the form of questions, I decided to make the format of this post in Q+A form. I think seeing the answers to some of the most commonly asked questions will clear things up for many of you.

As a refresher, the 4 Film Financing components I talked about in Part 1 – the ones that are working in today’s market to independently finance films outside of the studio system are as follows:

1. Tax Incentives
2. Partnering With Production Companies
3. Pre-Sales
4. Crowd Funding

So let’s move on to Q+A…shall we?

Q: What are the benefits from both sides of partnering with a Production Company or more experienced Producer?

A: The obvious benefit to the new or less-experience Producer is pretty obvious – you get to leverage someone else’s track record to get your film made. But what about the benefit to the other Producer (the bigger one)? The benefit to them is that you are bringing them a killer concept and/or killer script that they didn’t have before. In my own pitching experience I find that every single one of the Producers I speak to says they are always looking for the next killer project – and they don’t really care where it comes from! Enter YOU. One of the keys to this approach is that hopefully you can bring more to the table than just a script, for example some kind of unique expertise. What areas of expertise do you have that you can contribute? Do you have existing relationships with foreign distributors for instance? How about marketing expertise? Are you a producer who can qualify for international co-production funds because you have a European or Australian or New Zealand passport? Think along those lines of some unique contribution you can bring to the partnership.

Q: What does it take to make a Pre-Sale when you don’t have the typical ‘package’?

A: It’s a fact that the majority of Pre-Sales these days are done on ‘packages’ – meaning a script with Director and Cast attachments. So what if you have an atypical package meaning not a name director or big international stars? Well I’ll tell you… I’ve seen this past year a few projects be successful at Pre-Sales by attaching the right Producer or Executive Producer. Yes, Producer and EP are also part of your package! Mind you these projects were also very commercial concepts, and not in the art-house/drama genre. Which brings up something else – sometimes, and I mean only sometimes, if your concept is so strong and commercial, you can mange a Pre-Sale or two ONLY based on that, even without having a big director or stars attached. In those cases what happens is who ever is buying from you, may insist on attaching an experienced ‘name’ themselves, so they can increase their level of trust and mitigate their risk.

Q: Aren’t the administrative costs extremely high when closing a tax finance deal?

A: Yes, actually they are. They can be anywhere from 15% to 25% of your budget by the time to take into account the discounting that banks do, legal, financing fees, interest, etc. For this reason, it usually only makes sense to take advantage of tax incentive deals when your budget is $2 million or more (and some say $5 million or more). Because tax deals can be expensive to administer many Producers prefer to finance with equity rather than tax incentives, but equity isn’t always available, and unless you are experienced with a track record, can be difficult to secure. Obviously the higher the budget of your film, the more tax incentives make sense for your production – for example when you start getting into the $5-$10 million budget range the numbers starting adding up even better. Having said that, I personally think it’s always worthwhile to look into the option of shooting in places that offer favorable tax incentives, and run the numbers to see how everything pencils out. I know Producers who have resisted this for a long time, and have finally given in because not taking advantage of 20%-40% in rebates is considered simply irresponsible at this point.

Q: What percentage of budget can you actually raise with Crowd Funding?

A: Certainly I’m seeing people raise 100% of their budgets doing crowd funding campaigns, especially with budgets of $200K and less. However in most cases, I think if you can raise 20%-25% of your budget with Crowd Funding then you can wrap a traditional financing structure around that. The thing to keep in mind with crowd funding is that you want to keep your campaign donation-based instead of investment-based, as anything investment-based can put you into legal grey area. Obviously sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo are terrific platforms for running your Crowd Funding campaigns and the thing that I like best about raising money through crowd funding is that it can be a great way to raise development funds in the beginning, when you need things like a website and other presentation materials to get the ball rolling. By contrast, I’ve also seen Producers use crowd funding very successfully to raise finishing funds, because by then you actually have sample footage to show people, and there can be an increased level of trust that your film will actually be completed.

Q: What are the downsides to raising International Co-Production financing as opposed to International Pre-Sale financing?

A: International Co-Production financing is second nature to most European producers because that’s their ‘traditional’ financing model. Nowadays however, even American producers are getting in on the action and the two biggest downsides I see with seeking International Co-Production financing are 1) The amount of red tape it takes to apply for government film funds, and 2) the amount of time it takes to get a project off the ground when you’re relying on international co-production funds. With so many new ways of financing your film these days, even European producers are looking outside their traditional model of ‘free government money’ because it’s simply just so much more efficient to cobble together the financing in other ways (using the 4 components I talked about above + private investors). And yes, most U.S tax rebate programs are much more efficient than the European government funds – quicker to get approval on and quicker to get cash-flowed.

So there you have it — I’d love to keep answering questions so please if you have any more, place them in the comments section below!

And if you want to delve deeper into Film Financing 101, check out the Virtual Intensive I’m putting on after Thanksgiving!

In the – Film Financing 2.0 Essential Training - I’ll be covering these 4 components of financing in-depth over the course of a few weeks. Take a look at the details of this small group program, and grab a seat before it sells out. Join the movement to get your film financed for 2011!

Useful Tools: Dropbox

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

One of my most used apps is Dropbox, and for a limited time they are running a promotion.  It’s free to use so there’s no reason not to try it out.

Take a tour.  Dropbox is software that syncs your files online and across your computers.  Put your files into your Dropbox folder on one computer, and they’ll automatically appear on any of your other computers that also have Dropbox installed (Windows, Mac, and Linux too!). You can even download Dropbox apps for your smartphone or mobile device (iPhone, iPad, Android, and Blackberry). Everything in your Dropbox is available from theDropbox website, too.

