X

Looks like you are a new visitor to this site. Hello!

Welcome to Hope For Film! Come participate in the discussion, and I encourage you to enter your email address in the sidebar and subscribe. It's free! And easy! If you have any suggestions on how to improve this website or suggestions for topics please don't hesitate to write in to any of the blogs.

You can also follow me on Twitter or Facebook.

(If you keep getting this message, you probably have cookies turned off.)

May 11 at 7:05am

38 More Ways The Film Industry Is Failing Today

By Ted Hope

The bad things are really just opportunities

The bad things are really just opportunities

A year ago (May 15, 2009)  I wrote a blog post ” 38 American Independent Film Problems/Concerns”.Unfortunately, all of the problems I listed then still stand today; four or so from that list have improved slightly, but they certainly remain issues.  Of more concern is that the list keeps growing and growing.  I can contribute another 38 even more pressing issues today. You do the math: we now have over 75 things wrong with our industry that we are not taking action to fix.

In fact, we have no one to blame for this list but ourselves.  It is our inability to be proactive that has brought on us this terrible state. Ask yourself what currently concerns and frustrates you about where film culture and the film business are today.  What heights is our industry capable of reaching and how does it compare to where we actually are?  Do we really have the capacity to sit and wait to get there?  Isn’t our silence delaying the trip?

I must admit that I am a bit disappointed that I had no difficulty adding another thirty-eight items to this list of where we are failing.  The exciting part (and why #38 of last year ‘s list was “lists like this make the foolish despair”) is that these lists demonstrate a tremendous opportunity for those willing to break from the status quo and take action.  Things may be wrong, but they could always be worse.  From here, we just have to work together to make it better.  It is that simple.  Every deficit is an opportunity for the creative entrepreneur, right?

So how has the film biz continued to reveal itself to be troubled this year?  What do I suggest we start to focus on, discuss, and find solutions for?  This list is a start, and I wager we will expand it substantially in the days ahead.

