I don’t intend to get down on hobbies here; I love building model rockets with my son, but I don’t harbor any fantasies about earning a living from doing it (well, I do have a plan for a BowlOfNoses Summer Camp, but…). Thing is, there once was a time when all my friends earned a living making and sharing independent features. It didn’t feel like a hobby then, but now it does. I wonder if anyone still earns a consistent living making indie films?
Okay, the sales markets of Sundance & Toronto have increased my hopes that the economic situation for filmmakers will improve and, yes, “earning a living” is a relative phrase. True, many still are paying most of their bills from working in the film biz, but I suspect that either it is at a level 50% lower than it was three years ago, or else the company that pays them is earning substantially less than they were years back and just hasn’t passed the losses on to their employees beyond staff reductions. Yes, there are still some folks who hit a vein and get a windfall, but don’t mistake that good fortune as a career. I have seen highs and lows, but I don’t see consistency any more.
It’s not all doom mind you. Some people are adapting well to the current situation, working on lower budgets, and creating a variety of forms — but the earnings are at a much different level. The need to find ways to subsidize one’s creative passions has become more urgent than ever before. Speaking fees and consultancy gigs have become a necessary part of my balance sheet. Academia is growing more appealing by the day.
People used to toss off that Indie Film was the province of the rich or the young, as a way of saying that there was no long term survival path, but that was said most frequently by those that somehow had managed to embed themselves in the process — and thus contradicting their statement by their very existence. Those days are gone though. Indie film is only a viable stopover station and then only for the young and the rich. I am at a loss of how someone can earn enough to live in NYC making the kind of movies I did for the last two decades. It requires something completely different.
I wish it was as simple as scaling down. As budgets come down so do the stories and the styles by which they are told. Miracles occur on a regular basis and we are all treated to some beautiful work, but generally speaking, we are watching Norma Desmond’s words become our reality. As Indie’s stories get really small, not only does the audience follow suit, but the hope of a recovery becomes slimmer and slimmer. Part of the appeal of cinema is that it exposes the expansive nature of our lives — and that still is hard to do on a six or five figure budget (but not impossible).
There are many reasons to think, even to believe, that there is an alternative to this dark vision. Mike Ambs was right when he mused that the short form online crowd was building their side of the bridge much faster than the indie film side. As true as that may be, it ignores the fact that that progress is rarely done professionally. Yes it is done passionately, but it still requires those so driven that they have found an alternative way to afford a creative life than financial support from the industry they focus on.
When people speak of “profit” as the holy grail when speaking of “saving” indie film, they focus on the money because they want to survive. When people choose to make indie films, I don’t think they are ever really hoping to get rich, they just want to be able to survive doing what they love. Granted, very few are willing to live at subsistence levels in order to be an artist, but they still want to make a living, and hence they need to “profit” from their work. And right now I would wager that less than one percent of those that create indie films, “profit” from their work.
What is going to happen to the swarm of experts we’ve developed over that last two decades when we ultimately accept that the business is dead? As long as we are willing to drive the transactional price point to zero, artist will not support themselves by their practice? Do you really want to earn your living exploiting those whose passion prevents them from creating consistent work? Just because some are privileged enough by their reputation or wealth to aggregate libraries not by compensating at a respectable value, but by being the only legitimate option, does that mean that they should?
It is going to take a lot of thought and experimentation to get us on track towards a sustainable film industry of diverse and ambitious work. It is going to take a lot of patience. It is going to take a lot of collaboration.
Yes, it is true. Good Machine is back. But in a new and improved form. Perhaps we should have done a press release, but I thought I should do it here instead. Press releases are so yesterday.
If you went to Sundance, perhaps you noticed the secret stealth return of our so-called 90’s powerhouse. Or if you were at the Golden Globes, it must have caught your eye. Hell, even if you just watched the Golden Globes. If you missed all that, certainly by perusing the Oscar noms, something should have caused a bit of stir. I’ve been waiting for some sharp newshound to break with the story, but nope. So here’s the real buzz…
The Good Machinists seem to have now taken over indie film. The only difference between back then and now is that like any good thing, Good Machine the company achieved its own obsolescence. The Good Machinists each have their own shop. Call it, the decentralized approach. But look at what Good Machine achieved just this month.
My former assistant and partner, former head of production, Anthony Bregman, nabbed the biggest sale (I think) at Sundance for his production MY IDIOT BROTHER. I haven’t checked, but also think he’s giving Mr. Rudin chase for the title of Most Prolific Producer (when I asked Ant his secret, he replied “Have four children, and you don’t have a choice: you have to produce!”). His credit list also includes recent collaborations with many former Good Machine directors, including Nicole Holofcener and Bob Pulcini & Shari Springer Berman.
Good Machine’s 2nd initial hire, and the first employee to enter the producer ranks, Mary Jane Skalski, had one of the best received films of the Sundance fest in her 3rd collaboration with Tom McCarthy, WIN WIN. But why stop there? She was also in the elite club of Sundance twofers, with the fest opener and competition stand out PARIAH, which Mary Jane Executive Produced — and Focus just announced that they picked up. No rest for the weary, eh?
The whole time Anthony was a partner at This is that, and even some of the time he was at Good Machine, he had one assistant, and a remarkable one at that. With Bregman’s new company, Likely Story, Stefanie Azpiazu has taken on Executive Producer duties (what are those exactly, btw?). She holds that credit on Jesse Peretz’s MY IDIOT BROTHER, as well as several others, including last year’s Sundance opener, PLEASE GIVE (and this year’s WGA nominee).
Another former assistant of mine, now the head of hottest international sales company in the entire universe (aka FilmNation), Glen Basner, recently decided to expand his company’s portfolio into the specialized arena. Awhile back he told me he had found something that should spark. But I think 12 Oscar nominations for THE KING’S SPEECH is an outright bonfire.
Of course, my fellow Good Machine founder, the legendary erudite Mr. James Schamus, is always expected to do well, and last year — back before Sundance returned as a sales market — , he picked up a nice little title in THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT, and now has four Oscar noms for his label.
The founder of Good Machine International, David Linde, could well have decided to take some time off after running a studio, but as long as there’s great movies to make, I don’t think David will be taking a break. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu may be the most gifted filmmaker out there, but his films are challenges, thankfully. But that means they will never be easy to get made, but luckily he has a Lava Bear on his side. David EP’d this year’s entry to my top ten list, BIUTIFUL and yes, as a result has some more Oscar noms to his credit.
Anne Carey, my partner at This is that, did not go to Sundance this year. But that did not stop The Hollywood Reporter from naming her on their Indie Hit List the hottest producer there:
THE PRODUCER
Then: Lawrence Bender On team Tarantino since Reservoir Dogs, he has also handled Oscar-winning pics like Good Will Hunting and An Inconvenient Truth.
Now: Anne Carey The former WMA agent toiled at Good Machine before partnering with Ted Hope on pics including Adventureland and The American.