Go to this link, and download it.  For everyone that does, they will increase by storage capacity by 250MB up to 8GB, so you’ll help me out too.

Give Back! Testimony On The Joys Of Mentoring

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

It’s that time of the year that we’ve reserved for remembering what we are thankful for, and for giving back to those less fortunate.  It is an incredible privilege to use your labor to produce art, whether we get to do it as a means to earn our living, or as an additional extension of who we are and what we care about.

Today’g Guest post from filmmaker and mentor Rodney Evans captures our thanksgiving quite well.

Passionate. Brave. Generous. Determined. Rebellious.

These are some of the words that come to mind when I think about the teen Documentary Lab students at Reel Works. Working with them for the past year has been a profound, life-changing experience for me. It has been such a privilege to watch these seventeen students develop the skills and fortitude that it takes to be a successful filmmaker in today’s world.

Every Tuesday and Thursday for the past year has been filled with so much spontaneous creativity and unbridled energy that it was really infectious to all of us who were a part of it. All of them showed such a strong commitment to grappling with complex and difficult topics while never settling for the easy way out.

After almost twenty years of filmmaking, teaching the Reel Works Documentary Lab has really helped rekindle that initial spark that made me fall in love with filmmaking and for that I will be eternally grateful. I am so proud to be able to share this powerful and inspiring collection of short films with the world. Here’s to the Reel Works Documentary Lab students and the many years of creativity and passion that lie ahead for each of them. I, for one, cannot wait to see what they do next.

-Rodney Evans
Reel Works Documentary Lab Instructor

The screening for the Reel Works Spring Documentary Lab films takes place Sat., Nov 20th at 5pm at Brooklyn Lyceum (President and 4th Ave, R train to Union St.) Filmmaker mentors included Heidi Ewing (12th and Delaware, Jesus Camp), Michael Sladek (Con Artist), Paola Mendoza (Entre Nos) and Shari Carpenter (Kali’s Vibe).  http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=166168766737215

Rodney Evans is the the writer/director/producer of the feature film BROTHER TO BROTHER which won the Special Jury Prize in Drama at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival. He is currently in development on his second narrative feature, DAY DREAM, starring Anthony Mackie (THE HURT LOCKER) and IDRIS ELBA (TAKERS, THE WIRE).

We Must Defend The Rights Of Artists Everywhere: Jafar Panahi’s Defense

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

Last week Iranian Filmamaker Jafar Panahi had his trial in Teheran.  He has not been allowed to make a film in five years.  This post is Jafar Panahi’s defense, his closing remarks,  presented to the court of Iran.

Your Honor, I would like to present t my defense in two parts.

Part 1:  What they say

In the past few days I have been watching my favorite films again, though I did not have access to some of them, which are among the greatest films of the history of cinema. My house was raided on the night of March 1^st, 2010 while my colleague Mr. Rasoulof and I were in the process of shooting what we intended to be a socially conscious art house film. The people, who identified themselves as agents of the Ministry of Intelligence, arrested us along with other crew members without presenting any warrants. They confiscated my collection of films as well and never returned them to me.  Subsequently, the only reference made to those films was by the prosecutor in charge of my case, who asked me: “What are these obscene films you’re collecting?”

I have learned how to make films inspired by those outstanding films that the prosecutor deemed obscene. Believe me I have just as much difficulty understanding how they could be called obscene as I do comprehending how the activity for which I was arrested could be seen as a crime? My case is a perfect example of being punished before committing a crime. You are putting me on trial for making a film that at the time of our arrest was only thirty per cent shot.  You must have heard that the famous creed “There is no god, except Allah”, turns into blasphemy if you only say the first part and omit the second part.  In the same vain, how can you establish that a crime has been committed by looking at 30% of rushes for a film that have not been edited yet?

I do not comprehend the charge of obscenity directed at the classics of the film history, nor do I understand the crime I am accused of.  If these charges are true, you are putting not only us on trial but the socially conscious, humanistic, and artistic Iranian cinema as well, a cinema which tries to stay beyond good and evil, a cinema that does not judge nor surrender to power or money but tries to honestly reflect a realistic image of the society.

One of the charges against me is attempting to encourage demonstrations and incite protests with this film.  All through my career I have emphasized that I am a socially committed filmmaker not a political one.  My main concerns are social issues; therefore my films are social dramas not political statements. I never wanted to act as a judge or a prosecutor. I am not a film maker who judges but one that invites other to see. I don’t get to decide for others or to write any kind of manual for any body; please allow me to repeat my pretension to place my cinema beyond good and evil.  This kind of belief has caused my colleagues and my self a lot of trouble; many of my films have been banned, along with the films of other filmmakers like me.  But it is unprecedented in Iranian cinema to arrest and imprison a filmmaker for making a film, and harass his family while he is in prison. This is a new development in the history of Iranian cinema that will be remembered for a long time.

I have been accused of participating in demonstrations. No Iranian filmmaker was allowed to use his camera to capture the events but you can not forbid an artist to observe! As an artist it is my responsibility to observes in order to get inspired and create.  I was an observer, and it was my right to observe.

I have been accused of making a film without permission. Is it really necessary to point out here that no law has been passed by the parliament regarding the need for a permit to make a film? There are only some internal memos which are going through changes each time the deputy minister is changed.

I have been accused of not giving a script to the actors.

In our film making genre where we work mostly with non professional actors this is a very routine way of film making practiced by myself and many of my colleagues; the cast mostly consists of non-actors.  Therefore, the director does not find it necessary to give them a script. This accusation sounds more like a joke that has no place in the judiciary system.