  1. We cannot logically justify any ticket price whatsoever for a non-event film.  There are too many better options at too low a price.  Simply getting out of the house or watching something somewhere because that is the only place it is currently available does not justify a ticket price enough.  We still think of movies as things people will buy.  We have to change our thinking about movies to something that enhances other experiences, and it is that which has monetary value.  Film’s power as a community organizing tool extends far beyond its power to sell popcorn (and the whole exhibition industry is based on that old popcorn idea).
  2. The Industry has never made any attempt to build a sustainable investor class. Every other industry has such a go-to funding sector, developed around a focus on the investors’ concerns and standardized structures.  In the film biz, each deal is different and generally stands alone, as opposed to leading to something more.  The history of Hollywood is partially defined by the belief that another sucker is born every minute.  Who really benefits by the limited options for funding currently available other than those funders and those who fee those deals?  We could build something that works far more efficiently and offers far more opportunity.
  3. The film business remains the virtually exclusive domain of the privileged.  Although great strides have been made to diversify the industry, the numbers don’t lie.  The film industry is ruled by white men from middle class or better socioeconomic backgrounds.  It is an expensive art form and a competitive field — but it doesn’t need to be a closed door one.  Let’s face it: people hire folks who remind them of themselves.  These days everyone needs to intern and the proposition of working for free is too expensive for most.  Living in NYC or LA is not affordable for most people starting out.  We get more of the same and little progress without greater diversity.  And although I essentially mentioned this last year (#36), the continued poor economy limits diversity even more now.
  4. There is no structure or mechanism to increase liquidity of film investments, either through clear exit strategies, or secondary capital markets.  The dirty secret of film investment is that it is a long recoupment cycle with little planning for an exit strategy.  Without a way to get out, fewer people choose to get in.  Who really wants to lock up an investment for four years?  Not investors, only patrons…
  5. Independent Filmmakers (and their Industry advisors) build business plans based on models and notions selected from before September 15, 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed and everything changed.  It is not the same business as it was then and we shouldn’t treat it that way.  Expectations have changed considerably, probably completely.  Buyers and audiences’ behaviors are different (those that still remain that is).  Products are valued at different levels.  We live in a new world.  Our strategies must change with it.
  6. The film business remains a single product industry. The product may be available on many different platforms, but it is still the same thing. For such a capital-intensive enterprise to sell only one thing is a squandering of time and money.  Films can be a platform to launch many different products and enterprises, some of which can also enhance the experience and build the community.
  7. We have done very little thinking or discussing about how to make events out of our movies.  The list seems to have stopped at 3D. There’s only been one “Rocky Horror Picture Show” and the first one is very very old.  Music flourishes because the live component is generally quite different from the recorded one, and the film biz could benefit from a greater differentiation of what utilizes different platforms.
  8. We ignore film’s most unique attribute. As demonstrated by how little of people’s online time is spent watching content (30%), we know that people want connectivity & community more than anything else. There used to be film societies, just like reviewers once placed films in cultural context — we need to recreate a community aspect to film going. If you wonder why people don’t go to the movies more, it is not as much about the content, as it is about the lack of community.  Without that, why not just stay home to watch?  Film’s strongest attribute is its ability to work as a community organizing tool.  Film forces us to feel, to think, to engage — let’s not ignore that.
  9. Independent film financing is still based around an antiquated foreign sales model despite the fact that all acquisition markets are collapsing and fee levels shrink market to market.  This old model is centered around stars’ perceived value — an attribute that has been less reliable than ever before.  There has got to be a better way than the foreign sales estimate model, but no one talks about it, or even admits to needing one.  The participants that get most hurt by this are the investors who take the advice of the “experts” that this is the way it’s done.  It used to be done this way, but we have to move on before we burn to the ground.
  10. Filmmakers don’t own their audiences yet (and few even attempt to).  What will happen when agents start to cut deals for their clients who have 1 million engaged fans, people who will pre-order their content, promote it passionately, and deliver more of their friends? There is a shift in the balance of power about to happen, and those that have prepared for it, amassed their followings, will be able to change the conversation significantly.
  11. We’ve failed to develop fetish objects to demonstrate one’s love of cinema.  The only merchandise we sell is “fan-boy” toys.   We need to come up with items that demonstrate their owner’s sense of style and taste.  Beyond the books of Tashen, what is there?  We can do better.  Such products manufacture desire and enhance identification with the art form.  We need to streamline the process of the transformation of leisure time into both intellectual and social capital (i.e movie going and its byproducts).  How do we identify, reward, and encourage those that appreciate our work?
  12. Creators, Distributors, and Marketers have accepted a dividing line between art and commerce, between content and marketing.  By not engaging the filmmakers in how to use marketing tools within their narrative and how to bring narrative techniques to marketing, we diminish the discovery and promotional potential of each film.  We limit the scope of our art by restricting it to the plane of the 90 minute product.  Movies should find us early, lead us to new worlds, bridge us to subsequent experiences, connect us to new passions and loves, help us embrace a more expansive definition of cinema, life, and self.
  13. We don’t recognize that one of film’s greatest assets is its ability to generate data.  Filmmakers and financiers should be insisting on owning the data their films generate. It is an incredibly valuable commodity.  The VOD platform allows for tracking of where and when and who in terms of the business, yet this data is restricted to aggregators not creators.  When you license something for a small fraction of its costs, shouldn’t you share in everything that it generates?
  14. We fail to utilize the two years from greenlight to release to market our film and build our audiences.  Despite having the key economic indicators (i.e. stars & concept) in place at the time of greenlight, we underutilize that two year period when we could be sourcing fans, aggregating them and providing them with both the ramps and the bridges necessary to lead them to our work and then carry them to other new work.
  15. Why can’t our Industry develop more stars?  The talented actors exist, but they don’t have “value”. Why is it that we don’t have more serious actors who are worth something financially?  Isn’t it just about giving them the roles that help them build audiences? Why don’t we encourage more actors to take more risks in terms of the characters they portray?  Audiences, filmmakers, financiers would all be better served by industywide initiatives to launch more talent.  Say what you will about the studio system of old, but they were damn good at developing new talent.
  16. We need a greater embrace of innovation and experimentation in terms of both business models and building communities.  We keep doing things based on the status quo long after the practice has stopped being fruitful.  People are so fearful of failing publicly that new approaches are shunned.  This is a perception and PR problem as much as it is a structural one.  Filmmakers should have the will to fail, and take risks (but be practical about it).
  17. We allow consumers to think content should be free but it is okay that the hardware they play it on is very very expensive.  All the entertainment industries allow the hardware manufacturers to have policies that encourage such thinking.  They get rich and it grows harder to be a creator by the day.  People only want the devices because there is so much great stuff to play on it.  Why is the balance of wealth so misguided here?