And why not, her tenacity and genius, did yield the “coolest” film of the year in THE AMERICAN, which happened to enjoy the distinction of being the only This is that production to grace the top of the box office charts. (PS. Hey Anne: that wiki needs some updating! And: Hey HRptr: she wasn’t an agent, she just worked there!)
Unfortunately, Good Machine can’t take credit for WINTER’S BONE, but that won’t stop me from trying. After all, Ang Lee’s fantastic RIDE WITH THE DEVIL might have been Good Machine’s biggest financial flop (despite being a great movie), but it was the first film to be adapted by WINTER BONE’s novelist Daniel Woddrell. Okay, it’s a stretch but certainly it speaks a tad of our mutual fine taste for the man’s prose and stories (even if Ms. Granik has turned down our efforts to work with her!).
Okay, so this does leaves some Good Machinists still unaccounted for, but after winning some Globes last year, Ross Katz is entitled to some time off. Interestingly enough, Ross should take the reigns on a film Bregman is producing and Basner is arranging the financing on; the film, by title only is a mash up of several of our former projects, THE AMATEUR AMERICAN. One of Mr. Schamus’ former assistants, Jawal Nga, has been active on the producing front, with last year’s Sundance hit HOWL and prior Grand Jury Winner FORTY SHADES OF BLUE to his credit. And of course there’s a squad of GMers doing great things behind the scenes too, some that will no doubt start some bonfires of benevolence in short order.
Today’s guest post is by Orly Ravid of The Film Collaborative(TFC), the first non-profit, full service provider dedicated to the distribution of independent film. Orly was featured as one of HFF’s Brave Thinkers Of Indie Film, 2010.
*Part III to will be written in the aftermath of the glow of the fest.
Sundance 2011, insofar as distribution was concerned, saw a spike on both the traditional sales and the DIY front. 26 deals were done so far and more to come. One difference between this year’s Festival and those of recent years is that several acquisitions were done prior to the Festival and more deals occurred right at the beginning of the Festival rather than taken several days or weeks to materialize. In addition, some of the acquisition dollar figures were bigger than in recent times. There was a definite sense of ‘business is back’ (though mostly still for bigger films with either name directors or cast or both – and this we address below). And DIY is seeing a new dawn with directors like Kevin Smith announcing a self-distribution plan and Sundance’s solidified commitment to helping artists crowdfund (via Kickstarter) and market their films (via Facebook for example) access certain digital distribution platforms (in the works and TBA).
Starting with the deals. So far I counted 26 (one at least was a pre-buy / investment in production) and two so far are remake rights deals.
I only list the deal points that were publicized… meaning if no $$$ is listed then it was not announced.
Deals done Pre-Sundance:
1. Project Nim (James Marsh who did Man on Wire) – sold to HBO for a hefty yet unreported sum.
2. Becoming Chaz – produced by renowned World Of Wonder and sold to OWN (actually we gleaned OWN invested in the film and at the fest Oprah announced her commitment to doing for docs what she did for books via a Doc Club).
3. Uncle Kent went to IFC
4. The Greatest Movie Ever Sold (Morgan Spurlock) – went to Sony Classics.
Deals done at Sundance according to sections:
US Dramatic Competition:
5. The Ledge: sold to IFC
6. Like Crazy: (Director of Douchebag) – Paramount for a worldwide deal – $4,000,000.
7. Martha Marcy May Marlene: sold to Fox Searchlight, congrats to TFC Board of Advisor EXP, Ted Hope.
8. Circumstance: Participant is funding the release and will (along with the filmmakers) choose a distribution partner, we hope Roadside Attractions.
9. Homework: Fox Searchlight
10. Another Earth: (Mark Cahill) – Fox Searchlight – a $1.5 – $2 mil deal with aggressive P&A as reported and for US and all English speaking territories.
11. Gun Hill Road: Motion Film Group
12. Pariah: Focus Features
Premieres (‘names’ in films):
13. My Idiot Brother: TWC – $6,000,000 for US and key territories.
14. The Details: TWC – $7,500,000 MG and $10,000,000 P&A
15. I Melt With You: Magnolia (reported mid-high 6-figure deal reportedly w/ healthy backend)
16. Life in a Day: NatGeo Films
17. Margin Call: Joint deal with Lions Gate and Roadside Attractions
18. Perfect Sense: IFC
19. The Future: (Miranda July) – Roadside Attractions
U.S. Documentary Competition:
20. Buck: Sundance Selects
21. The Last Mountain: Dada Films (MJ Peckos and Steven Raphael)
22. Page One: A Year Inside the New York Times: Magnolia and Participant
Park City at Midnight:
23. Silent House: Liddell Entertainment
World Cinema Dramatic Competition:
24. The Guard: Sony Pictures Classics
Not distribution deals per se but Fox Searchlight bought worldwide remake rights to
25. The Bengali Detective &
26. TWC bought remake rights to Knuckle.
Please let me know if I missed any deals and feel free to comment in this blog. Of course more may be announced even as this posts and I am on a plane.
So we see mostly name filmmakers or cast but also definitely a few non-names generating deals the details of which are not publicized thus far.
AND NOW ON the DIY side:
RE: SLITTING RIGHTS & DIY: Andrew Hurwitz and Alan Sacks wrote an article in the Hollywood Reporter addressing all the same stuff TFC has talked about before, splitting rights, working and sometimes conflating windows and not settling for bad deal terms when one could do better on one’s own working with consultants etc. It’s nice to see trades addressing this in a context that speaks to more traditional industry players.
THE FLAT FEE MODEL EXPANDS: Distribber (now owned by IndieGOGO) announced a partnership that has been brewing with one of our Cable VOD partners, and TFC Board of Advisor Meyer Schwarztein of Brainstorm Media. Basically it expands Distribber’s flat fee digital distribution offerings to include Cable VOD (and also Hulu). If a film gets onto all key MSOs the fee is set for now to be $9999 and there are prices per platform if a film cannot make it on to any given platform so that one is not paying for a platform or service they are not getting onto. As per the press release: “The films will be presented to audiences on the new “Filmmaker Direct” label; consumers who purchase films on “Filmmaker Direct” will know that 100% of profits go directly to the filmmaker, instead of to a parade of “HollywoodMiddlemen.” For more info check out: http://www.distribber.com. My only cautionary note: this is not a great idea for smaller films for which the gross revenues that would not justify the flat fee. One must remember and always know to ask about the splits that the Cable VOD aggregator is getting from the MSOs. They range, to the best of my knowledge to-date, between 30% and 60% depending on company and films. Studios get the higher splits for the obvious reasons. And so one has to do the math. And of course also evaluate MARKETING (which will be the focus on the 3rd and final part of this Sundance Blog series). In any case, we work with both Adam Chapnick at Distribber and Meyer Schwarzstein at Brainstorm and are fond of and trust them both.
