About
Editor: Michela Ledwidge
Accounts
Friends
-
Loading...michela about 20 hours ago
Click here to check if anything new just came in.
August 18 2010
TCIBR: Ted Hope and Katie Holly on creative producing [audio]
TCIBR returns with a special podcast featuring Ted Hope (21 Grams, Adventureland) and Katie Holly (producer of One Hundred Mornings ). Topics covered include creative producing, community curation, making films you’re passionate about as well as what it takes to sustain as a filmmaker in today’s changing landscape.
The WorkBook Project is proud to present One Hundred Mornings the winner of the WBP Discovery and Distribution Award. One Hundred Mornings opens Sept 16th at the Downtown Independent Theater in LA and will run for a week. Special thanks to our partners IndieFlix, Slamdance, The Downtown Independent Theater, Cinema Speakeasy, and CineFist.
July 01 2010
Building a Better Request Tool
Recently, I’ve been keeping a close eye on tools for audience building. Several months ago I was very excited about a project, being funding through Kickstarter, called Openindie – if you’re not following Kieran Masterton on twitter already, then you should be. The site is still in beta, and what is exciting about Openindie is that it’s still finding and building it’s community: it is open to ideas and able to adapt quickly to what the filmmaking community needs.
A few nights ago I was in night-owl mode, with a moleskine and pen in hand, as I was pouring over some of the most-requested films on Openindie. Among them: Heart of Now, We Live in Public, and What’s Up Lovely. I was sketching out site designs that made use of an integrated Openindie request button. Researching which of these top-requested films on Openindie were heavily using Openindie on their film’s main site, the answer: none of them.
Which, I found very strange. But I’ll get to that below.
What I mostly wanted to talk about is: better approaches for audience building. Either for the purpose of mapping out which zipcodes have enough support + demand to schedule screening events, or for other purposes. A question I kept coming back to was “is it necessary for the audience to actually sign-up?”. Openindie does make the process quick and painless by offering Twitter Oauth and Facebook Connect – but does this benefit Openindie more than it does the film?
For example: I’ve been very interested in using twitter as the main engine behind building audience interest – asking that someone interested in FToM simply twitter the hashtag #requestFToM (for those who do not have a twitter account already, they could simply text #requestFToM to 40404). If Openindie could make use of that kind of information, I think it would be a far more powerful tool then having people navigate to a specific URL, sign-up, and then click on the request button. Any #hashtag attributed with GEO information could be mapped immediately, and any #hashtag without could be @replied back to requesting a zipcode. There is no sign-up form, there is no Oauth or Connect needed. Anyone with a cell phone that walks past your flyer on the street could immediately voice their interest.
What I would most love to see from a site like Openindie is a request tool that is 100% flexible on the filmmaker’s end. By that I mean, the request button does not change, you can grab a short piece of code and embed it anywhere you like. But from within Openindie the tool can be scaled out and adjusted in reaction to what is working best and what isn’t. As a filmmaker, what would I like to happen when the request button is clicked?
I would like the visitor to never leave the film’s site. Or if they do leave, much like Paypal, they are returned right back to where they started after the request is finished.
I would like control over what the visitor sees. Have I turned on the options for both twitter and facebook? Or am I just asking them to provide an email? Am I offering all 3 or 4 or 5 options? Does it take them straight to a pre-written twitter with the #hashtag and other important info? These should be settings that can be controlled from the Openindie dashboard without having to replace any embed script.
Once a visitor clicks the request button, that same button then reads: promote. And, of course, have 100% control from within Openindie as to what exactly happens when that is clicked. Does it take the visitor to Openindie’s list of sharing options? Or point them to a site of sharing tools still under the film’s URL? Perhaps I’m running a campaign that involves real-world action like flyers or stickers in public places and want them taken to a page walking them through that idea.
Only a tool that is 100% flexible is going to be a perfect fit for each different filmmaker.
I’m really excited about where Openindie is heading – and I’ve already pestered Kieran about some of these ideas and he seems very open to them, even more so he seems excited about talking to filmmakers and getting feedback on what tools are going to take independent film the furthest.
Building a Better Request Tool
Recently, I’ve been keeping a close eye on tools for audience building. Several months ago I was very excited about a project, being funding through Kickstarter, called Openindie – if you’re not following Kieran Masterton on twitter already, then you should be. The site is still in beta, and what is exciting about Openindie is that it’s still finding and building it’s community: it is open to ideas and able to adapt quickly to what the filmmaking community needs.
A few nights ago I was in night-owl mode, with a moleskine and pen in hand, as I was pouring over some of the most-requested films on Openindie. Among them: Heart of Now, We Live in Public, and What’s Up Lovely. I was sketching out site designs that made use of an integrated Openindie request button. Researching which of these top-requested films on Openindie were heavily using Openindie on their film’s main site, the answer: none of them.
Which, I found very strange. But I’ll get to that below.
What I mostly wanted to talk about is: better approaches for audience building. Either for the purpose of mapping out which zipcodes have enough support + demand to schedule screening events, or for other purposes. A question I kept coming back to was “is it necessary for the audience to actually sign-up?”. Openindie does make the process quick and painless by offering Twitter Oauth and Facebook Connect – but does this benefit Openindie more than it does the film?
For example: I’ve been very interested in using twitter as the main engine behind building audience interest – asking that someone interested in FToM simply twitter the hashtag #requestFToM (for those who do not have a twitter account already, they could simply text #requestFToM to 40404). If Openindie could make use of that kind of information, I think it would be a far more powerful tool then having people navigate to a specific URL, sign-up, and then click on the request button. Any #hashtag attributed with GEO information could be mapped immediately, and any #hashtag without could be @replied back to requesting a zipcode. There is no sign-up form, there is no Oauth or Connect needed. Anyone with a cell phone that walks past your flyer on the street could immediately voice their interest.
What I would most love to see from a site like Openindie is a request tool that is 100% flexible on the filmmaker’s end. By that I mean, the request button does not change, you can grab a short piece of code and embed it anywhere you like. But from within Openindie the tool can be scaled out and adjusted in reaction to what is working best and what isn’t. As a filmmaker, what would I like to happen when the request button is clicked?
I would like the visitor to never leave the film’s site. Or if they do leave, much like Paypal, they are returned right back to where they started after the request is finished.
I would like control over what the visitor sees. Have I turned on the options for both twitter and facebook? Or am I just asking them to provide an email? Am I offering all 3 or 4 or 5 options? Does it take them straight to a pre-written twitter with the #hashtag and other important info? These should be settings that can be controlled from the Openindie dashboard without having to replace any embed script.
Once a visitor clicks the request button, that same button then reads: promote. And, of course, have 100% control from within Openindie as to what exactly happens when that is clicked. Does it take the visitor to Openindie’s list of sharing options? Or point them to a site of sharing tools still under the film’s URL? Perhaps I’m running a campaign that involves real-world action like flyers or stickers in public places and want them taken to a page walking them through that idea.
Only a tool that is 100% flexible is going to be a perfect fit for each different filmmaker.
I’m really excited about where Openindie is heading – and I’ve already pestered Kieran about some of these ideas and he seems very open to them, even more so he seems excited about talking to filmmakers and getting feedback on what tools are going to take independent film the furthest.