  18. We – neither the creators, audiences, or their representatives – don’t make a stink when aggregators get rich, and the content creators live on mere pittances.  It’s not just the product but also the services that have flourished on the labor of the creators.  Instead of growing angry we have been embracing those that gather and not those that grow.  Again, we need to look at the inequity here and re-evaluate how the equity is dispersed.
  19. We don’t insist that our artists are also entrepreneurs.  We don’t encourage direct sales to the fans.  We don’t focus on building mailing lists.  This needs to be as much an accepted “best practice” as it needs to be part of every art school curriculum.  We can’t keep producing artists and not prepare them to survive in the world.  Passion without a plan to support it can only lead to exploitation.
  20. We have failed to engage constructively with other industries that we should be aligned with, most obviously, the tech world.  Why is only SXSW where film, music, and tech meet?  Can’t we do better?  The music industry has The Future Of Music summit, but there is nothing similar in the film world.  The facilitators at the agencies rarely know who’s who in terms of web and tech designers.
  21. Where is the simple site where you can get whatever you want whenever you want however you want it (other than what the bootleggers offer)? Why do we let the thieves beat us at our own game?   Soon it will be too late to win the people back.  The fact that the one place that comes close is ultimately in the business of selling hardware — and the industry seems okay with that — shows how we can’t see the forest for the trees.
  22. Where are the new curators?  The ones with a national or international audience? Why have we not had a more concentrated industry/community wide effort to give a home to all the fired film critics?  Is it that we are afraid of the bad, just like the studios are afraid of social media and film future exchanges because they are worried about negative buzz? We just need to make better movies and treat people well and then there is no negative to spread, right?  Anyway, with such a plethora of great work being made we need to offer audiences better filters to sift through it. What’s up with our collective failure to deliver more Oprahs, individuals whose support will lead to action?
  23. The majority in the film industry are essentially luddites and technophobes, barely aware of the tools we have available to us to enhance, economize, and spread our work.  How can we teach our industry how to use what has already been invented (and then focus on everything else we need but don’t have yet).
  24. We don’t encourage (or demand) audience “builds” prior to production.  Why shouldn’t every filmmaker or filmmaking team be required to have 5000 Fans prior to greenlight?
  25. We know incredibly little about our audience or their behavior.  We spend so much making our films without really knowing who our audiences are, why they want our product, how to reach them, or how they behave, or how they are changing.  Does any other industry think so little and so late about their audience?  Does any other industry do such little research into their audience?  Shouldn’t we all be sharing what info we have?
  26. There is no major, visible, high-level “non-partisan” free-thought film industry think tank and/or incubator to consider new models, new approaches, and enhance audience appeal while inspiring both government and private investment,  developing “best practices” to maximize revenue and  audiences, expanding aesthetic methods, and facilitating the creative dialogue internationally.  IFP and FIND do their part, as do festival institutes but we need something that can consider the bigger problems than that of just US “Indie” filmmakers…
  27. Where’s that list on best practices for preventing your film from being pirated?  Shouldn’t all producers know this?  I know I don’t and I can’t name another producer who does.
  28. The Industry has no respect for producers.  Granted, this might sound a tad self-serving, but producers’ overhead, fees, credits, and support are under attack from all fronts.  Yet, it is the producers who identify and develop the material and talent, package it, structure the finance, identify the audience, and unite all the industry’s disparate elements.  All the producers I speak with wonder how they are to survive and remain in the business.
  29. Let’s face it: we are not good at providing filmmakers with long term career planning.  Whether it’s financial planning, secondary professions, or just ongoing learning — we don’t really get it, and that sets artists up as future prey.  As an industry, and as a class, creative people get stuck in a rut quite easily, and are the hardest dogs to teach new tricks.
  30. With our world and industry changing daily, shouldn’t we have come up with a place where we learn the new technology or at least hear of it?  One that is welcoming even for the luddites.  The tech sites speak their own vernacular which is a tad intimidating for the uninitiated.
  31. Where’s the embrace of the short-term release?  With digital delivery here, can’t we get in and get out, only to return again and offer it all over again?  The week-long booking of one film per theater limits content to that which appeals to the mass market.  Niche audiences are being underserved, and money is thus being left on the table and some highly appealing menus not even being considered.
  32. Film Festivals need to evolve a hell of a lot faster.  Festivals need to ask what their value-add is to both the filmmaker and the audience.  One or two could ask that of the industry overall too.  Now that we recognize that festivals are not a market, and that filmmakers have to do a tremendous amount of work ahead of time in order for them to be a media launch, the question remains what are festivals and who do they serve?  The everything-to-everybody style of curating films no longer works.  The run-of-the-mill panels have become dull and boring.  The costs associated for filmmakers attending are rarely worth the benefits they receive.  Film Festivals need to be rebuilt.  There are a lot of good ideas out there on how to do it, but not enough have been put into practice.
  33. The past ten years of digital film are going to vanish.  We do little to preserve not just the works, but also the process and documents behind them.  Digital is not a stable medium.  We have a migration and storage issue in terms of keeping access up to date.  Those films that currently exist in digital format only, won’t stand the test of time.  Film remains a better format for archival purposes.  We need to take action soon if we are not going to see our recent culture get out of reach.
  34. We don’t encourage advocacy around the issues that affect us.  How many film industry professionals could rattle off the top ten government policies that affect their trade?  Why don’t our various support organizations, unions, guilds, and leaders list issues and actions at the top of their website?  Are we all so afraid or so unaware?
  35. Okay, it’s a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face, but it seems to me that film industry folk spend less time going to the movies (and I mean seeing films in the theaters) than the average bear.  Going to the movies should be viewed as a political act.  Support the culture you want with your dollars.
  36. Most of the bootlegging that I encounter comes from within the industry itself.  I recently heard of a manager who asked the studio execs and his Facebook friends to send in the bootlegs of his Sundance prize winning client’s film — and he got over 70 back; they all unfortunately were an early cut of the film too.  I admit I get a lot of free DVDs from agents & managers, and I admit I make dubs for my directors so they can see actors — but I have started to donate to crowdfunding campaigns to try to balance it out.  We have to come up with a uniform practice and commitment to avoid the Industry supported bootlegging.
  37. So few of us have determined what we love, not just in film, but also in the world in general.  The more we have defined our tastes, the more we strive to bring them into existence.  The more we know what we want, the greater our defenses are against that in which we do not want to participate.  Where are the filmmakers who can list the things they think can lead us to make better films?  If more filmmakers, distributors, and executives conversed more publicly in both the art and the business, the bar for all of us would be lifted higher.
  38. We love to read, talk, and engage more about the business than we do about the art.  Some of this comes perhaps because we have more forums for the business than the aesthetics, but it is much harder to get a conversation going about creative issues than it is about financial.  I’m just saying…