BRAND NAME FILMMAKER DIY: Kevin Smith fueled the torch of DIY in his own flame-filled way. He auctioned off the distribution of Sundance Premiere Selection RED STATE to himself and has pre-booked theatres and plans to be his own decider in distribution, sans print ads (Amen). We wish him well but caution his very “old world” production and release budget (4mil Prod & and 2.5mil to release (for prints etc)… immediate launch broad release plan… a slow build never hurt anyone. David Dinnerstein formerly of Paramount Classics and Lakeshore consulted on the release. For more on this topic just search the WWW.
ABOUT THE SHORTS:
DIY Hats off to the Sundance SHORTS filmmaker such as Trevor Anderson and I believe 11 others who are on Sundance’s YouTube Screening Room Initiative with tens of thousands of views. Anderson exceeded 94,000 views as of the other day and has put all his shorts including this year’s HIGH LEVEL BRIDGE on www.EggUp.com which allows him to monetize them via transactional digital sales. TFC regularly refers filmmakers to EggUp and now also TopSpin though our gury Sheri Candler advises TopSpin works better for filmmakers with an already robust following. Whilst Anderson may not be getting rich just yet, it’s a perfect model for a prolific and vibrant filmmaker who is building a brand and getting his/her work out there.
Last but not least, Sundance announces its DIY oriented initiative.
Sundance Institute announced (I’m now quoting from its press release) its “Three-Year Plan with Kickstarter as Creative Funding Collaborator / Facebook® to Provide Guidance to Institute Alumni… A new program to connect its artists with audiences by offering access to top-tier creative funding and marketing backed by the Institute’s promotional support…The creative funding component was announced today with Kickstarter, the largest platform in the world for funding creative projects. A new way to fund and follow creative projects, tens of thousands of people pledge millions of dollars to projects on Kickstarter every month. In exchange for support, backers receive tangible rewards crafted and fulfilled by the project’s creator. Support is neither investment, charity, nor lending, but rather a mix of commerce and patronage that allows artists to retain 100% ownership and creative control of their work while building a supportive community as they develop their projects… In the coming months, Sundance Institute will build an online hub of resources related to independent distribution options, funding strategies and other key issues. The goal is to provide for filmmakers a central location to explore case studies and best practices, in addition to live workshops and training opportunities with Institute staff, alumni, industry experts and key partners. As the first of these partners bringing their expertise to the community, Facebook will offer Institute alumni advice, educational materials, and best-practices tips on how to build and engage audiences via the service…Further development will include access to a broad and open array of third-party digital distribution platforms backed by Sundance Institute promotional support. In the future, additional opportunities for theatrical exhibition will be explored in collaboration with organizations such as Sundance Cinemas, members of the national Art House Project, and others.”
I have been championing festivals getting involved with exhibition since and distribution beyond the festival itself since 2005 and discussed some options and ideas with Sundance staffers last year and am thrilled about this powerful and liberating announcement that so connects up with TFC’s mission whilst having some serious muscle and we look forward to being involved in some way hopefully.
MARKETING IS KING: One thing no one talks about in much detail is MARKETING. Of course the big guns have the cash to buy marketing but the small distribs and aggregators are starting to be difficult to distinguish at times, and yet sometimes distributors do earn their fees by investing real talent and expertise and even money in marketing. So comparing what one can do oneself (if one does not get the big fat offer) with what traditional but small distribution deals bring will be the focus of the 3rd and last post in this series to come after Rotterdam but hopefully before Berlinale.
Over and out for now. Questions and Comments always welcome!
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.
HopeForFilm Named 1 of 10 Top Sites For Filmmakers
It is no longer the dawn. We are now officially in the new era of a Truly Free Film Culture.
Yes, the business of indie film is back. The rapidity, volume, and consistency of dealsblossoming ($30M and counting!) at Sundance should give investors more confidence that you no longer have to rely just on foreign; the US acquisition climate seems quite robust again. Whew. But the good news does not end there.
Indie Film has been infected by a new breed that — like those that came before them — refuses to ask for permission. But unlike the earlier wave, their go-get-them attitude doesn’t stop at production, it extends into all the pillars of cinema — from discovery and participation on through production, distro, appreciation, and presentation. The content, the form, the plans of cinema are not only for re-examination, but the rules have been thrown out. Time to get out of the way, and let the fresh air disrupt the stale space.
It is so happening in every which way. Yes, there are new stars, but also new ways of working. This Sundance there are plenty examples of “tribal filmmaking” (thanks to Brit Marling for that phrase) — teams of collaborators, working together, and moving beyond single authorship. The web world calls this “collabs”, but the spirit of this can be found in Martha Marcy May Marlene, The Sound Of My Voice, The Woods, and Another Earth. We will find more teams taking over in the days ahead — and it is an incredibly refreshing antidote to the antiquated construct of pure “auteur” cinema.
New spirit is there in old bodies too. Kevin Smith’s self-distribution plan recognizes the realities of the day. No one in indie film has used social media as well as Kevin Smith has. He understands clearly the need to eventize his picture, and he has done it well. Things started off with a bang at Sundance, and he plans to keep it going. He gave a nice lecture on his past and his plan for the future. In between the curses, he lays it out how he plans to go forward. His roadshow approach of teaming the local premieres with his live act is a value-add propisition that his million plus fan community hopefully can not resist.
Smith’s RED STATE plan has the core indie value at it’s heart. To me previously I only really saws this value in terms of content & production, but now has extended well beyond this. Indie refuses to ask others for permission. Smith makes movies his way — as he learned what happens when he doesn’t. He gets his fans the way his fans get him. It is not a one way street, but a true community. He might be divisive, but he is a model to follow. Perhaps, precisely because he is divisive!
The failure of corporate filmmaking to represent the world we live in, particularly compared to indie’s success at that, is evident at fest like Sundance. It is also painfully drummed home by the Oscar noms, when all the Best Actress candidates hail from indie projects. As long as corporate filmmaking fails to offer realistic takes on women’s lives, Indie Film will always thrive as a welcome alternative. Sundance must be acknowledged too as a tremendous generator of quality content; Sundance’s responsibility in delivering 15 Oscar nominees is nothing short of mind-blowing. If the world was just, the Oscar would be renamed the Bob.
I left Sundance boosted and relieved. As great as it was to license our film to a top distributor for a significant profit, it is more the spirit launch that I seriously needed — and that came from the individuals I got to meet with and hang out with. We are at time of change — but as someone pointed out to me, what is so great about the now we are in, is that the new breed recognizes change as a constant. They will not take this moment for granted. They accept the fluidity of all. They recognize how the whole world must turn for that one leaf to fall. And they are okay with it.
We ARE going to work together to make this better. Whew!
What was your filmmaking background before making Artois the Goat?
RICHARD: I had always been a movie junkie; it was the thing that dad and I did together. We watched Evil Dead 2 late one night while I was a freshman in high school and a light went on in my head. I decided that this was something I wanted to do.