I have been accused of having signed a declaration.  I have singed one; an open letter signed by 37 prominent film makers, in order to express their concern about the turn of the actual events in the country. I was one of them.  Unfortunately, instead of listening to the concerns we were accused of treachery. However, these filmmakers are the very same people who have expressed their concerns in the past about injustices around the world.  How can you expect them to remain indifferent to the fate of their own country

I have been accused of organizing demonstrations at the opening of Montreal Film Festival.  At least some truth and fairness should back up any accusations.   I was the chair of the jury in Montreal and arrived only a few hours before the opening.  How could I have organized a demonstration in a place where I hardly knew anyone?  Let’s not forget that in those days the Iranian Diaspora would gather at any relevant event around the world to voice their demands;

I have been accused of giving interviews to Persian speaking media abroad.  I know for fact that there are no laws forbidding us from giving interviews?

Second part: What I say

History testifies that an artist’s mind is the analytical mind of his society.  By learning about the culture and history of his country, by observing the events that occur in his surroundings, he sees, analyzes and presents issues of the day through his art form to the society.

How can anyone be accused of any crime because of his mind and what passes through the mind?

The assassination of ideas and sterilizing artists of a society has only one result: killing the roots of art and creativity.  Arresting my colleagues and I while shooting an unfinished film is nothing but an attack by those in power on all the artists of this land. It drives this crystal clear however sad message home: “You will repent if you don’t think like us”

y

I would like to remind the court of yet an other ironic fact about my imprisonment: the space given to Jafar Panahi’s festival awards in Tehran’s Museum of Cinema is much larger than his cell in prison?

All  said, despite all the injustice done to me, I, Jafar Panahi, declare once again that I am an Iranian, I am staying in my country and I like to work in my own country. I love my country, I have paid a price for this love too, and I am willing to pay again if necessary.  I have yet an other declaration to add to the first one. As shown in my films , I declare that I believe in the right of “the other” to be different, I believe in mutual understanding and respect, as well as in tolerance; the tolerance that forbid me from judgment and hatred.  I don’t hate anybody, not even my interrogators.

I recognize my responsibilities towards the future generations that will inherit this country from us.

History is patient. Insignificant stories happen without even acknowledging their insignificance. I, myself I am worried about the future generations.

Our country is quite vulnerable; it is only through the instauration of the state of law for all, regardless of any ethnic, religious or politic consideration that we can avoid the very real danger of a chaotic and fatal future.  I truly believe that tolerance represents the only realistic and honorable solution to this imminent danger.

Respectfully,

Jafar Panahi

An Iranian filmmaker

Quotable Thursday | Impossible Things

"Difficult things take a long time,
impossible things a little longer."
André A. Jackson

Job Ops In IndieLand (pt.6): Move Beyond A Single Product

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

Most industries and practices get stuck in a rut of doing things the way they’ve always been done.  The film world is a stellar example of this phenomenon.  Most practices are designed around the way the world used to be, not how it is now.  The film world and it’s economy used to be based around scarcity, but now we live in a world of abundance.  Adapting to this change will bring new opportunities.  The first step is acknowledging that change.

Some Job Opportunities in Indie Film with Ted Hope (part 6) from Hope for Film on Vimeo.

If you missed the prior posts on Job Opportunities in Indie Film, watch them here:
Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Five, Part Seven.

Special thanks to Chris Stetson for shooting, editing, and posting this.

Barry Poltermann on “The Life of Reilly”

What was your filmmaking background before making The Life of Reilly?

BARRY: I made an indie horror film in 1992 called Aswang, was a commercial director and edited American Movie. Here are some bio links:

Where did the idea come from to turn the show into a movie?

BARRY: In short, we were looking for something fun to do for our company Holiday Party in 2001 and a friend mentioned that Charles Nelson Reilly was doing a one-man show in town (LA). I called to book tickets, but the show had already moved on. So I set up a GOOGLE alert (probably a Yahoo alert back then) to track the show, because I thought it sounded interesting (in a campy, funny way). But as time went on and I kept getting these news alerts, all the reviews were of the "no... seriously... this show is amazing. And yes, it IS that Charles Nelson Reilly, but it's not what you expect" variety. I became kind of obsessed with seeing the show, but it never worked out.

Years later (2004) a friend of mine was attempting to get a movie off the ground that was an Evil Knevil musical. This brought to mind Charles' show, so I told him about it as a movie idea with the pitch "it will be the Stop Making Sense of comedy performances... we will do for Charles Nelson Reilly what Rick Rubin did for Johnny Cash!" and he said it was "genius" and he wanted to produce it. This was Bob Fagan (who eventually produced the film).

The next day I asked my assistant (Adrian Selkowitz) to track down CNR. He had me meeting with him for lunch within a couple of days, and then we went back to his house after lunch and watched hours and hours of raw VHS video shot over the years with Charles' doing the show. I loved it... I especially loved how unruly it was. Lots of work for an editor (which is my forte) as he never did the same show twice. It wouldn't just be filming a show, but helping to construct a narrative in editorial.... which I love to do.

What was the physical process like (number of cameras, film/video format, pre-production process)?

BARRY: We did a prep day/rehearsal shooting with two cameras, then two shows with four cameras (it was supposed to be three, but CNR got sick for the Friday performance).
We also did some pickup shots on Sunday morning (4 camera) to fill in gaps. These were mainly things that we'd seen Charles do in previous shows that he was no longer doing but we thought would help us in developing the narrative... like talking more about his Mother towards the end, and his students who died from AIDS. He didn't do these things live for us on either of the two nights, but we had seen them on tape previously and asked him to bring them back for the film.