This is my first co-post with The Huffington Post.  Please go to it here. Perhaps ALSO leave your comments there too.

Note: unfortunately I found 24 more ways that the industry was failing in 2012. And if you want to move into the future, here are the Really Bad Things In Indie Film 2013.


  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print

93 Comments

leave a comment
  1. Linda Nelson / May 11 at 7:05am

    I loved Primer. I saw it at the NuArt and spoke with Shane Caruth afterward. I loved how he never thought to do more than one take of each scene, because of his pure passion to make the film. How sad that he has never been heard from since. After winning the Sloan Award at Sundance and having a big time agent for a short while, he just disappeared. Sustainability is critical to Artists. We are not five year olds that need to be taken care of, we need to learn how to take care of ourselves.

  2. Emma Gallagher / May 11 at 7:05am

    I think the main reason why the film industy is failing because you can now download movies off the internet for free, everyone knows its illegal but who really cares? I mean people are seeing that they don't have to go to the hassel any more of driving down town to the cinema and pay more for popcorn than the tickets I mean why bothar when you can sit in the comfort of your own living room? To encourage people to come to the cinema more I don't know? what would make me get up and go apart from the latest block buster?

  3. MaryJane Skalski / May 11 at 7:05am

    Jon Reiss's 10 SOLUTIONS list is great and inspiring. Makes me want to work harder.

  4. Tony Naumovski / May 11 at 7:05am

    Mr. Hope, My name is Tony Naumovski, a New York based actor. I am a close friend and a colleague of Alrick Brown. It has been a week since I read your 'manifesto' so to speak and still each day your words resonate in me and shake my being more and more, provoke me and inspire me, to fight and stand even stronger in what I believe in, which I think that we share a very similar vision and opinion on what is going on in the film and theater actually world today. I truly hope and believe that a lot more people will read this and will stop for a second, and question themselves and their values for a moment and reconsider their responsibilities toward the society. Both Filmmakers and film supporters, cause we are and should be ONE. Even more so this 'manifesto' is a invitation to the roots of great art which can civilize humanity and should be published in many different magazines, books and studies. Bertold Brecht once said 'In the future they won't say the times were dark, they will rather ask why were their poets silent'. And so we should NEVER be silent otherwise we loose the essence and power of true art and the need of it. With great hopes for the future because we are IT and responsible for it. Thank you Mr. Hope for the hope…
    Together we are more !!!

  5. Ted Hope / May 11 at 7:05am

    Thanks Tony. I love that BB quote. I do think speaking up is the first step for most, and it is always a beautiful sound.

  6. Ted Hope / May 11 at 7:05am

    I think Emma that if people knew that filmmakers outside of Hollywood can not support themselves or that generally the only off-Hollywood American work can come from the wealthy, they might think twice before downloading illegally (as opposed to those that choose to give copies of their work away). I know that it is a much more enjoyable experience to see films with others, but even in NYC — America's greatest city for film viewing — I found myself with little I wanted to see on this one of the greatest filmgoing weekends of the year. Some of this is about supply. Some of it is about the marketing, the presentation, and the appreciation apparatus.