May 27 2010
The LOVELY Post Flow
I’ve been asked by a few people to cover the post-production workflow. I already talked about the shooting, editing and test screening process. So now I plan to address the score and sound design component and how everything — in theory — comes together in the end.
Here’s a snapshot of the final project in Final Cut Pro: (remember to keep your dialogue, sound f/x, music all on separate tracks)
This review is all just based on my experiences as I’m sure if I had a post-production supervisor and budget to hire a post-house things would be a lot different.
SCORE
Tackling the score with two different composers (Ken Lampl and Jonathan “Electronathan” Sorge) was no easy task. First off, I had to see if they were even open to this idea.
The reason I was interested in having two composers is I enjoy both their work for different reasons and skill sets — and it’d be an easier time commitment for each (if they split the duties) as they would be doing it as a favor for me. I showed them the rough cut to see if it was something they’d be interested in working on…thankfully they liked it and found it to be a great challenge they wanted to take part in. The main factor that I believe hooked them is that “Lovely” is definitely a score-driven film.
Admittedly, I was a little afraid to even bring up the idea — but knowing each guy personally helped make this a realistic option. They are true gentlemen and professional so I knew approaching them about it would at least be entertained. However, it’s a very risky thing to ask any creative person to join forces (almost like asking 2 filmmakers to co-direct together) — as it leads to potential conflicts. After a few phone calls to clearly define the roles/responsibilities and give each their own autonomy over specific scenes we were off to the races.
We all reviewed the film together in late November 2009. Then they took several movie files from me in order to work separately in their studios to create sketches of ideas. I let them work their magic until January 2010 when I checked in and previewed their cues. There was definitely some back and forth of feedback and revised cues — and by the end of February the score was locked and I was truly amazed.
In fact, the score is now so alive and adaptable with each scene in the film….it moves seamlessly from cue to cue (composer to composer). To me there is no sense of schizophrenia with the score – or at the very least their styles gel quite nicely together where it doesn’t take me out of it. In the end, the audience feedback is just that they truly enjoyed “the score” which is a win for everyone.
SOUND DESIGN
Dialogue clean up and sound f/x were completed by a talented music student — Keith Ukrisna — that I had met while he was interning for a post-studio I was using for “New York Lately“. I delivered the film to him and off he went.
We primarily used Google Wave for our entire communication/review process. There were definitely some lengthy waves going on, but for the most part it helped us keep organized over the entire scope of the film.
Keith spent the majority of time working on cleaning up the audio (primarily the dialogue scenes). Note: Remember to record “room tone” so that you can lay it under your scene to help smooth things out. He worked wonders on some of the scenes. Thankfully we had pretty clean sound throughout, but there were definitely a few locations that had some issues (ex: bar refrigerator, traffic, etc)
I asked him to put all his ideas into the sound design — and then we could scale back as needed. I preferred him to explore the soundscape as I thought there would be things he developed that I never would think of — which happened. There were definitely times where I did say I wasn’t too fond of things and they were removed.
It was an easy process/workflow. We divided the entire film into separate sequences for him to work on and referenced every shot with a timecode window. 
Once sound was approved for each scene, Keith would deliver the sound design files associated with the scene (referencing the timecode on where the file should be plopped in to the timeline to sync up with picture).
The only drawback in asking a student to work on your project is they have school and other activities that may cause delays if you’re on a strict timeline. But for me, the cost-saving advantages far outweighed any hard deadline — even though I kept him on one to keep things on track. Keith did a phenomenal job and I plan to work with him again.
FINAL MIX
I did the final mixing myself on Final Cut Pro. Not the ideal whatsoever but it worked. I had all the separate files (music, sound design, dialogue) on discrete tracks so I could easily mix the levels to what I needed. And since the film is in stereo 2.0 (and not some complex 5.1 or 7.2 mix) I felt I could handle it.
Again, not my choice to do it (I’d really prefer someone else) — but to save money and not burn any favors — I believed I could spend about a week on it. If I had any trouble I had friends willing to help out which was a great safety net.
AFTERTHOUGHTS
The best part was at a recent sneak preview of the film we had the audience comment on how great the music and sound was — which is an incredible testament to my team. They were truly amazing to work with and I hope I can keep them around (and pay them next time!). Sometimes I have to take a step back to really appreciate the amount of talented people that are willing to work with me for very low (or no) pay. I definitely don’t want this to be a regular thing and — as evidenced with my next project “How Do You Write A Joe Schermann Song” — I’m able to move up and gain a little funding which I’m more than happy to share with the people who’ve been there the whole time believing in what I’m doing.
That’s sometimes the best part — to look around at the people who were there with you from the beginning….and to see everyone moving up together. Helping each other along the way. That’s independent filmmaking.
The LOVELY Post Flow
I’ve been asked by a few people to cover the post-production workflow. I already talked about the shooting, editing and test screening process. So now I plan to address the score and sound design component and how everything — in theory — comes together in the end.
Here’s a snapshot of the final project in Final Cut Pro: (remember to keep your dialogue, sound f/x, music all on separate tracks)
This review is all just based on my experiences as I’m sure if I had a post-production supervisor and budget to hire a post-house things would be a lot different.
SCORE
Tackling the score with two different composers (Ken Lampl and Jonathan “Electronathan” Sorge) was no easy task. First off, I had to see if they were even open to this idea.
The reason I was interested in having two composers is I enjoy both their work for different reasons and skill sets — and it’d be an easier time commitment for each (if they split the duties) as they would be doing it as a favor for me. I showed them the rough cut to see if it was something they’d be interested in working on…thankfully they liked it and found it to be a great challenge they wanted to take part in. The main factor that I believe hooked them is that “Lovely” is definitely a score-driven film.
Admittedly, I was a little afraid to even bring up the idea — but knowing each guy personally helped make this a realistic option. They are true gentlemen and professional so I knew approaching them about it would at least be entertained. However, it’s a very risky thing to ask any creative person to join forces (almost like asking 2 filmmakers to co-direct together) — as it leads to potential conflicts. After a few phone calls to clearly define the roles/responsibilities and give each their own autonomy over specific scenes we were off to the races.
We all reviewed the film together in late November 2009. Then they took several movie files from me in order to work separately in their studios to create sketches of ideas. I let them work their magic until January 2010 when I checked in and previewed their cues. There was definitely some back and forth of feedback and revised cues — and by the end of February the score was locked and I was truly amazed.
In fact, the score is now so alive and adaptable with each scene in the film….it moves seamlessly from cue to cue (composer to composer). To me there is no sense of schizophrenia with the score – or at the very least their styles gel quite nicely together where it doesn’t take me out of it. In the end, the audience feedback is just that they truly enjoyed “the score” which is a win for everyone.
SOUND DESIGN
Dialogue clean up and sound f/x were completed by a talented music student — Keith Ukrisna — that I had met while he was interning for a post-studio I was using for “New York Lately“. I delivered the film to him and off he went.
We primarily used Google Wave for our entire communication/review process. There were definitely some lengthy waves going on, but for the most part it helped us keep organized over the entire scope of the film.