I got onto the high school news team and was in charge of making “commercials” and then enrolled in an independent studies class to further explore the process. For college, I enrolled in the University of Texas at Austin’s film production program. Sophomore year I met Kyle and subsequently his brother Cliff.
We had an instant working relationship, and have been working on each other’s projects ever since.
After graduating, Kyle told me he had a feature screenplay and that I was producing, and here I am.
Where did the idea come from? What was the writing process like?
RICHARD: Kyle had been writing a screenplay based on his own life about a young man discovering his passion and pursuing it with everything he had, while keeping a long distance relationship alive. He had laid out the film’s structure and thematic territory, but wanted a substitute for film-making. Something new and interesting. Something that people could get into. Something with an artistic process.
While he was writing, his brother was working at a cheese shop and would bring home all sorts of artisanal cheeses past their sell date. One particular cheese was made locally by a woman who had six goats and milked them every morning and sold cheese. That was her life. After a bit of research, it was plugged in and it worked.
Writing was a series of late nights after work, with the guys writing, taking notes, writing over each other, arguing, and then rewriting. Lather rinse repeat repeat repeat sorta thing, which left us with a pretty polished screenplay by the time we shot.
How did you find funding for the film?
RICHARD: Funding came from an appeal to our friends and family. They knew this was something we’d been working towards for a long time, so a lot of people invested to help us live our dream. Kyle, Cliff and myself ponied up our savings and loaded up my credit cards to fill the gaps.
What type of camera did you use to shoot the film and what did you like about it .... and hate about it?
RICHARD: We shot with the Panasonic HVX-200 with a Letus 35mm lens adapter. It was really familiar to all of us, as we had worked with the DVX all through school. The p2 card system was great for us. It was nice to not have to worry about changing or losing tapes. We had a few problems with the Letus. Early in the production it became a bit uncalibrated. Luckily we recognized it and had it fixed.
What was the smartest thing you did during production? The dumbest?
RICHARD: The smartest thing was probably listening to our DP about buying the 35mm lens adapter and hiring an accomplished sound recordist and listening to him on set. As a result, our images are fantastic with an incredible filmic look and our location sound is clean. We only had to ADR one small scene, which made posting that much easier.
Also, early on, we set an arbitrary start date, and worked backwards from there. Regardless of how things were going in preproduction, we held to that date, and eventually made it happen. It served as a really strong motivator to get things done.
The dumbest was running the production with less than skeleton crew. We really didn’t have the money or the resources to have a larger crew, but it really burdened us, particularly myself and our cinematographer. An extra set of hands or two would have everything run much smoother.
And, finally, what did you learn from making the film that you can take to other projects?
RICHARD: How crucial having an adequate preproduction period really is. It’s always stressful when things bleed over into production. Accomplish as much as possible early.
Now available on Hulu: http://www.hulu.com/watch/201361/artois-the-goat
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Sundance Teams With KickStarter & Facebook For New Initiative To Connect Artists With Audiences
PARK CITY, UT — Sundance Institute today announced a new program to connect its artists with audiences by offering access to top-tier creative funding and marketing backed by the Institute’s promotional support. These essential services will act as building blocks for future program components which aim to provide filmmakers access to a broad and open array of third-party digital distribution platforms. Adding to the nonprofit Institute’s acclaimed programs for Screenwriters, Directors, Film Composers, Producers and Theatre artists around the world, the new services were developed based on research and input from filmmakers, industry advisors, its Technology Committee and its Board of Directors, including President Robert Redford. The creative funding component was announced today with Kickstarter, the largest platform in the world for funding creative projects.
A new way to fund and follow creative projects, tens of thousands of people pledge millions of dollars to projects on Kickstarter every month. In exchange for support, backers receive tangible rewards crafted and fulfilled by the project’s creator. Support is neither investment, charity, nor lending, but rather a mix of commerce and patronage that allows artists to retain 100% ownership and creative control of their work while building a supportive community as they develop their projects. “Technology now allows filmmakers to fund and make films in ways we could never have even conceived. Just as we did 30 years ago, the Institute is responding to a need, with a responsibility to help the individual artist,” Redford said. “Today’s media landscape presents opportunities for audiences and artists to connect in new and exciting ways. This program is a natural and much-needed extension of our mission,” said Keri Putnam, Executive Director, Sundance Institute. “With unparalleled recognition worldwide, Sundance Institute is in the unique position as a nonprofit to bring together a wide range of services and lend invaluable promotional support.”
Creative Funding Support
Kickstarter has agreed to provide branding, educational, and promotional support to Sundance Institute alumni. More than 350,000 people have pledged over $30 million dollars to projects on Kickstarter since its launch in spring 2009. To launch the collaboration, the first alumni workshops took place at the Sundance Film Festival this week, conducted by Kickstarter co-founder Yancey Strickler and attended by a range of artists from first time filmmakers to seasoned veterans. Beginning this spring, the Institute will curate alumni projects at Kickstarter.com and drive alumni and fans to support projects in various stages of funding. In addition, Sundance.org will showcase projects and interviews with artists on a monthly basis for even further reach.
“We’re excited to be working with the Sundance Institute and its esteemed community,” said Kickstarter cofounder, Yancey Strickler. “Kickstarter has been an effective tool for artists of all stripes, and we’re looking forward to the projects that this collaboration will bring to life.” Education and Resources
In the coming months, Sundance Institute will build an online hub of resources related to independent distribution options, funding strategies and other key issues. The goal is to provide for filmmakers a central location to explore case studies and best practices, in addition to live workshops and training opportunities with Institute staff, alumni, industry experts and key partners.
As the first of these partners bringing their expertise to the community, Facebook will offer Institute alumni advice, educational materials, and best-practices tips on how to build and engage audiences via the service. Earlier this week at the Sundance Film Festival, Facebook led the first in a series of hands-on workshops for Institute alumni. During these workshops, artists received unique training on free tools and apps for social engagement, education in the types of pages and profiles they can utilize, and insight into Facebook’s advertising opportunities. Artists needing more direct assistance were able to share Pages while Facebook staff assisted them in making improvements and changing settings. Facebook and Sundance Institute have had a relationship for years and last year provided Page assistance for films including Waiting for Superman, A Small Act and Restrepo among 20 others.
All Sundance Institute artists from Sundance Film Festival, Labs and Grantees, will be the first to gain access to the programs. Further development will include access to a broad and open array of third-party digital distribution platforms backed by Sundance Institute promotional support. In the future, additional opportunities for theatrical exhibition will be explored in collaboration with organizations such as Sundance Cinemas, members of the national Art House Project, and others.
To execute the program, Sundance Institute has hired Christopher Horton as Associate Director of Filmmaker Services. Horton, who will relocate to Los Angeles after nearly a decade with Cinetic Media, will work closely with Joseph Beyer, Director of Digital Initiatives, Katie Kennedy, Associate Director of Development, Corporate along with the Institute’s Program Directors.
Legal Services for Sundance Institute have been graciously donated by O’Melveny & Myers LLP, headed by a team including Paul Iannicelli and Chris Brearton.