  7. nick / May 11 at 7:05am

    read the first 10 and could disprove all of them soooooo….. yea people, don't buy into this. it isn't all accurate.

    i just graduated from film school at penn state. i am now a poor college grad with $20 to my name. however, through online sites (ie Facebook/Twitter/Production Hub, etc) I have landed 3 paying jobs in NYC that I can do either from home, or I will travel to NYC on their money and get housing through their money. this makes it seem impossible to get into the industry which is a lie.

    by the way, look at the director who won the best picture oscar this past year….spoiler alert NOT A WHITE MALE.

  8. Alina Szpak / May 11 at 7:05am

    All pretty accurate, but few things – summits exist, this year I attended Future of the Film conference and big panel about the same at Produced by Conference. I am also very sceptical abou longevity of film v digital. About international sales I agree: we have problem: for many years world buyers were buing every crap produced in America for relatively big bucks to feed their tv needs. Now with digital technology they discovered that they can produce this crap themselves. And they have national and international goverment funds for their movies, free money! There are limited markets and price falling from let say 10,000 K to 300 dollars per territory is a killer for independent industry. Finding public in US is relatively easy for specific genre movies but sadly the great american drama is dying!
    Alina Szpak

  9. Frank / May 11 at 7:05am

    Sorry I hadn't replied to this sooner… I forgot (thankfully) this whole argument for a while as I've been working on a new short film.

    Jon Raymond –

    I disqualify docs because docs are doing their job and doing it well. I don't see any problem in the market for a well-crafted doc with an interesting subject. Like I said, I think it’s the only healthy area of indies right now and I think a big reason is that when you make a doc, you’re dealing with the filmmaker’s perspective on an objective reality. It’s almost always inherently more interesting than watching some new filmmaker’s first baby steps towards CREATING an objective reality that they then overlay with their subjective viewpoint… jeez, I hope this makes sense.

    I don't like/dislike indie or Hollywood films, I like GOOD MOVIES. I didn't make a distinction, those who would say that one cannot put Avatar and the work of Jim Jarmusch in the same sentence made that distinction.

    And by the way, HARRY, if you don't think Avatar qualifies as art that means one thing – that YOU do not think it qualifies as art. That's the wonderful thing about all art… it's mostly subjective, isn't it? And I'm sorry, but many indies follow a formula as derivative as any Hollywood movie… it's not what your film is about (everything, really, has been done) but HOW IT IS ABOUT IT. I’m sorry I don’t know have the answer on how to make a commercial film with a built-in audience… if I had the answer to that, I’d be Steven Spielberg, wouldn’t I? And I doubt I’d be sharing my secret formula in a blog comments section. The distribution apparatus I described would allow GOOD films, my entire point, to find an audience. I think letting festivals do all the work and have all the power has hurt the perception of indies immeasurably. This isn’t a place where how to make a good movie is being discussed (the ONLY place for that, imho, are screenwriting blogs like Go Into the Story, Mystery Man, and Script Shadow), what’s being discussed here is how, assuming you have a good movie, do you get it out there.

    Back to Jon Raymond –

    I think the big problem here is that we're all taking tiny threads of this discussion and going off on a tangent about how we agree or disagree with each other on one singular point while at the same time completely (willfully?) misunderstanding the other person. The reason this post even exists is because it seems that festivals and distributors are not really helping out indie filmmakers as much as they could in finding an audience. I believe the main reason is because festivals now seem to serve the interests of the friends of the programmers, the pseudo-celebs willing to attend, sponsors, and whichever publicists contact them rather than doing the actual work of sifting through the submissions to find the best stuff (I know it’s subjective, but I think we’re hitting or have hit a tipping point where we can almost objectively say the cream isn’t always rising to the top… more on that in a bit.)

    Jon, I think we're in agreement here on nearly every point, it just APPEARS that we're disagreeing. Again, I don’t (or didn’t mean to) make the distinction between Hollywood and indie films, only between good and bad movies. Hollywood turns out a lot of crap, but it's well marketed crap and it has a built-in awareness because of that. The director of some pos, by-the-numbers Hollywood rom-com doesn’t really have to wring his hands worrying whether or not people will be made aware of it… nowhere near as much as an indie filmmaker does, anyway. I STRONGLY believe that because the cream might not be rising to the top within the indie world (i.e., the best stuff gets in front of eyeballs), we have a major problem with finding a wider audience that would, in turn, allow us to do what we all want to do… make more films. That audience existed 10+ years ago but has largely been erased by factors we could argue over ‘til the cows come home. I think part of the reason is poor festival selection practices and, like I said in other posts, the average moviegoer who may have been interested in indies almost as a genre unto itself has taken a chance on one too many films that didn’t live up to the festival laurels on the DVD cover. Because many of us believe the cream is not rising to the top, what Ted seems to suggest we do and what I know Zak does in practice is take their case for their filmmaking talent as directly to the audience as possible. In other words, cut out the middleman and let the people decide for themselves.