Keith spent the majority of time working on cleaning up the audio (primarily the dialogue scenes). Note: Remember to record “room tone” so that you can lay it under your scene to help smooth things out. He worked wonders on some of the scenes. Thankfully we had pretty clean sound throughout, but there were definitely a few locations that had some issues (ex: bar refrigerator, traffic, etc)
I asked him to put all his ideas into the sound design — and then we could scale back as needed. I preferred him to explore the soundscape as I thought there would be things he developed that I never would think of — which happened. There were definitely times where I did say I wasn’t too fond of things and they were removed.
It was an easy process/workflow. We divided the entire film into separate sequences for him to work on and referenced every shot with a timecode window.
Once sound was approved for each scene, Keith would deliver the sound design files associated with the scene (referencing the timecode on where the file should be plopped in to the timeline to sync up with picture).
The only drawback in asking a student to work on your project is they have school and other activities that may cause delays if you’re on a strict timeline. But for me, the cost-saving advantages far outweighed any hard deadline — even though I kept him on one to keep things on track. Keith did a phenomenal job and I plan to work with him again.
FINAL MIX
I did the final mixing myself on Final Cut Pro. Not the ideal whatsoever but it worked. I had all the separate files (music, sound design, dialogue) on discrete tracks so I could easily mix the levels to what I needed. And since the film is in stereo 2.0 (and not some complex 5.1 or 7.2 mix) I felt I could handle it.
Again, not my choice to do it (I’d really prefer someone else) — but to save money and not burn any favors — I believed I could spend about a week on it. If I had any trouble I had friends willing to help out which was a great safety net.
AFTERTHOUGHTS
The best part was at a recent sneak preview of the film we had the audience comment on how great the music and sound was — which is an incredible testament to my team. They were truly amazing to work with and I hope I can keep them around (and pay them next time!). Sometimes I have to take a step back to really appreciate the amount of talented people that are willing to work with me for very low (or no) pay. I definitely don’t want this to be a regular thing and — as evidenced with my next project “How Do You Write A Joe Schermann Song” — I’m able to move up and gain a little funding which I’m more than happy to share with the people who’ve been there the whole time believing in what I’m doing.
That’s sometimes the best part — to look around at the people who were there with you from the beginning….and to see everyone moving up together. Helping each other along the way. That’s independent filmmaking.
May 24 2010
TCIBR: Four Boxes a DIY thriller [audio]
With 40k in hand Wyatt McDill and Megan Huber set out to make a first feature on their own terms. Having spent a few years pushing a script through development hell they came out on the other side wanting to “just make a movie.” The end result is a DIY voyeuristic web thriller entitled Four Boxes
THE STORY: Trevor, Amber and Rob run Go Time Liquidators – an ambulance-chasing eBay auction business. In a dead man’s destroyed suburban house they start watching a bookmarked surveillance-cam website:fourboxes.tv. If fourboxes.tv isn’t just more internet BS, then a crazed creep they call Havoc is building enough bombs to, like, kill everybody in the U.S.
Designed to embrace and work within the confines of an internet experience the films stars Justin Kirk from (Weeds). Four Boxes enjoyed a festival run with stops at SXSW in 09 and has just recently returned from the Cannes Market. This fall Wyatt and Megan will stage a hybrid release of Four Boxes with a mix of touring, VOD, along with few special internet surprises. We caught up with the husband and wife filmmaking team to discuss the project and the freedom that can be found by working within your limitations.
Step into the world of Four Boxes
TCIBR: Four Boxes a DIY thriller [audio]
With 40k in hand Wyatt McDill and Megan Huber set out to make a first feature on their own terms. Having spent a few years pushing a script through development hell they came out on the other side wanting to “just make a movie.” The end result is a DIY voyeuristic web thriller entitled Four Boxes
THE STORY: Trevor, Amber and Rob run Go Time Liquidators – an ambulance-chasing eBay auction business. In a dead man’s destroyed suburban house they start watching a bookmarked surveillance-cam website:fourboxes.tv. If fourboxes.tv isn’t just more internet BS, then a crazed creep they call Havoc is building enough bombs to, like, kill everybody in the U.S.
Designed to embrace and work within the confines of an internet experience the films stars Justin Kirk from (Weeds). Four Boxes enjoyed a festival run with stops at SXSW in 09 and has just recently returned from the Cannes Market. This fall Wyatt and Megan will stage a hybrid release of Four Boxes with a mix of touring, VOD, along with few special internet surprises. We caught up with the husband and wife filmmaking team to discuss the project and the freedom that can be found by working within your limitations.
Step into the world of Four Boxes
May 13 2010
Hosted Screenings – an interview with Sol Tryon
Recently, Ted Hope posted a list entitled 38 More Ways The Film Industry Is Failing Today the first point on the list focuses on building richer theatrical experiences.
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).
This and the other 37 points are definitely worth reading. They raise numerous questions while hinting at possible solutions. In relation to the first point that Ted raises I was struck by the fact that “Hosted Screenings” present an interesting option for those looking to roll something out in today’s theatrical market.
We had a chance to catch up with filmmaker Sol Tryon from Mangusta Productions to hear about his recent experimentation in the hybrid distribution world and how he and his team are working around a “Hosted Screenings” model for their theatrical releases.
What lead to your hybrid distribution efforts around your slate of films?
Over the past few years we have seen the independent film industry flip on it’s head. With the number of films getting big advances for all rights deals dropping drastically, it became apparent that in order to be independent filmmakers with sustainable careers we were going to have to know how to market and distribute our films ourselves. We began exploring and comparing the different options for self, hybrid and traditional distribution. Fortunately, there have been a few other filmmakers blazing these trails already giving us some points of reference to work from. For the most part though, these strategies are only being implemented as a one off sort of thing for specific films. Seeing this as a developing trend, we decided to try to shape our company around eventually being prepared to release all of our films ourselves theatrically. With that as the strategy, we have begun including a modest P&A (prints and advertising) budget into our production budget in order to finance a theatrical release. This puts us, the filmmakers, as well as the initial investors in a greater position of power when it comes to managing the distribution options. If one of the precious few large all rights deals comes our way, we can take it and just distribute the remaining funds back to our investors. If there aren’t any offers we are jumping up and down about, we have the ability to distribute the film ourselves in a way we feel it deserves. The ideal situation being that we develop this strategy for distributing our films to a point where other filmmakers and distributors want to work with us because they see the value we are able to add to a project.
Can you explain how you’re approaching theatrical and the results you’ve seen so far from your efforts?
Our first theatrical release was FIX (directed by Tao Ruspoli; starring Olivia Wilde and Shawn Andrews). We opened in New York and played for two weeks at the Village East. We generated a lot of press and saw a real tangible jump in awareness for the film. One of the most effective strategies we employed was setting up hosted screenings where we invited cast, crew, friends and influential personalities to take part in themed post-screening Q&A’s. For instance, we invited Daniel Pinchbeck, a proponent of hallucinogens, to participate in a discussion with Tao Ruspoli titled: “Drugs: Culture, Addiction and the Exploration of Altered States of Consciousness”. Pinchbeck promoted the screening on his Reality Sandwich blog which, combined with our promotional and marketing efforts, enabled us to sell out a Tuesday night screening.