Kickstarter Kickstarter is the largest platform for funding creative projects in the world. Every month on Kickstarter, tens of thousands of people pledge millions of dollars and help bring creative projects from the worlds of music, film, art, technology, design, food, publishing and other creative fields to life. The Kickstarter community features projects by Oscar winners, Grammy winners, TED Fellows, New York Times best- sellers, Pulitzer Prize finalists, and thousands of others. Kickstarter is open to creative projects big and small, serious and whimsical, traditional and avant-garde. www.kickstarter.com
Sundance Institute Sundance Institute is a global nonprofit organization founded by Robert Redford in 1981. Through its artistic development programs for directors, screenwriters, producers, composers and playwrights, the Institute seeks to discover and support independent film and theatre artists from the United States and around the world, and to introduce audiences to their new work. The Institute promotes independent storytelling to inform, inspire, and unite diverse populations around the globe. Internationally recognized for its annual Sundance Film Festival, Sundance Institute has nurtured such projects as Born into Brothels, Trouble the Water, Son of Babylon, Amreeka, An Inconvenient Truth, Spring Awakening, Light in the Piazza and Angels in America. www.sundance.org
In an earlier blog post, we talked about the use of surprise in filmmaking. We mentioned that maybe surprise isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Surprise is related to mystery. Think about a birthday package. If you genuinely don't know what's in the box -- and it turns out to be something you really want -- than that surprise becomes memorable and effective.
And yet, it only lasts for a moment.
You can never truly re-live that moment of surprise. Same goes with movies. Once you know the secret, it's no longer a surprise. (Unless you have a very bad memory and can't remember anything.)
Now, that doesn't mean a movie that uses the element of surprise is necessarily bad. There are very good movies that use surprise. It's just that if you were to watch the movie a second time, that particular scene is no longer operating in the same way.
For example, when you re-watch The Empire Strikes Back for the second, third, fourth (or you fill in the blank) time, you will never experience the I-can't-believe-it!-Darth-Vader-is-Luke's-father! moment again.
No, instead of surprise, it now becomes tension. Or rather, dramatic irony.
We know the secret. In the movie, Luke doesn't know it. Even in Star Wars, the whole Ben Kenobi line about how Vader murdered Luke's father brings new meaning after you've watched all three of the original trilogy.
This is probably why Star Wars fans keep coming back to these movies. They weren't just about the surprise or shock of the moment. A movie should be enjoyed on different levels. An element of surprise should be able to morph nicely into dramatic irony.
I’ve had the pleasure of working with Lance Weiler for maybe two years now. I love how he thinks. I love how he takes that thought and transforms it into action. Process is more key to what he does, than virtually anyone else I have worked with. The journey is the destination. He is willing to walk without knowing where it all might be going. He is collaborative to the Nth the degree. His vision for cinema truly knows no limits.
Wired Magazine singled him out this summer as one of the fathers of transmedia. BusinessWeek credited him with changing cinema alongside Thomas Edison, The Warner Bros., and James Cameron. Between his features, The Workbook Project, & DIY Days, the man is profoundly generative.
If you were in Sundance this past week (and even if you weren’t), you probably witnessed how he infected Park City with a Pandemic. Others certainly did. Jamie Stuart shot this beautiful video for Filmmaker Magazine on Lance’s Pandemic activities. FearNet has acquired his short which was screening at the fest. For those that like to hold their stories in their hand, you can follow it on Twitter here. AND of course there is a website. Granted, I am producing the feature, but believe me when I tell you it is thrilling, horrifying, beautiful, and groundbreaking; it’s a shame you have to wait until I raise the money to see it.
Christine Vachon and I also got to speak to Lance for KillerHope on Hulu.
Lance created this short as a style template for collaborators throughout the world to help capture the outbreak in their local territories. Check it out and get filming!
A “polite” pass is quite contrary to substantive notes. When they are polite, they don’t want to see you again. If they really liked you and your project they’d be cruel. Or something close to it. So how do you know they never want to see you again?
It’s too close to what we are already committed to.
We can’t wait to see what you do/have next!
We’d be interested if you beef up the comedy/action/horror/penis jokes.
Our slate is too full to pay it the attention it deserves.
We have very defined focus these days.
It doesn’t fit our model.
We love it, but you know who would really get this project? Here let me give you so&so’s number/email.
I think Star #23 would really respond to this. If you got Star #23, we’d really be interested in it. It’s perfect for them. Get them and we are IN!
You really are onto something here. Thing is, we would need a regular and consistent supply for this audience — we can’t do just one. You should build a whole slate around this.
Come back to us when you’ve built out the transmedia components.*
Come back to us when you’ve built up a substantial community.*
*= Okay, they don’t actually say this yet, but they will by the end of 2012 (or is it 2013?)
To think I once got to see movies when I went to film festivals…
I had one film to share with folks this time around, Sean Durkin’s MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE, which I had the pleasure and good fortune to Executive Produce — even still I did not plan to see any others. I knew I was going to be too busy with the work that festivals have become for me.
The reception for the filmwasgreat — which has generated a lot of meetings (and which has yielded some niceannouncements ). I forgot to read the latest Exec Prod job description though and did not realize it now means moderating press conferences. Check out the video here, and let me know how you feel I did.
When I wasn’t dealing and celebrating Sean’s movie, I was doing my part to aid in the promotion of indie film.
Christine Vachon and I have been doing this talk show on and off now for several years, now dubbed KILLER / HOPE. Hulu’s got it up on their Sundance page. Please check it out while you still can (at least in all its glory). New episodes will be added daily throughout the festival. Additionally, we were invited to talk to Eugene Hernandez for the local NPR station. Gotta get the word out, but man does all that yapping, make for some seriously dry mouth.
But man, what a test of will power it is. I admit I am an addict for great film, and even noble failures. To be in Park City and to have booked myself into back to back meetings to extent that I am unable to watch movies, leaves me quaking and shaking. I want to see some movies!
I recently met with a writer/director whom I hadn’t seen in over ten years. The decade was hard for him and he had worked only on other people’s projects — and not projects that he respected. He had written scripts and they were good, but they were not going anywhere. He was frustrated with the business. He wanted a magic cure, but I did not have it. I was already trying to do too much to try to help him at this time.
His situation was like that of many filmmakers I encounter. In addition to the advice I put forth on this blog, I recommended this:
Do not give up the fight. Prep even more for the battles. The film biz is neither smoke or white lies. Regardless of budget, film is an expensive labor-intensive time-suck. It requires so much from so many for so long. Everyone who collaborates on a project has little to gain in comparison with the director. The question is always how to gain others’ trust, commitment, loyalty. Demonstrating your investment and leadership is how it all begins. There is nothing better to do than to be generative and create work on a regular basis — any kind of work. Help people find and discover you.
I hope it helps somewhat. I know it’s only words. And I had too much on my plate to offer anything more that that. I hope they keep on pushing through. And that you do too. It will be worth it, if only to show the rest of us that we should’ve when we could’ve. But even if that never happens, I still believe that good work is worth it regardless.