    The problem here, and what many have correctly pointed out, is that it turns a filmmaker (and I know, because I tried to do this myself) into a marketing machine. Personally, I believe it hurts the work… this is where the ‘artist first/marketing-machine never’ argument comes in. For some, it seems they have boundless energy to both craft their film and sift through potential twitter followers, four-wall and tour their movie, and maintain a blog. Like I said, I’m so exhausted by the process of making the film that all of that other stuff really turns me off by the time I’m at the point where I know I’m SUPPOSED to be doing it. And then it seems that I’m really supposed to be doing both concurrently. Hats off to anyone who can maintain that dichotomy with their sanity intact.

    Jon – what you said about youtube is DEAD ON and it’s what I decided to do. You see, I MADE one of those navel-gazing indie features that I so seem to loathe, but I think I made it honestly and was objective about the characters and their predicament and I know, even in hindsight and having moved on, that my film deserved a better shot on the festival circuit than it received. All of my research since moving on points to a festival system that thrives a lot more on cronyism and the exact kind of indie marketing prescribed on this blog than on picking films that are actually good. These days, if you don’t have a publicist, a blog, 50+ social networking profiles/fan pages, and some money set aside for marketing your film to the festival programmers, you have almost no shot of getting into a fest like SXSW, Cinevegas, or Sundance. For what happened to me after all the rejections, I’m almost glad I didn’t wind up on the festival circuit during that time.

    I decided, as a result of that whole debacle, to make a science fiction web series that I put on youtube and other video sharing sites with no marketing whatsoever. I just relied on entertainment value and core concept. 75,000 views later, the concept has been optioned by a medium sized production company and we’re putting together a sizzle reel to pitch it to the networks as a television show. $500, 20 minutes of material, and a youtube channel took me further than my $18,000 indie feature ever did or, sad to say, ever could, regardless of quality.

    So I side with those who say ‘artist first’, but I sadly think that where they’re wrong is in ever suggesting that the ‘first art’ of ‘artist first’ can be anything but a genre piece. While I believe this was true in the past, it is even MORE true now. A potential Scorsese today can very well be overlooked for far too long… to the point where he’d probably quit for not being the type that can schmooze and market their way to the Grand Jury prize at Sundance and thus be able to finance further pictures. Indeed, from my experience, it would seem that the type of person who is an artist to their core probably isn’t very good at marketing his or herself, especially not during the formative years.

    Again… Jon – I’ve seen all of those films, I even own Coppola’s ‘Dementia 13’. But besides being good movies, what do they all have in common? Yes, Tarantino was indie, Lucas was indie, even Spielberg made a ton of short films during his youth to get attention, but what does nearly every single filmmaker who has made a nice career for themselves have in common when it comes to their first few efforts that got them noticed? They all started out in horror, science fiction, or comedy… or some subset of other genres, like Nolan with film noir, and people like Scorsese and Coppola cut their teeth directing (yet retaining their voice) exploitive movies for Roger Corman. (Have to say it yet again, where is the Roger Corman of today, giving young filmmakers a chance to find their voice/style without worrying about distributing and marketing the film themselves?)

    I’m only saying this because I’d like to see an audience come back to independent films in general and because I’d like to see at least one filmmaker made something like a Texas Chainsaw Massacre, yet retain their rights and sell it exclusively through VOD or something and KEEP that fortune to then go and make whatever the hell they want. Of course, chances are, if someone were to make something of such high quality, the distributors would come knocking again and it’s likely all of this would be moot. In the case of finding distribution, like Paranormal Activity, the filmmaker might not even make any money, but they certainly would be able to get another film made and, possibly, make a living as a filmmaker.

    You see, if you, as an indie filmmaker, decide to make the greatest indie horror film ever made and you even PARTIALLY succeed, you won’t have to be a marketing expert. There is craft and art in trying to do something like that and it also subverts basically everything we’re being told about festivals, twitter, etc., because it is highly unlikely that a great horror film will be ignored. Then you can put all your effort into making the best film and far less effort into twitter followers, blogs, and marketing. One good clip on youtube would pull all of that weight and more.

    Lastly, I want to address Mark Lipsky’s assertion that at some vague point in the past, indies yoked themselves to ROI and Oscar consideration and filmmakers began worrying about making a living and from that point forward, indie film was dead.