With our two current films, The Living Wake and 2012: Time For Change we’ve continued in this direction. With 2012: Time For Change we partnered with Green Festivals (the largest green expo in the U.S.). They hold five events throughout the year (San Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Washington D.C., and San Francisco again). We premiered the film April 9th at the San Francisco event where we organized panels on the green festival main stage featuring participants in the film and set up a booth to promote our screenings, build our mailing list, and sell merchandise. Outside of the festival, we booked a Landmark Theater for one screening a night for three nights. With the awareness we built up at the green festival and our grass roots marketing, we sold out all of our screenings and built a strong base of interest in the area for our film. Each night the film was followed by a Q&A featuring a different lineup of luminaries from the film. These events became great opportunities to bring together an eclectic mix of personalities into one space for unique discussions. The guests included Paul Stamets (Mycologist), Rob Garza (Thievery Corporation: Musician), Tiokasin Ghosthorse (First Voices Indigenous Radio), Richard Register (Ecological City Design), Barbara Marx Hubbard (Futurist, Writer), and many more.
We are continuing this approach next in Chicago and are expanding the idea in Seattle to incorporate a full one week theatrical run. The thinking is that Seattle is a great market for this film and with the green festival’s outreach, as well as the attention we received from our San Francisco event the time is right to explore taking things to the next level. We are also planning an event screening in NYC for early July with Sting, Paul Stamets, Ganga White, Daniel Pinchbeck and director Joao Amorim where we will be doing simultaneous screenings through several platforms and streaming the Q&A/panel discussion live after the film.
With our latest release, The Living Wake, we are collaborating with Dylan Marchetti of Variance Films on our theatrical bookings. We started by booking theaters in New York (May 14th) and LA (May 21st). From there we used those dates to build around with other cities. We currently are planning on releasing the film in Seattle (June 4th), Chicago (June 25th) and several other cities through June and July. We have also recently secured separate deals for the DVD and VOD rights, coordinating them both to be released on August 3rd.
Can you share how you design your self hosted screenings?
For our New York release of The Living Wake this week we have a total of twenty hosted screenings set up, and are planning to do the same in Los Angeles next week. Many of the screenings will be hosted by the Filmmakers and Cast members themselves (Sol Tryon, Jesse Eisenberg, Mike O’Connell, Jim Gaffigan), while others will be hosted by special guests such as Shirin Neshat (Women Without Men), Mark Webber (Explicit Ills), Cory McAbee (American Astronaut), Daniel Pinchbeck (2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl), Steve Conrad (The Pursuit of Happyness), and Jimmy Miller (Step Brothers). Several companies and film festivals we have screened at are also jumping in and hosting select screenings in support of the film.
Our goal is to create an event type of experience within the traditional theatrical format. The approach with each host is slightly different. Some hosts are trying to just promote us and our film by bringing people that they think would enjoy it to a specific screening. Others it works two fold for, where they are promoting us, but we are promoting them as well and it becomes a mutually beneficial experience. All of it though is targeted at creating a particular experience around each and every screening for the audience.
What tips would you offer for someone who is interested in booking their own event / hosted screenings?
Give people as many reasons as you can to go out and see your film. It’s hard to get people into the theater, it’s expensive, and you’re competing with a zillion other things so you have to work to make the experience unique and memorable. Form partnerships whenever and wherever possible with groups and individuals and help promote each other. Get as much advice from people who have done it before as you possibly can, but remember that Self and Hybrid Distribution is still very new, there are no set rules as to how it is done so be creative. Lastly, be prepared to work harder than you ever have. The only guarantee in going this route is that the fate of your film rests on you and how much work you are able to put into it.
What’s next and will you be releasing theatrically in more cities?
The Living Wake and 2012: Time For Change will be rolling out to more cities throughout the summer and fall. The next film on our slate for distribution is Being In The World, a documentary directed by Tao Ruspoli (Fix). This project we have been with from the beginning and are devising a strategy for a theatrical tour building on the experiences gained from Fix, 2012: Time For Change and The Living Wake, but gearing everything specifically for this film. We have also decided to work on supporting other indie films that we think deserve a theatrical release, but have not had the opportunity for what ever reason to make it happen yet. In that vein, we are providing the P&A financing for Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench to be released by Variance Films. We have a few projects in development and plan on continuing to do theatrical releases on our own films as well as others. Our goal is to work with filmmakers on establishing a sustainable environment for us all to continue creating the projects that inspire us.
Hosted Screenings – an interview with Sol Tryon
Recently, Ted Hope posted a list entitled 38 More Ways The Film Industry Is Failing Today the first point on the list focuses on building richer theatrical experiences.
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).
This and the other 37 points are definitely worth reading. They raise numerous questions while hinting at possible solutions. In relation to the first point that Ted raises I was struck by the fact that “Hosted Screenings” present an interesting option for those looking to roll something out in today’s theatrical market.
We had a chance to catch up with filmmaker Sol Tryon from Mangusta Productions to hear about his recent experimentation in the hybrid distribution world and how he and his team are working around a “Hosted Screenings” model for their theatrical releases.
What lead to your hybrid distribution efforts around your slate of films?
Over the past few years we have seen the independent film industry flip on it’s head. With the number of films getting big advances for all rights deals dropping drastically, it became apparent that in order to be independent filmmakers with sustainable careers we were going to have to know how to market and distribute our films ourselves. We began exploring and comparing the different options for self, hybrid and traditional distribution. Fortunately, there have been a few other filmmakers blazing these trails already giving us some points of reference to work from. For the most part though, these strategies are only being implemented as a one off sort of thing for specific films. Seeing this as a developing trend, we decided to try to shape our company around eventually being prepared to release all of our films ourselves theatrically. With that as the strategy, we have begun including a modest P&A (prints and advertising) budget into our production budget in order to finance a theatrical release. This puts us, the filmmakers, as well as the initial investors in a greater position of power when it comes to managing the distribution options. If one of the precious few large all rights deals comes our way, we can take it and just distribute the remaining funds back to our investors. If there aren’t any offers we are jumping up and down about, we have the ability to distribute the film ourselves in a way we feel it deserves. The ideal situation being that we develop this strategy for distributing our films to a point where other filmmakers and distributors want to work with us because they see the value we are able to add to a project.
Can you explain how you’re approaching theatrical and the results you’ve seen so far from your efforts?
Our first theatrical release was FIX (directed by Tao Ruspoli; starring Olivia Wilde and Shawn Andrews). We opened in New York and played for two weeks at the Village East. We generated a lot of press and saw a real tangible jump in awareness for the film. One of the most effective strategies we employed was setting up hosted screenings where we invited cast, crew, friends and influential personalities to take part in themed post-screening Q&A’s. For instance, we invited Daniel Pinchbeck, a proponent of hallucinogens, to participate in a discussion with Tao Ruspoli titled: “Drugs: Culture, Addiction and the Exploration of Altered States of Consciousness”. Pinchbeck promoted the screening on his Reality Sandwich blog which, combined with our promotional and marketing efforts, enabled us to sell out a Tuesday night screening.