How did you shape the story in the editing and what was that process like?

BARRY: We had outlined 'the story' and scripted it prior to the shooting. We did this by looking at ten or so hours of raw video tape of him doing the show in previous years and the pre-editing this into a video 'script' of sorts. We then transcribed this edit and it was the template for what we wanted to shoot.

Any scenes that CNR didn't do during the shoot that WERE included in this overall edit we had him re-create on Sunday. So the final version is really somewhat different than what he had performed ever before... but it included all stuff that he had performed at SOME point or another throughout the previous three years or so.

Once we had the footage shot we began a LONG process of cutting. It really took a surprisingly long time to get it to work as a story instead of just a concert/performance film. There were so many options. Yes, we had the 'script' to follow, but CNR surprised us by doing stuff we had never seen before (some of it he made up on the spot) and it was GOOD. So that threw us off. Then other things we really liked didn't work as well as it had in previous taped versions... who knows why. The whims of theater and audiences, I guess.

The other thing was that our 'script' was two hours long when cut together, so we had to trim the hell out of it to get it down to under 90 minutes. We tested the cut longer and people got very restless. Something about live theater (where it isn't boring at al to hear CNR go on for three hours or more) and a film, where audience expectations are more ADD and they really got restless after 90 minutes.

But the main obstacle was that CNR never hit marks and seldom told the same story or did the same scene in the same spot from night to night, so we had to cut together the show in such a way not to reveal that from one shot to the next he was in a completely different space. This is one of the reasons we ultimately shot hand held and did a dreamy/hand held, shallow focus kind of look. We had to mask the fact that he was stage left in the wide shot and then stage right in the close up! Quite a challenge, but I feel it really ads to the surreal/mental landscape quality of the film and hopefully sets it apart from other stage shows on film.

How did Charles react to the finished film?

BARRY: He loved it. He saw the first cut at my house one night and we drank Manhattan's and talked for hours afterwards. He truly loved it. He did wish it were longer and asked for some things to be put back, but generally he eventually agreed that it worked better for film audiences at this length. In fact, he eventually even suggested some cuts and re-arrangements. He also suggested the title slides (and even wrote some) and other ideas.

We got a fax with his notes the day after the shoot, but they were really positive. When he saw the final version we were told by Patrick that he watched it over and over, studying it and showing it to friends. He could be cantankerous at times but was really a pleasure to deal with on the edit.

What was the smartest thing you did during production? The dumbest?

BARRY: Throwing out our storyboards and shooting hand held was the smartest. We were really worried that this 'look' would seem out of step with the material, but in the end, given how unplanned the show is from a blocking sense, there would have been no way to cut the multiple nights together -- we had to get a little surreal. If we'd kept with our initial 'boarded' plan the film never would have cut and we would have ended up with a mess. And I really like the final look... it is unique and dreamy and messy in a way that seems to match CNR's monologue and the man himself.

The dumbest? Hmmm. Probably assuming that the theater crew would do what we wanted them to do without more political tact on my part. I think the confrontations we had stemmed from my assumption that we were paying the theater crew to stage the show so we could film it, and so they would take orders from our film DP without question.

In the end it worked great, and I loved the theater crew... especially David Mingrino. But in the beginning they were very protective of the show and CNR's legacy... to the point of really pushing back on our lighting and staging requests. This back and forth really resulted in some nice results though... in the end it was a better film for it. But the next time I shoot a stage play, I will definitely spend more time bringing the film DP and the stage manager and director into the planning prior to shoot.

And, finally, what did you learn from making the film that you can take to other projects?

BARRY: You learn with every film, and with this one it was really how different the film experience was from the theater experience. The music, the lighting, the pacing... all of these things are VERY different in the finished film from the original stage show. When we did test screenings, the further we went away from the theater experience and made it more focused/cinematic, the more people liked it.

And I also really like the fact that the film doesn't just seem like a series of anecdotes, but is an overall story, of a hero, forging ahead through a difficult life.

From every project I seem to learn the same thing... it is all about STORY.

Top Ten Tips For A GREEN Indie Production (Pt. 3 of 3)

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

The last two days film producer/director Miranda Bailey has guest posted sharing her trials and tribulations at trying to make indie film green.  Today she shares her tips.

Miranda’s Ten Tips for Greening Your Film.

1.) Take a deep breath and realize you will not be able to be completely green. Acknowledge what you can green – Trash, Catering, Water Bottles – and go from there.

2.) Make sure there is a recycling bin next to EVERY GARBAGE CAN.  EVERY SINGLE ONE.

3.) Give everyone a reusable water bottle and show them where they can fill it up instead of using plastic disposable ones. As soon as they lose them, which should be with in the first 48hours of giving them out, give them another one and use the money you saved by not buying water bottles on buying a gazillion Sigg bottles.

4.) Tell Craft Services it is very important to you to use non-disposable plates and utensils at meals.

5.) Look in the trash. See that soda can or bottle in there that should be in the recycling bin that is right next to it!… pick it out and put it in the proper bin.  Then tell a PA you don’t want to have to do that again and that you will give them quarter for every person they tell to recycle from here on in.

6.) Go raise your budget to include $100 a day for the PA you had to hire that has to guard the trashcans.

7.) When you are on set a week later, and you notice that there are trash cans located everywhere, but no recycling bins anymore. Find that PA and tell him/her to put the recycling bin that got moved and forgotten about back next to the trash can. Tell them to make sure there is ALWAYS a recycling bin next to the trash can. And when they say they are too busy because we are actually making a movie not a recycling competition…hire another one whose sole purpose is to make sure we recycle.