    I know you said, “Don’t give up your day job” regarding true indie filmmakers, but I’m not sure I understand where you think the money comes from. So you are saying that before this magical demarcation point, there were indies who made their film not caring if there was an audience or if it made it’s money back? Then why even screen them? Can you provide examples? And Jarmusch is a bad one because doghouse nicely tore that one apart by placing Jarmusch firmly in the place from whence he came… making the New York, Warhol-ish, early 80’s art/celebrity scene… like doghouse said, a time when an enthusiastic New York Times review could guarantee some box office/notoriety (also true some ten years later with Clerks). Had he not had all of that, he wouldn’t have gotten to make another film… you might say that he didn’t think about it BEFORE he made his first feature, but I guarantee you have to think about it if you want to make another one. Besides that, films require others to help you make them great… music, cinematography, talented actors… while your hypothetical director may not give a shit about commerce or his film being seen, for that to be 100% true all the time for an indie film, it would also have to be true of every single person who makes an artistic contribution to said film. Do you think the people that help you achieve your vision also share this romantic notion of art for art’s sake and that they don’t say to themselves, “Yeah, but what are your plans for this movie? How will you get it out there and who is going to see it?” Good luck with that one when putting together a talented cast and crew. Also, do you think that ROI played zero part in Jarmusch casting people like Johnny Depp or Bill Murray in some of his films? I’m not debating the artistic merit of Jim Jarmusch, I’m simply saying that I need a lot more from Lipsky to understand what he’s talking about when he implies that true indies never worry about their film making its money back or getting it out there. Which ones and can you provide proof?

    Even if they don’t get into the nuts and bolts of marketing and distribution, I think anyone who wants to continue making films, indie or not, must worry about getting their film out there and having it make money so they can make more films… even if they still have to keep their day jobs. I think the ONLY problem we have right now is that it seems the normal indie channels through which an undeniably great film should find an audience have put barriers in place that seem to hinder such a thing rather than help it. I’ve seen enough over the last few years to lose all trust and faith in the indie gate keepers. As a filmmaker myself, it’s hard to know who your friends are, and it’s why I advocate doing good genre work, because when you do it undeniably well, like Neill Blomkamp with his sci-fi short films, it puts you on an even playing field and sometimes even vaults you to places you never thought you could reach… WITHOUT killing yourself over festivals and indie marketing schemes.

    The only thing I 100% agree with Mark Lipsky on is that the word ‘indie’ has lost all value for audiences. But I think that all comes down to the quality of the work and for you to begrudge filmmaker’s like Zak for trying to find a new paradigm while also talking up your own digital distribution system is a bit disingenuous. There’s an inherent contradiction there. However, like you’ve said… rather than making lists, you are doing something about the situation and I have to give credit where it’s due.

  10. lacoste shirt / May 11 at 7:05am

    the fact is, his recently produced work is leaps and bounds above what you're doing in terms of artistic quality.

  11. Ted Hope / May 11 at 7:05am

    Publish

    Sent from a device that leads me to be more concise than I might otherwise.

  12. lacoste outlet online / May 11 at 7:05am

    what does nearly every single filmmaker who has made a nice career for themselves have in common when it comes to their first few efforts that got them noticed

  13. lacoste polo shirts / May 11 at 7:05am

    they certainly remain issues

  14. bigbigeye / May 11 at 7:05am

    You really give a long list , but I can't agree with you.  I love film, and I don't think they will fail.

  15. Lei Xu / May 11 at 7:05am

    gth

  16. lacoste polo shirts / May 11 at 7:05am

    In fact, there are still many people watch flim

  17. paul smith sale / May 11 at 7:05am

    Liked this article, the article made ​​it more worth watching

  18. Yileiyang1985 / May 11 at 7:05am

    Louis Vuitton Bag With the enthusiasm Louis Vuitton Outlet and has Bikinis become a brand that spans bags, Swimwear wallets, shoes, scarfs and so on.
    Louis Vuitton Bags Sale Belstaff  to Belstaff Jackets Outlet make sure its durable. L find from Belstaff Jackets other branded bags. Louis Vuitton Wallets also have these advantages.They are so beautiful and charming.ive.Cheap Belstaff Jacket C

  19. tn requin / May 11 at 7:05am

    <a href=”http: product_list-tn-requin-homme-c_24.html”=”" http://www.nike-tn-requin-pas-cher.org=“”>tn requin pas cher
    <a href=”http: product_list-tn-requin-homme-c_24.html”=”" http://www.nike-tn-requin-pas-cher.org=“”>tn requin 
    <a href=”http: product_list-chaussures-puma-c_29.html”=”" http://www.nike-tn-requin-pas-cher.org=“”>chaussures puma pas cher 
    <a href=”http: http://www.nike-tn-requin-pas-cher.org“=”">soldes chaussures timblerland 
    <a href=”http: product_list-tn-requin-femme-c_25.html”=”" http://www.nike-tn-requin-pas-cher.org=“”>tn requin femme</a href=”http:></a href=”http:></a href=”http:></a href=”http:></a href=”http:>

  20. Uth Video / May 11 at 7:05am

    A few weeks ago I wrote about some of the business problems or challenges that exist with social media ROI.
    Today I want to address some of the technology challenges. Keep in mind
    that I’m not a very technical person so if you have something you want
    to add or contribute to the post please let me know.  Note, we are
    mainly talking about enterprise size clients.