With our two current films, The Living Wake and 2012: Time For Change we’ve continued in this direction. With 2012: Time For Change we partnered with Green Festivals (the largest green expo in the U.S.). They hold five events throughout the year (San Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Washington D.C., and San Francisco again). We premiered the film April 9th at the San Francisco event where we organized panels on the green festival main stage featuring participants in the film and set up a booth to promote our screenings, build our mailing list, and sell merchandise. Outside of the festival, we booked a Landmark Theater for one screening a night for three nights. With the awareness we built up at the green festival and our grass roots marketing, we sold out all of our screenings and built a strong base of interest in the area for our film. Each night the film was followed by a Q&A featuring a different lineup of luminaries from the film. These events became great opportunities to bring together an eclectic mix of personalities into one space for unique discussions. The guests included Paul Stamets (Mycologist), Rob Garza (Thievery Corporation: Musician), Tiokasin Ghosthorse (First Voices Indigenous Radio), Richard Register (Ecological City Design), Barbara Marx Hubbard (Futurist, Writer), and many more.
We are continuing this approach next in Chicago and are expanding the idea in Seattle to incorporate a full one week theatrical run. The thinking is that Seattle is a great market for this film and with the green festival’s outreach, as well as the attention we received from our San Francisco event the time is right to explore taking things to the next level. We are also planning an event screening in NYC for early July with Sting, Paul Stamets, Ganga White, Daniel Pinchbeck and director Joao Amorim where we will be doing simultaneous screenings through several platforms and streaming the Q&A/panel discussion live after the film.
With our latest release, The Living Wake, we are collaborating with Dylan Marchetti of Variance Films on our theatrical bookings. We started by booking theaters in New York (May 14th) and LA (May 21st). From there we used those dates to build around with other cities. We currently are planning on releasing the film in Seattle (June 4th), Chicago (June 25th) and several other cities through June and July. We have also recently secured separate deals for the DVD and VOD rights, coordinating them both to be released on August 3rd.
Can you share how you design your self hosted screenings?
For our New York release of The Living Wake this week we have a total of twenty hosted screenings set up, and are planning to do the same in Los Angeles next week. Many of the screenings will be hosted by the Filmmakers and Cast members themselves (Sol Tryon, Jesse Eisenberg, Mike O’Connell, Jim Gaffigan), while others will be hosted by special guests such as Shirin Neshat (Women Without Men), Mark Webber (Explicit Ills), Cory McAbee (American Astronaut), Daniel Pinchbeck (2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl), Steve Conrad (The Pursuit of Happyness), and Jimmy Miller (Step Brothers). Several companies and film festivals we have screened at are also jumping in and hosting select screenings in support of the film.
Our goal is to create an event type of experience within the traditional theatrical format. The approach with each host is slightly different. Some hosts are trying to just promote us and our film by bringing people that they think would enjoy it to a specific screening. Others it works two fold for, where they are promoting us, but we are promoting them as well and it becomes a mutually beneficial experience. All of it though is targeted at creating a particular experience around each and every screening for the audience.
What tips would you offer for someone who is interested in booking their own event / hosted screenings?
Give people as many reasons as you can to go out and see your film. It’s hard to get people into the theater, it’s expensive, and you’re competing with a zillion other things so you have to work to make the experience unique and memorable. Form partnerships whenever and wherever possible with groups and individuals and help promote each other. Get as much advice from people who have done it before as you possibly can, but remember that Self and Hybrid Distribution is still very new, there are no set rules as to how it is done so be creative. Lastly, be prepared to work harder than you ever have. The only guarantee in going this route is that the fate of your film rests on you and how much work you are able to put into it.
What’s next and will you be releasing theatrically in more cities?
The Living Wake and 2012: Time For Change will be rolling out to more cities throughout the summer and fall. The next film on our slate for distribution is Being In The World, a documentary directed by Tao Ruspoli (Fix). This project we have been with from the beginning and are devising a strategy for a theatrical tour building on the experiences gained from Fix, 2012: Time For Change and The Living Wake, but gearing everything specifically for this film. We have also decided to work on supporting other indie films that we think deserve a theatrical release, but have not had the opportunity for what ever reason to make it happen yet. In that vein, we are providing the P&A financing for Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench to be released by Variance Films. We have a few projects in development and plan on continuing to do theatrical releases on our own films as well as others. Our goal is to work with filmmakers on establishing a sustainable environment for us all to continue creating the projects that inspire us.
April 11 2010
Slaves of Industry
I don’t want to sell my work to corporations. I want to sell my work to, and share it with, people.
I don’t know why it has taken me this long to land upon this thought, but it hit me like a ton of bricks today. For some time now folks in the ‘industry’ have been crying, rather loudly, about how the system of independent film distribution is broken. I usually took that to mean that they (the individuals telling me how broken things were) simply felt overlooked by a cruel system, which in many cases they perhaps didn’t fully understand, I know I don’t, but now I realize, the shit IS broken. But, it’s not film distribution, it’s much deeper than that, it’s the entire system of American entrepreneurship we so pride ourselves on. For all our ‘rugged individualism’ we sure seem to prefer the role of sheep, even in our art.
We have fundamentally shifted our value system. The rich history of American entrepreneurship, of innovation, of ‘going it our own way’, feels stunted by our inability as 21st century Americans to sustain any kind of long view. It seems that everything, including our art, has become disposable, not built to last. We no longer start new business (or make films, or make anything) in an effort to carve out and create new, and sustainable industry (or culture), we plan exit strategies. And, nearly 100% of the time, that exit strategy means selling out to a corporation, no matter what your business.
This is so very prevalent in the world of independent film. The whole business, if we can call it that, to date, has been built on exit strategy. Many filmmakers “just wanna make films”, and not be bothered with those troublesome technicalities of how their genius makes it onto screens, just as long as their genius is recognized. So, producers package this profundity in a manner pleasing to the tastes of corporations, and simply role the dice, as the independent film industry has no actual sound business model for bringing a product (film) to market. And, since the strategy for the producer is based on the exit, throughout the entire process of production the actual end user, who in most cases will not be the corporation, but rather everyday people, have never been considered, brought in to the process, or otherwise engaged. Because it would of course diminish the art, and mystery of our cinema.
It’s 2010 folks. Take a look out your window. There is not much mystery left under the sun, and the golden age of indie film, those long lost 90’s, have so sanitized the idea of cinema it’s turned filmmakers into some of the least adept people at revealing the deeper struggles, meanings, and questions of this life through their art. Of course we’ll deny that loudly, and stake our claim as the preeminent art of this age, as we continue to chase down ‘industry’ desperate to be seen, to be scooped up, coddled, and told how wonderfully exciting we are. But, the reality is, we’re struggling to stay relevant in an every changing world, and doing a bang up job of proving it as we continue to produce sub-par rehashes of our beloved 70’s, and our roaring 90’s cinema. YouTube is relevant, you’re boring.
Because of all this, and because enough people have lost their shirt pursuing their independent film careers (dreams, fantasies…), the conversation has obviously turned heavily toward “how do we sustain?” It’s a new era of responsibility across the board. It may costs less to make, and distribute independent films now, but it still costs money. And, as long as it costs money, and we are going to assume it is a business, there is a responsibility placed upon the filmmakers to ensure the work makes as much, or more money than it costs to produce. If we can not fulfill that promise, then we might as well call it a hobby.
When you actually just stop and think about it, it’s completely insane. Independent film, as ‘business’, depends on audience, on people to pay for tickets, DVDs and downloads. But, generally doesn’t, in any tangible way, consider that audience at any point in developing, producing, and marketing their wares. Even when we all get together and talk about developing, producing, and marketing our wares. We’ll engage in conversations about what the market wants, ie. the corporations, but it’s somehow taboo, and an affront to the art of cinema to talk about the audience on which we all depend.