8.) When you are at lunch and you realize you are eating with a plastic fork, complain to catering and ask why it isn’t silverware. Demand Silverware.

9.) Go raise your budget AGAIN to hire your catering another dishwasher because they refuse to use non-disposable plates and utensils on the budget you originally negotiated with them.

10.) Never drive where you can walk.  And always use recycled paper if you can afford it.

I do understand that these are the more REALISTIC greening tips than ones that Lauren Selman our Green Consultant and all around awesome chic would say, so I’ll mention her tips as well. Because, hers are the ones we all strive for…or should anyway.

Laurens Greening Tips: (as printed in The Independent -http://bit.ly/a5WaYl)

- Have a green point person.

- Train the production assistants and crew early.

- Get reusable water bottles.

- Get recycling bins for sets and trailers.

- Pass sets forward, to other productions, or donate.

- Get reusable canvas bags for PA runs.

- Get reusable garment bags for wardrobe.

- Encourage departments to carpool.

- Get a printer that prints double sided, and use recycled paper.

- Get reusable coffee mugs.

- Don’t throw away food.

- Don’t use Styrofoam.

Recently there are ton of resources that have sprouted up on best practices for greening films. Here are some of them:

Film Biz Recycling – http://www.filmbizrecycling.org/

EMA Make Your Production Green – http://www.ema-online.org/for_productions.php

California Film Commission Green Resource Guide-http://www.film.ca.gov/GreenFilmmaking.htm

Good Luck!

Miranda Bailey

www.greenlit.org

Miranda Bailey is a Producer, Actress and now Documentary Film Director. She is a Partner at the production company Ambush Entertainment in Hollywood.  Upcoming films from Miranda include Every Day,  & Super- out in 2010.  Her past films include: Squid and the Whale, Wonderful World Oh in Ohio, Against the Current.  Her website:www.ambushentertainment.com

Film Finance Overwhelm

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

Guest post from Film Specific’s Stacey Parks.

As I’m unwinding from AFM last week, it occurs to me that while many of you are experiencing Distribution Overwhelm, even more of you are experiencing Finance Overwhelm. Why? Because unless you have 100% cash in bank to make your film, what can you do to get your project off the ground?

The way I see it is we’ve entered a time where ‘cobbling together’ different forms of film financing is necessary to make the whole. Sure, private equity (or cash) still plays a role in this new model, but there’s also other methods that need to be explored and implemented to finance your film

Case in point – many filmmakers today are using private equity or cash for development funds, tax incentives and pre-sales for production funds, and crowd funding for finishing funds. Is that too many financing components? Let me put it to you this way….

Ignore a diversified approach to film financing at your peril!

So how and where do you begin on this journey then to cobble together financing for your film? Let’s forget the private equity or cash component for a moment b/c that’s usually the hardest piece of the puzzle, and let’s focus on financing components we actually have more control over in order to create some initial momentum with your project:

• Tax incentives – you’ve probably heard this before but if you’re not investigating locations to shoot your film that offer tax rebates and credits, you’re simply being irresponsible. Research both U.S and international states, countries, and provinces which offer attractive tax incentives for you to shoot your film there. Use the individual Film Commission offices as your starting point and they’ll walk you though the process and procedure, which in my experience are shockingly simple. Get budgets drawn up for shooting in different locations so you can compare where you’re able to make your film in the most economic way possible.

• Partnering With Production Companies – This may not seem like an obvious choice at first but let’s just say this – if you don’t have a track record yourself, if you’re a first or second time producer, writer, or director and you want to fast track your production, you should consider partnering with a more experienced Producer or Production Company and leverage their track record to get your project made. There are so many other benefits to this approach too – not least is the fact that if you manage to attract a bigger producer with a track record to your project to partner with you, you can ride their coat tails for this project, get introduced to their whole network of ‘relationships’, and be in a prime position for your next project to go it alone, using all the contacts you made. I’ve seen this happen many times, and it seems sometimes what holds people back in this scenario is their pride. Wouldn’t you rather swallow your pride and get your film made?

• Pre-Sales – Here’s the facts: Pre-Sales are not dead. I don’t care what anyone says, Pre-Sales are alive and kicking for the right projects. And that’s the key here – the right projects. What does that mean? That means for projects with a killer concept, an experienced director attached, and great cast, pre-sales are in fact a reality. Now I know this might seem like a long shot for some of you but hear me out….If you are a first time director, focus on a killer concept and cast. If you are a first time producer, focus on attaching a ‘name’ director. You can in fact build a package that attracts pre-sales, it takes time, and often money (development funds) to pull things together but it’s possible.

• Crowd Funding – Crowd Funding has actually been around for a while but only recently popularized by sites like Kickstarter & Indie Go Go. However, as many of you know, Robert Greenwald has been crowd funding his movies for years. His moves, being cause-related in nature, actually quite nicely lend themselves to being crowd funded (by people who are passionate about his causes). But what about if you have a narrative feature (as opposed to a cause-related doc)? The truth is, Crowd Funding can work for you too but the success of your campaign will be predicated on your ability to build an audience for your film while you’re still in the financing stage. No easy task but by leveraging the internet and social media, ti’s entirely possible provided you have a subject in your film, or are covering a topic or theme that people are actually interested in. Have you researched the concept of your film yet to determine if in fact there’s a potential audience for it that will be interested in seeing it? That’s the key to crowd funding right there.

These 4 components are what I see as the basic building blocks of a Film Financing plan in today’s market. And by building blocks I mean you should be using a combination of a few if not all of these to get the job done!