Yes, I am trying to remind myself of all of this as I write. Don’t give up the fight!
Thursday, January 20, 2011
What Is The #1 Most Important Thing You Can Do For Your Film Aside From…
Today’s guest post is from IndieFlix founder and CEO Scilla Andreen.
What is the #1 most important thing you can do for your film aside from telling a good story?
It’s not what you think and it’s often taken for granted. I believe the answer is to honor your film and the people who support it by having meaningful engagement in everything that you do.
Yes, it sounds broad and vague and it falls into the category of listen to your gut, but when applied to each and every action you take it becomes a highly, customized, sharpshooting tool that prioritizes your time and money. It will act as your compass on your filmmaking journey.
I am a filmmaker turned distributor out of pure necessity. I had to start IndieFlix because I couldn’t fully comprehend standard distribution. No matter how many times it was explained to me it felt wrong. I would nod yes and wait for that aha moment but it never came. I didn’t understand how indie filmmakers would ever make money? We launched IndieFlix in 2005 with 36 films and now have a growing library of over 2500 films.
I spend much of my time experimenting with different ways to create meaningful, audience engagement that can be converted into meaningful revenue. The key operating word here is “meaningful”. If we don’t include this element in our work all of our efforts and energy is for naught. Now that I have adopted this policy I learn something new everyday. I have gone from hurriedly getting hundreds of films up and selling on all major platforms to spending more time listening to feedback, analyzing data and noticing what works and what doesn’t.
I created a movie game called Film Festival in a Box that has evolved into a movie club based on honoring the filmmakers and respecting the desires of the audience. I didn’t rush and it went from concept to market in less than 6 months. Slowing down seems to move things along much more efficiently. Each film has it’s own path and we must honor that path and be realistic in our expectations. Go ahead and dream big but do the research and don’t assume. Filmmakers must be smart and have a good team. Ask for help. Share your needs. Collaborate. People will come out of the woodwork to assist. This is one of the most exciting times to be in our industry.
There now exists an abundance of free information, tools, technology and delivery platforms available to us. We’re bound to find some success right? Wrong. It’s all about the choices we make and how we use these tools to connect the dots.
Here’s a great example. The Weinstein’s deal with Google: they took proven, quality content and made it available for practically nothing on one of the world’s busiest platforms, YouTube. The Michael Moore documentary Sicko, has a meager 151 paid views and is currently the most-rented Weinstein movie in the past few months. Surprising? Not really, peddling Weinstein films on YouTube is like selling Prada shoes at Wal-Mart. I don’t think it’s a good fit at all, just as I wouldn’t want to go to Denny’s for sushi. The offering of the content doesn’t fit the platform. YouTube is free. Why would anyone pay for something there? So, do the research and make choices that are right for your film. Honor your project. Honor the platform. Respect the demographics.
Think about meaningful engagement for yourself. Does having tens of thousands of fans to share every step of your process feel meaningful or are you exhausting yourself trying to keep the beast fed? Honor the relationships you create. Keep it manageable.
I think that a smaller group of “meaningful” fans, friends or followers who believe in you is a much more effective way to build long-lasting, measurable audience engagement.
We are all so inundated. Let’s slow things down and adopt the less is more approach. Let’s be better listeners to others and to ourselves. Quality over quantity is powerful and much more viral. So, circling back to honoring your story, the art of filmmaking and the way in which you share it with others is like eating your meal slowly appreciating every bite and savoring all the different flavors. That is something to experience and talk about. That is meaningful.
What do you think is the #1 most important thing you can do for your movie aside from telling a good story?
Scilla Andreen (CEO/Co-founder IndieFlix.com) award winning producer, director and Emmy nominated costume designer, Scilla has deep roots in the entertainment industry and is a popular speaker, juror and tireless champion of independent film. In 2004 Scilla co-founded IndieFlix.com a next generation film distribution and discovery site founded on the principles of community, promotion, syndication and transparency.
What was your filmmaking background before making A Genesis Found?
LEE: A Genesis Found was my first professional endeavor as a filmmaker (professional in terms of our approach and ultimate goals-- not that any of us got paid upfront). I'd been involved with making films, seriously, since I was 17-- I worked as a PA on a graduate thesis short film that was shooting in rural Alabama (where I'm from, and where the filmmaker was from, though he and most the crew were in from LA and Nashville). That led me to some PA, Grip, Gaffer work on some music videos, commercials, reality TV, shorts, and features in Birmingham throughout high school.
Of course, I'd been making my own films since I was 14 or so, but not really "seriously" until late high school, and certainly not anything good until I studied Telecommunication and Film at the University of Alabama (Class of '07, Roll Tide). In college I kinda stopped doing hired gigs (though I did help occasionally on some DIY features and docs) and focused more on work with a filmmaking club we started on campus, producing shorts and taking advantage of the typically underused TCF equipment room. There my mentor, Aaron Greer, who came from a very low-budget, DIY background, was very supportive of all the outside of class work we were doing-- that was kinda his ethos, and the ethos of the dept, that you gotta do it yourself because no one is going to hold your hand, give you a break, or do it for you.
I also met my producer partner, Benjamin Stark, there, as well as most of the major behind-the-scenes collaborators on Genesis-- we all kinda learned together through this prolific, ceaseless out-of-class work we were doing together which set us up well for our feature aspirations soon after graduation.
Where did the idea come from? What was the writing process like?
LEE: My senior year at UA, when I started writing what ultimately became Genesis, initially we wanted to take advantage of the school's equipment room one last time and make another 30 to 40 minute featurette-length short that dealt with a treasure hunt at a Civilian Conservation Corps camp in the 1930's. Aaron, again our collective mentor and film professor, was pretty adamant we, instead, since we'd already done some shorts that length, move on to start work on something we could actually use outside of school-- he kinda showed us that, for the first time, we were ready to move into features, which was our ultimate goal to begin with.
So since we knew there'd be no way we could afford a feature set entirely in the 1930s, we decided to use a story similar to the featurette idea as a flashback, and have the core of the story take place in modern day. My father, and in turn myself, has always had a novel interest in ancient astronaut theory, so that eventually found its way into the script, to tie to the Moundville setting (Moundville was a major prehistoric civilization of the Mississippian Culture in Central Alabama, and some mysteries about its birth and culture still exist).
The process was exciting, and relatively short, though totally consuming. I wrote only one full draft, but wrote about 80 to 90 pages in two to three previous drafts. And then, of course, once I got a draft I liked, I revised it countless times. This wasn't the first feature-length script I'd written-- the Christmas before, I wrote an 80-page script where I got out most of my rookie growing pains; so going in I had a pretty realistic idea of what I was doing and what the process would be like for writing Genesis.