Part of the reason we find ourselves in this debacle, and in this conversation, is because the business of producing ‘independent’ film has never been about the distribution. This is at the heart of the great, and growing divide between what is considered the ‘independent film industry’, and the growing micro-budget or diy ‘movement’. The ‘industry’ depends upon financiers funding budgets to provide salaries to sustain, in contrast the ‘movement’ generally does not have the luxury of budget, and depends on (figuring out new means, and methods of) distribution to sustain.
Based on that assertion alone, which ’sector’ as it were, do you think will be leading the way in the next decade? Where will the innovation come from? And, how long can a business that doesn’t consider itself dependent on the distribution of its product, and that for all intents and purposes is a form of legalized gambling, actually sustain?
From where I am standing the writing is on the wall, and the message is clear. If you want to carve out a sustainable career as a 21st century ‘independent’ filmmaker (or artist, or musician), forget trying to appease the gatekeepers, because the gates are crumbling, and swiftly revealing the mess of an ‘industry’ that was built more on magic, and illusion than anything else. It’s time to dig in, take the long view, take responsibility, and get to work. Go out and make friends, lots, and lots of friends, and be willing to openly share your work with those new friends at every stage of the process, understanding that the ability for you to sustain and thrive from your work, (and yes -we’re talking dollars here), depends solely on your audience for that work. You cannot getting something for nothing, and if you build it -they will not automatically come, so put in the face time, digital or otherwise, and get to know the people who want to know you, and embrace their embracing of your work.
It’s time to revel in the fact that you can make films for less money, and with less crew. It’s a good thing. Time to take pride in your uniqueness, and to have pride of ownership. Strive to be one of the artists driving cinema forward. Stop chasing industry, and start building relationships. While corporations are looking for tried and true, there are a lot of people out there who are looking for something off the beaten path, and refreshingly new. Take heart in that. Be bold. Be consistent. Be vocal. Be open. Concentrate of your craft, and lead the way.
In the next 2-3 years we will see a Hollywood more and more dependent on spectacle, which they do well and will likely thrive at, and an independent film industry decimated under they weight of its own bloated self importance, if it continues in it’s long held practice of producing for exit strategy. There is only so much money out there.
The choice for us ‘independent’ artists seems very clear to me. Pioneer a new and sustainable film culture based on relationships with people, rather than corporations, or go the way of the dinosaur.
April 02 2010
The Cycle of Success, Rejection and Anonymity
Whenever I sit down to write a post, I always freeze. I transform from ‘loudmouthed truck driver’ to Cindy Brady the instant that record light turns on. Some of you may be wondering where the hell I’ve been for the last year. The answer is (usually delivered monotone), “Working on Abel Raises Cain.” And in return, the incredulous response from family and friends is always, “What? Still?”
Yes, it’s true. It turns out that the finish line is nonexistent, the definition of success is completely nebulous, relative and random. At what point do you stop? Never. Once you make a film, you’re chained to it for life. While the preceding sounds grim, I’m actually enjoying the journey, although I’m tired as hell. The high points have overshadowed all of the ‘no’ men, naysayers and other assorted sour grapes who tried to thwart me along the way. Their feeble attempts to rain on my parade only made me stronger and more persistent.
While I may cry myself to sleep at night over our declining DVD sales and pray that all of the nice people out there who have watched torrents or free streams of our film (our anonymous ‘fans’) will one day send us even just a few pennies, I remain optimistic that our small little movie that has taken on a life of its own will indeed survive another decade.
I’ve kind of resigned myself to the fact that it’s impossible to track all of our ‘fans.’ (BTW, my parents ask for everyone who has seen the movie and laughed out loud at least once to send them a dollar in the mail.) The current issue getting everyone riled up is CreateSpace’s recently revised policy to no longer share buyer data with its clients, claiming that information sharing is a breach of consumers’ privacy.
I handle our own DVD fulfillment, so I develop a ‘personal’ relationship with all of our direct sales customers. Amazon is a different story. I supply the stock to them (through my Advantage account), so at least I know how many units are moving, but the buyers remain faceless and nameless. On one hand, I feel good about being partially involved in the process. But it’s like a one-night stand after a drunken night on the town. No phone number and you never see that person again. Not that I would know, of course.
Right now, we’re totally reliant on word-of-mouth in terms of people stumbling upon our film. We never had a budget for Publicity and Advertising. Our DIY journey has been an ever-morphing experiment with a million different variables at play. I continue to figure things out as I go. I struggle to embrace even just a few of the incredible tools at our collective disposal, some of which Lance Weiler talks about in a recent Culture Hacker article. The dizzying array of possible directions any one filmmaker can take in order to reach his or her audience is mind-blowing.
One of the last frontiers that I’ve been obsessing over, wondering how in the hell we’re going to crack this ‘old world’ nut, is the esteemed educational market. To my question posed prior to the Filmmaker Summit, Is it possible for filmmakers to independently tackle educational sales and succeed, the answer is a resounding YES! I’ve recently been shown the light and have begun to embark on this journey with the help of another filmmaker, Ashley Sabin of Carnivalesque Films. Please stay tuned as I report back on our progress…I don’t want to jinx anything, but it’s looking like I may not need to raid our penny jar for groceries this month.
March 30 2010
The Cycle of Success, Rejection and Anonymity
Whenever I sit down to write a post, I always freeze. I transform from ‘loudmouthed truck driver’ to Cindy Brady the instant that record light turns on. Some of you may be wondering where the hell I’ve been for the last year. The answer is (usually delivered monotone), “Working on Abel Raises Cain.” And in return, the incredulous response from family and friends is always, “What? Still?”
Yes, it’s true. It turns out that the finish line is nonexistent, the definition of success is completely nebulous, relative and random. At what point do you stop? Never. Once you make a film, you’re chained to it for life. While the preceding sounds grim, I’m actually enjoying the journey, although I’m tired as hell. The high points have overshadowed all of the ‘no’ men, naysayers and other assorted sour grapes who tried to thwart me along the way. Their feeble attempts to rain on my parade only made me stronger and more persistent.
While I may cry myself to sleep at night over our declining DVD sales and pray that all of the nice people out there who have watched torrents or free streams of our film (our anonymous ‘fans’) will one day send us even just a few pennies, I remain optimistic that our small little movie that has taken on a life of its own will indeed survive another decade.
I’ve kind of resigned myself to the fact that it’s impossible to track all of our ‘fans.’ (BTW, my parents ask for everyone who has seen the movie and laughed out loud at least once to send them a dollar in the mail.) The current issue getting everyone riled up is CreateSpace’s recently revised policy to no longer share buyer data with its clients, claiming that information sharing is a breach of consumers’ privacy.
I handle our own DVD fulfillment, so I develop a ‘personal’ relationship with all of our direct sales customers. Amazon is a different story. I supply the stock to them (through my Advantage account), so at least I know how many units are moving, but the buyers remain faceless and nameless. On one hand, I feel good about being partially involved in the process. But it’s like a one-night stand after a drunken night on the town. No phone number and you never see that person again. Not that I would know, of course.