So what are your thoughts about Film Finance Overwhelm? Which of these methods have you used successfully, or not so successfully? And what questions do you have about any of them?

I’ll be kicking off one last Virtual Intensive for 2010 dedicated to Film Finance Overwhelm because I know that many of you are looking ahead at 2011 and you want to get your films made next year come hell or high water!

In my Virtual Intensive – Film Financing 2.0 Essential Training - I’ll be covering these 4 components of financing in-depth over the course of a few weeks. Take a look at the details of this small group program, and grab a seat before it sells out. Join the movement to get your film financed for 2011!

Stacey Parks is an expert in the area of Film Distribution, and the author of “Insiders Guide To Independent Film Distribution” (Focal Press). After several years as a foreign sales agent, in 2007 Stacey launched www.FilmSpecific.com as a Virtual Training hub for Producers seeking to get their films made, seen, & distributed worldwide.

Blogging in the Future

By the time you read this...

It will be Tuesday, November 16th.

And this post will NOT be in the publishing queue anymore.

But, it was at one time. Because this is currently being written ahead of schedule. And it will be published automatically on Tuesday. (We originally thought to post some photos of the Awards ceremony for today's post. But that probably won't happen until next Tuesday, the 23rd.)

Actually, in case you're wondering, most of our blog posts are written early and put into queue. Some posts are even begun, saved as draft, and published A) never; B) not until a year or so later; C) only after a severe re-write.

Come to think of it, blog posts are kind of like screenplays. Only shorter.

Green Indie? It’s A Hard Road (Pt. 2 of 3)

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

This is the second guest post from producer Miranda Bailey.  Part One ran here yesterday.

A lot of people want to be green on set, but the cost associated with it rises. I had heard that being green saves you money and that makes sense theoretically, but even something as simple as recycling has its costs.

First off you need more trash bins. Secondly, you really need to have someone there to make sure people put the right stuff in the right bin. You would think that a simple sign would work. Recycling goes here, other stuff goes in there right? But sadly, it doesn’t work like that.

I have now tried to “Green” three films. On the last film I produced (with Ted Hope), SUPER, we had recycling bins all over the place but no matter how many times I checked there was always some douche bag that put food where the bottles should be or bottles where the trash should be. I got so annoyed with it I told a PA I would give him a quarter for every can or bottle he kept from getting put in the wrong garbage. Guess what that meant…yup, our budget went up.

When I tried being “green” on our film Every Day (which comes out to theaters in January btw J) we specifically told the caterers that we did not want any plastic or Styrofoam offered during lunch. We wanted to have a “green” film so we were going to use ceramic and silverware. They whole-heartedly agreed to this when we interviewed them and seemed to have no problems with it. However, when the first lunch came I noticed there was not one single silverware item or ceramic plate on the tables. It was paper plates and plastic forks and guess what? It all ended up in the trash with everything else including cans, bottles and food. This was embarrassing.

I spoke to our Green Consultant Lauren about this since I had hired her after The River Why for this film as well. Thanks to her and The River Why producer I had learned a lot about the waste that films accumulate and I wanted to do my part, and not be one of those people who makes a movie about Greening but doesn’t change their own lives. Lauren went and spoke to the caterers. She then came to me and said they told her that it was just the first day and they were still getting themselves up and running. I understood that, no biggie. I mean who hasn’t’ used paper plates at their own BBQ to avoid a big clean up right?  But the next day…SAME THING! Not a single non-disposable item in site. What the hell? Were they still getting up and running? I thought let me wait it out for one more day. Day 3…you guessed it, same thing. My EP and I were pretty peeved so went to talk to them ourselves. Hiding behind our Green Consultant obviously wasn’t working. We asked what the problem was, we were very specific about how we were trying to be a “green “film and this paper plate and plastic ware mumbo jumbo wasn’t’ jiving with that, not to mention we made this clear before they hired them. They then said, “Listen guys, if you want to give us more money to hire a dishwasher go for it, but I’m not getting paid enough to wash dishes”. WOW!

Here I was on an indie film that was already over budget, everyone is under paid from the actor to the craft services and now my caterers are asking me for more money to not have to toss away plates and forks. What should I have done? Well, monetarily I should have just agreed to the toss away ware and kept the costs down. We couldn’t afford it, and let’s face it, indie dramas were hard to sell at any cost, I’d be lucky to get my postproduction costs covered for this film on the sale. Or I could walk the talk that I had learned from Lauren when making the film Greenlit— which is that the importance of

Greening a film HAS to come from the top down. I can’t expect my crews to go out of pocket because I want them to be green…I HAVE TO BE GREEN and I have to put my money where my mouth is. So I did. We said OK; we will hire a dishwasher for you just promise there will be no more plastic or paper. They did. And the rest of the shoot the caters were “green”. Or as green as that means anyway. I wondered did all that water used to clean the dishes also contribute to waste? Oy! You just can’t win can you? I want to be green. I want to be so green that James Cameron uses me for a new green humanoid in Avatar 2. But it seems that no matter how hard I try it is an uphill battle…especially alone.

I wonder if there is a way to focus on the film you are making and know that someone else is making sure you are being as responsible to the environment as you can be on set. That is the business that Lauren is trying to create with Reel Green Media and I think if more films and shows incorporate someone like this into their crew than we can all be at least a little greener.

This is Part Two of a three part article.  Tomorrow: Miranda & Lauren’s Top Ten Tips For A Green Set.  Yesterday’s “Can An Indie Film Really Be Green?” started us off.