One thing I found out very quickly was how valuable and important research is. Going in, I did do a fair share of research before writing, but mostly on the more fun, novel aspects of the script (ie the "alien" and genre angles); so, subsequently, the first drafts were pretty inconsistent, gimmicky and awful. But, as I started doing more and more research on real anthropology, archaeology, and the Moundville site (including reading history books, science essays, dissertations, doing some interviews with professors, and checking out some actual archaeological digs), the script started to form a much more convincing, much more grounded foundation, and everything else then started falling into place.
I wrote the script, full-time, from about June 2007 to November 2007, when I'd say I probably had enough of a final draft put together where we started actually hiring crew and getting pre-pro started. I kept polishing the script though, of course, and didn't have a shooting draft til the week before we started production, in April 2008. Things changed throughout production, too, obviously, as the shoot dictated; but April was the last time I sat down and consciously revised the whole thing.
Obviously there's things I'd certainly do different now, but I can honestly say that I put all I had into it-- the script is a very genuine indication of who I was as a storyteller at that time, and what I was capable of then, for better or worse. I guess that's the most you can really ask out of your first one.
How did you fund the film?
LEE: We did call in some favors, haha, but mostly we got funding from two primary sources. Ben and I hired ourselves out to do some commercial work (at the time we both were also working in advertising in Huntsville, AL, for a day job) and raised 10 grand for the equipment-- which we used to buy the camera, tripod, and a basic light kit. We then got 17 grand from a private investor who we were very lucky and very blessed to have involved. He knew it wasn't really a great tangible investment, but had and continues to have faith in our futures, and in our work down the road.
Now, I'm paying for mostly everything out of pocket, on the tour and with our distribution efforts. Occasionally I'll get some help from family, but I try to avoid that-- plus, at this stage in the game, we really don't need that much money to get by, day to day, and since our tour is designed to be pretty streamlined and grassroots, the cost is pretty negligible-- plus I'm not constantly on the road (only about one to two days a week), so the cost is pretty manageable.
What sort of camera did you use for production and what were the best and worst things about it?
LEE: We used the Panasonic AG-HVX 200, and shot in 720p HD Video onto P2 cards. Frankly, I have no real complaints about the camera, though I'm probably not the guy to ask. Though I have no regrets regarding the look of the film, we weren't able to use any lenses or a lens adapter for this film (though we have been able to on our second feature, The Nocturnal Third, which launches in April 2011) mainly because of budgetary restrictions and weight restrictions (we used a Steadicam Merlin extensively, and the naked HVX was at its max weight limit).
The deep focus visual style of the film works, though-- there's a lot of long takes, and the film deals, thematically, with widening perceptions and perspective, so that marries well to the naked HVX's focal look. Plus, we did typically use the zoom to fake a longer lens whenever we could. But I guess, in an ideal world, we would have had a bit more to work with as far as depth of field is concerned.
Shooting directly to P2 is always a little dangerous, and we did lose a shot due to a workflow malfunction, but overall I loved working with direct to hard drive media.
What was the smartest thing you did during production? The dumbest?
LEE: We probably did more dumb, potentially dangerous things than I'd like to mention, but generally these things didn't wind up being a negative for us. I guess the flat out dumbest thing we did was, after finding out one of our actors was potentially an inactive SAG member, not worrying about it, shooting with him anyway, and not dealing with SAG until after wrapping the shoot-- all that could have ended very badly, but since we had no real experience with unions before, we were kinda under the impression it wasn't that big of a deal.
Luckily, we worked something out with the local office since the film was so small, but not without getting an earful of how this wasn't the correct way to operate, haha. But, I guess you get to use the "I'm young and didn't know I did anything wrong" card once, so we certainly did.
I think we did our fare share of intelligent and resourceful things as well-- I mean, I don't care how bad a movie is, somebody has to be doing something relatively intelligent somewhere to get it made. But, if I had to single out one thing I'm most proud of, it's probably our casting approach.
Obviously, there's not that thriving of an acting pool in Alabama-- and even the bigger cities close to us, like Nashville and Atlanta, that see a decent amount of film work, aren't spilling over with talent who can or are willing to work for a deferred salary. But, we ran a pretty aggressive (for our means) four city casting campaign, and saw a lot of folks.
Plus, we decided to keep the script pretty young-- our thought being that, on average, you're going to find more young actors locally who are budding professionals that have yet moved off and who are also willing to work for free than older actors, and that if we could have the leads strong, they could carry the weaker roles. We were blessed, though, and found just the right amount of strong older actors-- most of which used to do it professionally and either decided to leave the profession or moved to teaching-- and, as we had hoped, we found a lot of young talent, some of whom exceeded our expectations from even when we cast them.
But, casting can make or break a film, and I think, for our means, and for my abilities as a director at that time, we assembled the perfect cast.
Why did you decide to self-distribute the film? What would you tell other filmmakers about that process -- the pitfalls and the benefits?
LEE: Honestly, distribution was the one part of the film we didn't really have solidified (or at least a reasonable working game plan setup for) before we started the shoot.
We had always heard that you have to have distribution figured out going in as solidly as everything else, and I agree that you should, and we did have a "backup" DIY release plan in the back of our minds (which was the route we ultimately wound up taking)-- but, at the time, we definitely erred on the side of "well, we've gotta get it made before we can worry with that."
I'm not sure this is a regret, though I admit it's a mistake-- but since we were figuring out every other aspect of making the film in, largely, trial-by-fire fashion, and because of how things were setup with the cast, crew and investor giving us flexibility in that regard, we allowed distribution concerns to kinda drift to the back-burner for most of production and early-post.
We also wanted to give ourselves a little time to try the festival market out, a little, and see if we made films that might work within that infrastructure. So, we spent most of 2009 (after the film was, essentially finished, in April) playing and trying to play festivals (in addition to some Science Fiction Conventions, which were ultimately a more lucrative market for us and led to the tour construct we're using now).
Overall, I'd say we had a pretty bad festival experience. We didn't play any big fests, and aside from some good local/regional fests (most small even for their region), we didn't play to any big, or hell, even modestly big, audiences. We even got rejected, twice, from the Sidewalk Moving Picture Festival, the biggest fest in Alabama, one of the biggest in the South, our "home" festival where we had previously won numerous awards for shorts, and where we actually knew, on a personal level, the lead programmer (she was a Teacher's Assistant Grad Student for some of our classes back in UA). I figure if crooked politics can't get you in in Alabama, nothing can.
Why don’t you think the film did well at festivals?
LEE: I think there are lots of reasons the film didn't do well in the traditional festival model. For one thing, the market is so saturated now, there's just not enough room out there for the every quality, DIY feature produced, so, fests and fest programmers have to rely, more, on programming short features that are easy sells. There's nothing wrong with this-- we were just asking for trouble, on the festival circuit, with a two-hour long adventure/drama with hard-sell sci-fi elements that would probably net a PG rating, yet too adult to sell as a kiddie film.