Right now, we’re totally reliant on word-of-mouth in terms of people stumbling upon our film. We never had a budget for Publicity and Advertising. Our DIY journey has been an ever-morphing experiment with a million different variables at play. I continue to figure things out as I go. I struggle to embrace even just a few of the incredible tools at our collective disposal, some of which Lance Weiler talks about in a recent Culture Hacker article. The dizzying array of possible directions any one filmmaker can take in order to reach his or her audience is mind-blowing.
One of the last frontiers that I’ve been obsessing over, wondering how in the hell we’re going to crack this ‘old world’ nut, is the esteemed educational market. To my question posed prior to the Filmmaker Summit, Is it possible for filmmakers to independently tackle educational sales and succeed, the answer is a resounding YES! I’ve recently been shown the light and have begun to embark on this journey with the help of another filmmaker, Ashley Sabin of Carnivalesque Films. Please stay tuned as I report back on our progress…I don’t want to jinx anything, but it’s looking like I may not need to raid our penny jar for groceries this month.
January 05 2010
OpenIndie an interview with Kieran Masterton
By Lance Weiler – OpenIndie burst onto the scene this past fall when Arin Crumley (Four Eyed Monsters) and Kieran Masterton ( a software developer) successfully raised over 12k via a kickstarter campaign to bootstrap a new theatrical on-demand model. Frustrated at the current state of distribution the two teamed up to create a service that will help filmmakers find audiences and audiences find films. I had a chance to ask Kieran some questions around OpenIndie, the importance of data and what thinks the real-time web might mean for storytelling.
WBP: What will the role of social curation play within OpenIndie? Is it important and what types of trends have you seen emerging in the area of social curation afforded by the real-time web?
KIERAN MASTERTON: OpenIndie will work socially in a similar manner to Twitter in that you will have non-reciprocal relationships with other users i.e. users you are following and users who are following you. Unlike Twitter, however, it is user actions on the site, plus a small optional comment, that is recorded in their stream. So, when a user requests a film in their area or RSVPs to a screening it is that information that will be disseminated to their followers. Meaning in terms of social curation almost every action a user makes on the site will let their followers know which films and events they believe to be valuable.
I think one of the keys to enabling the crowd to filter out the noise in these increasingly distracting social spaces is to link their ability to be part of the conversation to a positive action. What I mean by this is that I believe in the value of a positive actions within the community. Putting on a screening via OpenIndie has hugely positive outcomes: a group of film fans get to see a film and the filmmaker gets a screening and hopefully a little revenue in return. Then the reverberations of that real-world event begin to travel across the real-time web with screening specific hash tags for social spaces like Twitter, Flickr, Vimeo and YouTube. The outcome of these positive actions, I believe, should be a louder voice within the community.
The problem of how to execute personal, social and professional curation on socially powered sites is, I think, one of the most important challenges facing developers and information architects in 2010. One site that I think could be one to watch, with regard to social curation, is Stackoverflow.com, a collaboratively edited question and answer site for programmers. Their reputation system is driven by the quality of the answers Developers give to questions on the site. This system is now, in turn, being used to power a Developer recruitment site. While, obviously, their methods can’t be directly translated to OpenIndie, I think they’re getting things right and we should be taking note.
WBP: Do you have any feelings about visualizing the attention economy that is online? In the sense that there are interesting ways to hook into various social APIs. Have you and Arin discussed ways to visualize the demand for a film? Online, via mobile and in the real world?
I think some of things being done with visualisation are fantastic. I’ve been following the stuff that Flickr have been doing on their Developer Blog and also the open source software visualisation project code_swarm. And I also think that subtractive blending overlay maps like the one below from Shawn Allen on Flickr are potentially extremely revealing for mobile social activity on OpenIndie.
Naturally, Arin and I have talked about geographical mapping in a similar vein to the heart map developed for Four Eyed Monsters. However, we haven’t discussed specifically ideas around real-time visualisation which I think could be especially interesting working with OpenIndie’s API on mobile devices both before and after screenings. Filmmakers could get insights into their audience but perhaps more exciting is the potential for storytellers to work with our data to expand the world of their film.
Flickr Devs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/revdancatt/3398050524/
code_swarm: http://vis.cs.ucdavis.edu/~ogawa/codeswarm/
Overlay map from Shawn Allen: http://www.flickr.com/photos/shazbot/3282821808/
WBP: I strongly believe that data is an area that will become increasing more valuable to filmmakers. Such as the data around their films and their audiences. I’m a proponent of of DataPortability and would love to see some type of audience sharing protocol established that enables audience to be aggregated in anonymous ways. Are these things that you’re considering around the development of OpenIndie? The name and what I’ve discussed with Arin leads me to believe that you want to be as open as possible. From a programming / development perspective how do you achieve openness that will satisfy the needs of both filmmakers and audiences?
KM: I couldn’t agree more and likewise, I’m a proponent of the DataPortability Project. Arin and I are determined to bring those values to OpenIndie. Data is already tremendously important to filmmakers, and I agree, it is only going to increase in value. As a programmer it is extremely tempting to do it yourself, to establish your own standards and close your doors to the world. Similarly, in the business world, it is very tempting to look upon your data as an asset that should be protected but I genuinely believe that opportunity comes from openness.
One thing fundamental to OpenIndie, that it’s important to understand if you’re filmmaker signing up to the site, is that the data surrounding your film is not private. What I mean by this is that OpenIndie believes it is beneficial to everyone for data pertaining to requests, screenings, and audience attendance etc. to be open. A filmmaker is not the only user who is going to have access to statistical information about a film’s life on OpenIndie. This is simply because the more applications that are built to utilise that data, the more attention a film gets and in turn the audience for that film grows. Whether it’s a one-off iPhone app for a film that tells you, wherever you are in the world, where you can find the nearest screening or a number-crunching web app for market research purposes it’s all of value to the filmmaker and the audience. I think the key point to remember is that we’re not building this site just for the benefit of filmmakers, or audiences or exhibitors the focus is ensuring the same level and quality of information is available to all those groups and beyond.
Finally, I must note that we are not planning to release any private data via our open API. Users will be able to give permission to release various levels of information such as geo-specific data, but we’re not in the business of handing out email addresses. What we do want to do is provide a open elegant interface for working with the fairly large amounts of data we are going to amass and for that data to be as complete as possible.
WBP: Any thoughts on the future of the real-time web and where you’d like to see it go especially in relation to filmmaking?
KM: As a geeky type I especially excited about SimpleGeo who have developed a cloud based platform for building location aware applications. I think that the potential for this product is immense in providing context to almost any action performed in the cloud. Likewise, they will give apps the ability to perform “complex geospatial and temporal queries” on their SimpleGeo enabled data. I can see fantastic opportunities for this with OpenIndie especially in real-time mobile applications. I eagerly awaiting a beta invite.
In terms of filmmaking I’m extremely excited to see how the real-time web can become part of storytelling, especially in a theatrical sense. I’m a passionate cinephile and love the theatrical experience and would love to see real-time web applications allowing the story world and the real world to blend. I’ve love to see OpenIndie involved with filmmakers using our data to make their story more immersive and we’d be extremely interested to hear from any filmmakers who are working in this area.
RELATED:
Arin Crumley explains OpenIndie
Phase 1 Successfully Funded! from OpenIndie on Vimeo.