Miranda Bailey is a Producer, Actress and now Documentary Film Director. She is a Partner at the production company Ambush Entertainment in Hollywood.  Upcoming films from Miranda include Every Day,  & Super- out in 2010.  Her past films include: Squid and the Whale, Wonderful World, Oh in Ohio, Against the Current.  Her website:www.ambushentertainment.com

Can An Indie Film Really Be “Green”? (Pt. 1 of 3)

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

Guest post from producer Miranda Bailey.

Even though I have been working in indie films for the last 10 years I never thought about the waste my company or my industry was creating and outputting each time we went into production on a movie; that is until my company Ambush Entertainment got involved on a film called The River Why. As with all indie films there are struggles along the way in making any movie and most of them revolve around money. There is never enough. So when I heard the producer of The River Why wanted to make the film “green” right after a discussion concerning the fact that we were actually going to try put the film in the can with out the completion funds in place, I thought everyone who was up for this idea might have gone mad.

What did that even mean? GREEN? And how much was that going to cost?

In order to find out, I met up with Lauren Selman of Reel Green Media, the environmental consultant that the production wanted to hire to go “green”.  I expected her to be one of those earthy granola old hippie types or perhaps a eco science professor type. Boy was I wrong. She was a cute, bubbly blonde fresh out of Berkeley  who really hadn’t even dipped her foot in the world of films except for a student project here or there, and her thesis working on an indie film in San Francisco helping them recycle. “Oh Great”! I thought. “This is the person who is going to GREEN our film? Please, what does she know”… apparently a lot. Quite a lot.

When we sat down together and she started telling me about specific productions and what they have done to our eco systems or landscapes and I was shocked! I thought to myself… “Well, that isn’t me. I don’t’ do that!” but do I? And that is where my interest in “Greening” productions began.

I decided to follow Lauren and film her journey to green The River Why.  I wanted to know how to do it. How filmmakers avoid all the waste we were apparently producing? When I started filming Greenlit I thought it might be a cute little behind the scenes footage type of thing for the DVD or something small like that. But it got a lot bigger.

The reasons it got bigger were because so much DRAMA occurred with “greening” of this film. I figured the crew would be totally into “greening” since the film shot in Oregon. I assumed that they would be a bunch of Birkenstock wearing, vegetarian eating, eco nerds. But they weren’t that at all. They were a skilled, insightful, film crew who knew what they were doing and what they needed to do their job and unfortunately that meant that some of them ended up revolting against most of the ideas set in place by Lauren.

Maybe they were upset because they thought she was getting paid more than they were, or maybe they thought she didn’t belong because she wasn’t in any of their unions. Have you ever seen a line item for Green Consulant? Who knows, all I know is it ended up being Gossip Girl meets An Inconvenient Truth, and I thought it was extremely interesting and also hilarious.

I had to make this into it’s own film. So I did. It is called GREENLIT. It premiered at SXSW in 2010 and is now out in VOD and DVD. (Btw- VOD is super green…no packaging!) You can see some of the drama on the trailer here: www.greenlit.org

The biggest lesson I learned about “greening” a film also applies to “greening” our lives. It takes a tremendous amount of effort to change even the nominal things. That is why it really isn’t done on sets in Hollywood, at least not like everyone says it is.

When we began in pre- production I thought that Lauren would be implementing change in every department. Perhaps she would be making sure that the wardrobe department was using bio degradable soap and all the costumes would be donated or used or organic cotton? Maybe she would make sure craft services is all local and organic, serving no paper plate products, and that the transpo department would consist of all hybrids or bio diesel vehicles. I was sure everyone would carpool. The make up department would only use phalate, paraben and cruelty free makeup right?  Turns out I had an overly idealistic idea of what “greening” a film was. All of these things were suggested and encouraged by Lauren but they didn’t happen– not fully anyway.

The main change that occurred going to a green set was that there were absolutely no disposable water bottles on set. And man, was the crew pissed. They wanted their water bottles. It was hot and the big jugs of water with tiny cups weren’t going to cut it. A few other minor changes happened as well. There was recycling on set, which shockingly had to be micromanaged by Lauren, and only on one day were they able to compost.

The reason more ‘greening’ didn’t happen on this indie film is because it wasn’t realistic. Not then anyway. And frankly, it was too expensive. Seventh Generation donated some stuff to the film, which was awesome, but we had to pay product placement services for that. Using 100 % recycled paper was definitely not in their budget so they used 30% recycled here and there, and when they could, they tried to double side scripts. Although that proved time consuming and caused more problems than it solved. Some of the crew camped out at one of the sites which production sold the idea to them that it was “greener” when no one had to drive to set every day, but I’m pretty sure that was due to the fact that they didn’t have the money to put the crew up in any hotels and it was just a few miles shy of the union rules which would require housing. After a 14 hour or + work day no crew would want to drive an hour home and back. So they pitched their tents and camped.

It was tough being “green”! Even the “green” producers who stayed in the same housing together drove separate cars to set, which confused the crew with their agenda. Were they really into being green or was this a publicity thing for the film so they could say they were? That is a question I ask now whenever I read about a studio or film “going green”. Not that it is bad, we have to start somewhere and doing the right thing for other reasons can’t be so bad if it is really for good, right? Hell, I made a movie about it-that I want people to buy and download so I can recoup my budget… how “green” could I be?

Tomorrow Part 2: The Hard Road To Indie Green.

Miranda Bailey is a Producer, Actress and now Documentary Film Director. She is a Partner at the production company Ambush Entertainment in Hollywood.  Upcoming films from Miranda include Every Day,  & Super- out in 2010.  Her past films include: Squid and the Whale, Wonderful World Oh in Ohio, Against the Current.  Her website: www.ambushentertainment.com

GREAT EXPECTATIONS: Not Just a Dickens Novel.