I'm sure the fact that we had no names and, though I'm proud of our production values, the fact that we weren't working with the highest-end stuff didn't help, and all those factors combined (a traditional approach contrasting with non-traditional actors and production values) turned programmers off. The film also has its flaws.
So, towards the end of 2009, we realized that we really needed to retool our approach to getting the film out there. Some of this was the fact that we were having such a hard time with fests-- but, and perhaps more so, we also were just unhappy with the festival setup and the festival culture, even at the fests we were able to get into. Ultimately, even if you get in, you still have to compete with other films for an audience; and everything is about the fest, that's the event-- not your film. So, if you don't have the headliner, or the festival darlin', if you have the "filler" feature, haha, they're not doing you much good.
And they cost so much to enter, and you're only going to get in about a third, at best, of the fests you try. And you have so little control. So we decided we didn't like the culture, all together, and wanted to find something a bit less old-fashioned and a bit more empowering to the filmmaker. It's not 1994 anymore, you know?
So what was the new plan?
LEE: We decided to go ahead and produce a DVD of the film, available by Manufacture on Demand, get the film on Video on Demand, and take the film to numerous colleges and universities across the Southeast in a support tour, which was a viable option because of the film's regional and academic ties.
In addition, we decided to create some media tie-ins to help promote the film, and encourage it as more a brand and a franchise, so we put together a book, A Genesis Found: The Film Companion, which featured my script, a novelization by mystery writer Wilson Toney, an interview, and some anecdotal essays. We also produced some video tie-ins, including a mocumentary that lays out the film's backstory (without giving anything away), and are still doing a monthly comic strip that follows different story arcs featuring one of the film's main characters.
Since we were shifting gears pretty dramatically, it regrettably took us a little while to get all this ready, and it was at this point that I started lamenting the "wasted" time in 2009 (though we had also shot our second feature that year, during the Genesis fest experiment) and had to kinda battle myself a little to keep a reasonable pace to get the DVD and subsequent support tour ready for the Fall 2010 semester.
From about January 2010 to June 2010, we put together the DVD, Book, an improved website, the comic strip, and laid out the groundwork for the tour. I visited my first school in July, a test run at a small college just outside of Birmingham, and then started full swing on the first semester of the tour in September - November. We're currently on a hiatus for the holidays, but will resume in late January and finish up in April 2011 (just in time for our second feature's release).
What’s your advice for filmmakers who want to follow a similar self-distribution path?
LEE: Ultimately, the best piece of information I can pass on to other filmmakers, I think, is that self-distribution is hard, and for more reasons than just because you don't have a lot of money.
For one thing, you have to do as much, if not more, research in developing your game plan for distribution than you do for scripting, producing and editing the film. Also, unless you got some ins, it's hard to get people to care-- it's hard to get people to buy your DIY indie movie-- hell, it's hard to get people to see it when you offer it for free on their home campus.
I can't tell you how many of my friends, who haven't seen it yet, even blew off screenings, haha. So you gotta have a thick skin, and you've got to constantly be thinking about what you can do better-- you can't relax, because if you just sit there, the film is just sitting there.
I've probably focused more, so far, on promoting the screenings of the tour than promoting the DVD release (since the tour and its subsequent press coverage is designed as a vehicle for supporting the DVD), so I guess I can speak more to that. It can get discouraging quick-- since we have very little money for the tour, the only advertising I can pay for is for some ink and postage to print off fliers to mail to each venue we're visiting.
Other than that, I have to rely entirely on PSAs on local radio, community event calendars, libraries, direct e-mails to professors, student organizations and art councils, and write-ups in local and school papers. So, it can be pretty tough-- I've had a few screenings in big cities where I've literally spent 5 to 6 days just promoting the screening via online sources, then show up two weeks later and only five to eight people show up.
But, you just gotta move on to the next school, no matter how much the previous feels like a wasted opportunity, and try to keep it from happening again.
I've also learned that the peripheral benefits of the tour are much more rewarding, in the long run, than the direct ones, and I think make the tour worth it. Directly, all I'm really getting is a chance to visit a bunch of great Southern cities I've never had an excuse to visit before, and I get to see the film with another audience, and maybe learn something about how the film is being perceived in the Q&A that follows (oh, and another story for my blog chronicle of the development of tour at sonofarkie.com).
But, indirectly, even if only five to eight people show up at a venue, I still get to say I went to that school (which helps book other schools), I generally get some kind of coverage in the local press, I get to remind our followers about our tour on Facebook and Twitter by citing another screening locale, etc. I've probably gotten more press interest simply because we are doing a tour than because of the film itself.
So, in a nutshell, be smart in your approach and try to find a unique spin that works for your project, then commit to that despite all deterrents and keep busy, and eventually, things will start to happen. Things are only, just now, finally starting for us.
Ultimately we hope the tour will be, first and foremost, a test drive and a learning experience for this type of DIY model for us in the future, and secondly, lead this film to a better, bigger DVD deal, and open some doors for our second feature, and our yet-produced features of the future.
We're really set on promoting regional identity in filmmaking; our goal is to tell Southern stories, and to present a new perspective of the South, its stories and its mythologies, to the region and to regions beyond, and as of right now, this DIY model seems like the best outlet for us to achieve this approach. As the world gets smaller, I think new perspectives on regional identities, and reassertions of those identities, will become more and more essential.
And, finally, what did you learn from making the film that you can take to other projects?
LEE: You learn so much-- really, I think, before you make your first feature, at any level, you don't really know anything about making a major film.
I don't care how complicated your shorts are, or what TV work you've done, features are a whole other beast-- they require, exponentially, so much more planning and thought and problem solving than shorts its really hard to compare the two processes, overall. I suppose you still shoot the same way, but the emotional commitment to a feature versus a short is staggering.
I wrote the script in the summer of 2007, and there hasn't been a day since where I haven't done at least one thing related to producing or promoting the film. And, you know, once the excitement of the shoot wears off, or like now, once the excitement of the film being released wears off, your still left with it, and, in our system, it's now all on me-- I've got to keep the tour going and tend to it while the rest of the cast/crew have moved on to other projects, as they should have, and need to. Even Ben, our producer, has his hands full now editing our next film, The Nocturnal Third.
It never felt this way with shorts, where when the honeymoon is over your work on the film is, typically, over. It's high school dating versus marriage, really.
So, I guess, I've learned, truly learned, the difference between being a student/wannabe filmmaker, and being a real but struggling one.
More tangibly, one specific thing I've learned is I don't want to be the sound editor again. Not that it's not rewarding, in its own way, and I'm glad I've got it under my belt-- but after three or so sound cuts, foley and adr recording, and the final mix, I can no longer, really, look at the film as a director, and it's very hard for me to imagine myself as an audience member and see if the film is working.
Not that you can ever be completely objective about your own film, but I think, if I can spare it, that's a job I'd like to not have to do for a film I've directed again. Ideally I'd just do the initial, full rough cut (ie selecting all the shots to use and dictating the basic pace with hard sound edits) and then just oversee the rest of the fine-tuning processes.