  21. Algybarr / May 11 at 7:05am

    Thanks for the
    great tutorial on writing tutorials. I'm thinking of doing some on my blog so
    this came about at the perfect time for me!

  22. Davidjjamess / May 11 at 7:05am

    Reading this your
    entry I have even noticed some new information which I haven’t known before.

  23. Davidjjamess / May 11 at 7:05am

    Well, this is a
    very valuable post. Thanks for the information you provided. It would be
    great if got more post like this.I appreciate it.

  24. davidjjamess / May 11 at 7:05am

    I hope you can
    continue this type of hard work to this site in future also..Because this
    blog is really very informative and it helps me lot.

  25. Rosy / May 11 at 7:05am

    Who wrote this blog? Can I contact this person directly?

  26. web hosting / May 11 at 7:05am

    Above all the points are explained very clear mind.Most of the people looking for this kind of valuable information.

  27. Studio Beyond / May 11 at 7:05am

    We like your judgements on the film industry, very thought provoking and most of them absolutely spot on.  We would like you to consider addressing these points to our industry executives – we have tried your email link but it doesn;t work.  SO feel free to send us an email ghart”studiobeyond.net – we welcome you to stir things up and hopefully get some answers! 

  28. Ferienhaus am Meer / May 11 at 7:05am

    The particulars and exact recommendation are insurance specifically what I was wanting. I’ve book marked and will definitely be returning. Thanks for the information in this blog. 

  29. book of ra online / May 11 at 7:05am

    I am really impressed by reading this article. Interesting post and I really like your take on the issue. I now have a clear idea on what this matter is all about. Thank you so much.

  30. ink toner / May 11 at 7:05am

    I like all the reviews have been posted by the visitors ofthis site ,some of them are very good suggested regard the article.

  31. High PR Link Builders / May 11 at 7:05am

    This is very interesting, the points that you make and the questions that you ask kind of make sense. I think there are some more important questions that you could of asked, but I am guessing that was the maximum…

  32. Buy High Pagerank Link / May 11 at 7:05am

    Super bonne continuation blog I think they must have to fighting hard in the last match because it’s really deciding them to pass to round of last 16. Godd luck for them.

  33. C / May 11 at 7:05am

    Complex reading. I will save and go back to for some time, I think. That’s valuable writing.

  34. pavi / May 11 at 7:05am

    casino gratis I am so happy to read this. This is the kind of manual that needs to be given and not the random misinformation that’s at the other blogs. Thanks for sharing this.

  35. niraj / May 11 at 7:05am

    You completed certain reliable points there. I did a search on the subject and found nearly all persons will agree with your blog. hulk spiele | online casinos test

  36. vimal234 / May 11 at 7:05am

    I love to surf and my initial source for information is the blogs which have always helped me in my education. This blog is one of them. free slot machine | ra online

  37. My 1 Login / May 11 at 7:05am

    Hmm, I agree with most of your points, I like your writing and analysis. You said “The past ten years of digital film are going to vanish.” I don’t thin so.

  38. Geoff Talbot / May 11 at 7:05am

    Wow this is a really extensive list and noting has really changed… although the internet and social media are definitely changing things for the savvy filmmaker.

    I for one am endeavoring to do things about these issues

  39. Ted Hope / May 11 at 7:05am

    Problem #2 is one that I am trying to solve by connecting the dots with SFFS’s A2E program. Stay tuned for more on that.

  40. Whoopie / May 11 at 7:05am

    The only film I want to watch is the one inside my head.

  41. UK Sildenafil / May 11 at 7:05am

    Heya justt wanted tto give you a brief heaes
    up and let you know a few of thee immages aren’t loading correctly.
    I’m not sure why but Ithink its a linking issue. I’ve tried it in two different web browsers and both
    show the sazme outcome.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

  1. skiny
  2. Quebec
Leave a Comment

This site could not have been built without the help and insight of Michael Morgenstern. My thanks go out to him.

Help save indie film and give this guy a job in web design or film!