I got a kick out of Hollywood’s Reporter’s recent article on the WikiLeaks cables. There they put forth the realization that George Clooney, Desperate Housewives, and Late Night With David Letterman do more to prevent jihad than the $500M the US State Dept dumped into funding the TV station in Saudi Arabia.
I have long thought we damn the perception of America by only allowing the market to decide what films travel overseas. Okay, granted that is a bit of an oversimplification, but when so much money is spent marketing The Studios’ product, the overseas audiences basically get to see that Americans like to drive fast and blow shit up. I know we are a wee bit more diverse than that.
If the films from Sundance or any other regional festival were given away to developing nations, the people of the world would have a much different impression of whom we are, culturally speaking. Okay, maybe they’d think we are a bit obsessed with coming out and perhaps made up of predominately junkie moms trying to go straight, but they still would be presented with a much greater tapestry.
If the US State department funded a giveaway of US Indie films, not only would Indie’s have access to audiences, communities, and markets that they currently struggle to find, but hey, what’s so funny about getting a little world peace in the windfall?
Today, the 20th Anniversary edition of THE UNBELIEVABLE TRUTH becomes available. You can order it here on director Hal Hartley’s website. This little film, put in the can for around $55K, and finished for about $125K, launched many a career (Hal, Adrienne Shelly, Edie Falco, Robert John Burke, Kelly Reichardt, Nick Gomez, Danny Liener, Bob Gosse, Whitney Ransick, Mike Spiller, Sarah Cawley, Chris Rogers and many more). It changed my perspective on getting things done, on not waiting for others’ acceptance or approval, and to instead use the power and will we all need to maintain. I am confident it holds many lessons still for us all and am eager to leap into it again. But what does it’s creator have to say? Hal speaks: [...]
I get asked this question a lot: “What is the hardest thing about being an indie film producer today?” It is worth doing a much longer post on, listing all of the problems we all face. But as I said, I get asked this a lot, and I don’t think they are looking for 75 or more answers (I have those up here and here). Usually folks are looking for the short answer. This is that answer, or rather at least, how I answered it today.
The pay has dropped significantly while the job description has increased ten fold, and the demand for both services and advice have increased even more. We producers are expected to (and must) source and develop new material, package it with talent, put together a production plan, and then find a way to finance it. Of course we have to execute those plans at the highest level possible, all the while dealing with the unique personalities that flock to indie film production, but we are also expected to then put together a marketing plan, distribution strategy, social media outreach organization, and festival plan – and probably raise the funds for all of that (or figure out how to do it without funding). We need our own community built from the start and we have to provide them with meaningful contact, satisfying information and content, and the opportunity to collaborate together. On top of all of that, most of this is not a science and the workable business model for indie film in this day and age has not yet evolved and certainly has not been shared. To just discover the tools for this requires more hours than there are in a day. Oh yeah, and we don’t get paid for any of these endeavors until the full film is financed – and then we are asked to reduce our fees regularly. The only way to survive is too work on some many projects simultaneously, you are unable to give each project the attention you want. And I did mention that most of the folks that you collaborate with along the way adopt an approach that they must be your top priority at all times?
Not that I am complaining. It is a good life (just not a good job). I am not building widgets (well, okay I am building widgets to help, but I am not JUST building widgets).
That’s the short answer. For today. And check out the replies to this question on my Twitter feed & FaceBook page(s). A lot of good conversation out there. We can build it better together.
Guest post by Jeffrey Ballagh, lead strategist for Novacut (Note from Ted: I have not used Novacut, but heard what they were aiming for and asked Jeffrey to explain it to all of you.)
The future of distribution and funding for independent film relies on the Internet. The technology to forge a new business model for independent film success is out there, but it needs nerd champions to build a venue where artist-to-audience commerce can thrive. To thrive, that venue must be the condensation point for the independent filmmaking community. For that to be possible, that venue needs a strategy for reaching critical mass and a damn good draw for filmmakers’ attention. This is what we know, and this is Novacut.
The spark? A pro-grade video editor that’s free and designed from the ground up to exploit recent advances in technology and community – to name a few: digital production, HDSLR cameras, online collaboration, and cloud computing. [...]
Okay, so the traffic is sometimes louder than the dialogue, but hey, this is Indie! I had wanted to partake in this interview that David Poland did at TIFF this year. There was only one hour when Christine and I were both in Toronto though, and it took a bit longer to close the SUPER deal than I had anticipated. Christine and David paint a pretty good picture of what things are like for indie producers these days.
9/21 Update: Seems like the link I found for this kind of jumped the gun. It came down as I was watching it. I assume David Poland will post soon on the MCN website. And hopefully the video will work again. Hope hoping here…
Update 9/21 #2: It’s up on MCN, but I can’t embed it for some reason
Unfortunately if I sought to get compensated for the work I do, my movies would not get made. If I sought to get paid like normal people are, I never would have been able to produce any of my films.
I have been fortunate enough to have made about sixty films in about twenty years. I am not foolish enough to think I was the deciding factor in bringing good ideas into cinematic being, but I do know that certain practices of mine, have helped significantly. Yes, it is also true that good work begets other good work, and a track record certainly helps — particularly a track record of profitability — but generally all of my films depend on two things to get made: 1) superior quality of the material, and 2) the willingness of the collaborators to make great sacrifices.
There’s more though on why these films have happened; there have been commonalities amongst all the films that have helped significantly in their getting made. I have to repeatedly go out on the limb, believing in the film and the filmmaker for years on end, with no remuneration, pushing to make the project better, figuring out how in the hell to bring more “value” to it, shopping it, strategizing and the like.
[...]
Today’s guest post is courtesy of James Fair.
When I wrote ‘Linearity is the Enemy’ for Ted last month, I briefly mentioned how I felt the ‘family tree’ style organisational structure of filmmaking could look more like a ‘mind map’. I want to clarify my point a little further and follow it with why I think it is relevant.
In Figure 1, I have drawn what many consider to be the model that represents filmmaking structure best. [...]
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!