This entry was originally published at Hope For Film

What do Filmmakers want from film markets and what they can realistically get?

“Discerning the difference between a film that can actually sell well enough to justify having a third party sales agent and going to markets vs a film that is best served by DIY methods that should be planned and employed BEFORE the film’s first exhibition”

Guest post from Orly Ravid, Founder of The Film Collaborative (TFC)

We get questioned all the time by members and others about which markets should filmmakers attend and which sales agents should they go with. Having unrealistic expectations is dangerous. It sets people up to do nothing on their own but wait for some third party to make their dreams come true.

We’re just coming off of AFM. indieWIRE reports growth attendance at the market. See this article if you want to read the stats. They are however only relative to last year, a real low, and not addressing the question on everyone’s mind, what about the sales themselves.  AFM has always been known more for genre films and cast-driven films. Troma films do well for the genre category and Henry’s Crime starring Keanu Reeves, James Caan and Vera Farmiga is a cast driven narrative was being sold this year, for example.

It was decently busy from my p.o..v and buyers were there a bit more to buy than they were at say Toronto, according to our foreign sales partner, Ariel Veneziano of Re-Creation Media. But, the question is what are they there to buy and at what price?  The shift in the business from the 80’s and 90’s till now is not reversing itself and I don’t think it ever will. Prices have come down, dramatically because ancillary business has shifted so much, retailers have gone under, and supply has grown. That is the case across the board.

Digital services such as Fluent, Gravitas, Distribber, Brainstorm (all of whom we work with) were all at AFM, digital is where the business is now, not in getting big MGs per territory for most films anymore, not for most art house films. Of course there is some of that business still but the people benefiting from it are the Sales Companies with big libraries and the aggregators with the same. The individual sales prices, after expenses are deducted, are more often than not, not making money for the filmmakers,  not given the terms most companies offer, at least not from our vantage point, . Of course we’re not in the business of selling big genre films or cast-driven films so we are not addressing those. Docs do sell best to TV at doc markets such as Hot Docs and IDFA, to name two, and those so far still seem to be worth it and that business still has value.  And of course a lucky few theatrical-potential docs sell at Sundance and TIFF etc.

Why do I bring this up? Because we get questioned all the time by members and others about which markets should filmmakers attend and which sales agents should they go with and the truth is, very often the films are not viable for a sales agent because the sales would be too small and if a sales agent did take the film on, the filmmaker would never see a dime after the sales agents recouped their expenses and fees and after one has paid for Delivery. And then the sales agent  / sales company would have the right to do the DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION DIRECTLY that the FILMMAKER SHOULD BE DOING. That is the point of this blog.  Discerning the difference between a film that can actually sell well enough to justify having a third party sales agent and going to markets vs a film that is best served by DIY methods that should be planned and employed BEFORE the film’s first exhibition.

Stacey Parks recently sent this missive out to her members: “So AFM is coming to a close and the overall good news for everyone out there is that business is picking up from last year. Sales are brisk and even Pre-Sales are brisk for the right projects. I’ve met with several clients who are here at AFM and all of them are reporting good results in meeting a variety of people and companies as potential financiers for their projects, or sellers, or both.”

That’s exciting and we know Stacey knows her stuff and she’s a friend so all good. But I still want to know the numbers from everyone who sold a film, or didn’t after spending money trying, and ask all of you readers to share the real numbers, as we will of course (you will soon see), so that people can know what expectations are reasonable and what is not reasonable to expect.

Having unrealistic expectations is dangerous. It sets people up to do nothing on their own but wait for some third party to make their dreams come true. And then time goes by, months and even years, and one has done anything to build community around the film or get it out there. Then filmmakers are disappointed and blame others instead of making it happen for themselves.  There is no excuse for that anymore.

We announced a partnership with Palm Springs International Film Festival to help its filmmakers distribute and we will be working with other film festivals to do the same. Filmmakers are embracing Jon Reiss and Sheri Candler’s PMD concept and that can really create success via DIY distribution or get an audience started to give leverage in negotiating a deal.  The options for accessing Cable VOD and digital platform distribution and also having mobile Apps distribute the film are only growing, though of course the space gets only more glutted too.

But solutions are being worked out for that. Companies such as Gravitas are working with Cable operators vigorously to better program and highlight various categories of cinema, making it easier for audiences to find what they might be looking for. Comcast debuted a VOD search feature that imitates Google’s, and this will help in time: http://www.multichannel.com/article/459677-Comcast_Debuts_VOD_Sear

Verizon introduced Flex view to help consumers manage content on all their devices and all the players involved in digital are competing with each other to get as much good content to consumers in the most useful and user-friendly way to grow that market further, so whilst the space gets more glutted, there are more solutions in play to manage the paradox of choice a bit better and that’s why it’s imperative that filmmakers get engaged with their own success more and more, and sooner and sooner.  Lastly, these days, aggregators such as Cinetic and many distributors openly rely on filmmakers to do a lot of their own community building and marketing so if you are already doing the work, you might as well keep your rights.

Again, we do sales ourselves, we know there is still value in that, but we implore you filmmakers to do the research before you give up the rights and before you just forge forward trying to figure out which market to attend or having organizations like us do that for you, for many many films, there is no market you can attend that will be worth your while. Create your own market that will pay off in the long run.

-Orly Ravid

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 www.TheFilmCollaborative.org Orly runs TFC w/ her business partner, co-exec director Jeffrey Winter.