November 30 2009
10 Lessons Learned – The New Year Parade
By Tom Quinn – In the fall of 2003 I began work on The New Year Parade with my co-producer, Steve Beal. Steve was a high school biology teacher with no film background and I was the building AV tech who would stop in at lunch to talk about my screenplay, which followed a South Philadelphia family through the first year of a divorce. It was loosely based on interviews I had filmed with friends about their parents’ divorces and set against the backdrop of Mummery, a centuries old tradition in South Philadelphia where the working class holds a parade on January first. The film concept was not entirely practical: in addition to the core cast we would need a hundred musicians in costume, thousands of extras, and permission to close Broad Street to film the parade sequences.
A Bit of History
The Mummers began strutting during pre-Revolutionary times and grew until the city organized an official parade in 1901. Popularity peaked in the 1960’s when thousands upon thousands would crowd the streets and bands like Quaker City and Ferko were nationally known. Like the rest of the country, the Mummers have been hit by hard times and the city was forced to cut funding in 2008. This past year, Philadelphia natives Kevin and Michael Bacon got involved with the Save the Mummers foundation www.savethemummers.com, organizing a Bacon Brothers benefit concert on December 5.
Lesson 1: Turn Your Perceived Weaknesses into Strengths
When Steve and I told friends about our script, they thought we were crazy: We had no money to speak of and could not afford seasoned actors, permits to shut down Broad Street, or props and costumes to create the parade. Inspired by Jim McKay’s Our Song we approached The South Philadelphia String Band to see if they would permit usage of their club and costumes for two weeks. Instead, we were welcomed in for three years as the band acted in the film; incorporated our cast and crew into rehearsals; gave us old costumes and keys to their club; and obtained press passes so we could shoot the 2005 Mummers parade with five cameras. Before we began shooting, I joined the Mummers’ Grapevine (a message board for members) and submitted sections of the script for feedback. We were also fortunate enough to work with The Quaker City String Band who acted as South Philadelphia’s chief competitor in the film. Because of the community’s endless support our film captures the Mummer world to an unprecedented degree.
Lesson 2: A Small, Dedicated Group Can Do Wonders
While we were fortunate to have a few professional young actors aboard, the majority of our cast had never acted before. To build the nonactors’ confidence we spent four months rehearsing and rewriting the script – shaping it to their personalities. Many scenes were shot as long improvisations, riffing off the screenplay while allowing the cast to tap into their own raw feelings and experiences. To keep our costs down, we filmed on nights and weekends over the course of three years while most of the team kept their full time jobs or were enrolled in school. This was a tremendous commitment for all involved – particularly the cast (who could not cut their hair for three years). For instance, Jennifer Welsh was in college and working full time while Greg Lyons moved to LA when his band Eastern Conference Champions was signed. Despite their busy schedules, the entire cast was professional and focused – always ready to perform, dress the sets, or pack up gear. Our crew was very small: typically the ever-talented Mark Doyle would run sound, light the set, set up the video monitor and occasionally act. Meanwhile, I shot and worked with the actors. On larger days we were lucky to have one or two extra hands (including the extremely loyal PA Grant Gaudry), but the crew was never more than five. It was a wonderful atmosphere and really did feel like a family by the end.
Lesson 3: You Don’t Need $$$ to Connect With An Audience
By 2007, we had shot 160 hours of tape, including 80 hours of documentary footage of Mummer practices, parades, and concerts. Our cut was progressing slowly when we were accepted into the amazing IFP Narrative Rough Cut Lab. Coming off the Lab we hit the pavement with new momentum and premiered at Slamdance in 2008. To our surprise we were awarded The Grand Jury prize for Best Narrative and followed it up with a great week at SXSW and 7 additional festival awards. 2008 ended with a Gotham Award nomination for The Best Film Not Playing in a Theater Near You, which brought the film to MOMA for an exclusive run. All of this for a film that was shot on digital video for $7,000!
Lesson 4: Find Passionate Partners
Steve and I briefly considered a theatrical run to coincide with the 2009 parade, but knew our release would benefit from time to plan. Fortunately, Carnivalesque Films were interested in releasing a DVD. Carnivalesque is a fairly new independent label we’re pretty psyched about. They are releasing exciting independent work like Mardi Gras: Made in China, Orphans, and Woodpecker. Owners David Redmon and Ashley Sabin are both filmmaker friendly and very hard working. We decided on a November 24 release to coincide with “Mum Season” in Philadelphia and began work on the DVD design and content.
Lesson 5: Create a Final Product With Audience in Mind
Based on our festival experience we felt there were three core audiences who would buy the DVD: Aspiring filmmakers, Mummer fans, and family counselors. Our aim was to create a DVD they would want to own rather than rent so we created eighty minutes of bonus features we thought they would enjoy. For aspiring filmmakers, we shot interviews with most of the major cast and crew and cut a “Making Of” that is unusually detailed for a low-budget film. Our hope was that, by including footage of auditions, rehearsals, and deleted scenes, other filmmakers could learn from our successes and failures.
I spoke to the friends I interviewed before shooting the film, and they were all supportive of including their discussions on divorce. During our festival run we had met many family counselors who thought the film could be useful to their profession because it explored the problem in a realistic way. We also met so many wonderful people, from the 68-year old woman in Ashland, Oregon to the 20-year old in Torino, Italy who had experienced divorce first hand and connected to the characters’ experiences. My hope had always been to generate discussion about divorce because, while it is a topic we often consider understood, many people have unresolved feelings toward it.
Finally, we created a “Behind-The-Sequins” section of the DVD, which provides a glimpse into Mummery. Everywhere we have screened, people have wanted to know more about the Mummers. We reached out to The Mummers’ String Band Association, who provided oral history interviews they had taped. We included three that related to the film. We also shot a History of The South Philadelphia String Band as a thanks for all they had given. The short documentary piece covers the band from their inception in 1946 through present day and includes interviews with 14 members, including Jim Donaghy, who had been their highly respected captain for 30 years.
For design, we turned to Matt Hanemann, a Philadelphia based designer and musician who had created our poster artwork. We both felt the design needed to be recognizable at a very small size as the DVD would often be a thumbnail online. Matt shifted the proportions from the poster concept to create greater emphasis on the title and created a beautiful back cover full of quotes and images. For the inside booklet, we used a photo from Charlie Roetz, a mummer from Quaker City String Band who tells the real story behind the photo in the film. Finally, we were fortunate to have Steven Rea, a respected critic with the Philadelphia Inquirer, write our liner notes.
Lesson 6: Theaters Will Work With You
To build awareness for the DVD release, Steve and I booked a theatrical run in Philadelphia through Landmark Theaters. We had reached out to Landmark in February and while they loved the film, they had concerns as to whether we could fill the theater for a week. Steve continued the conversation all summer while we simultaneously reached out to our press contacts in the Philadelphia area. Throughout our festival run, we had been contacted by reporters interested in a story, but we asked them to hold off until a release. We asked if they were still interested and went back to Landmark with confirmations from The Philadelphia Inquirer, City Paper, Daily News, and Philadelphia Weekly. In early October, they agreed to open the film on October 30 at their Ritz Bourse Theatre with five screenings per day. This all proved….
Lesson 7: Print is Not Dead
When Landmark first requested we buy an ad in The Inquirer we wondered whether that money could be better spent online. So much has been written in the past few years about the death of print and we did not have the funds to waste. Yet when it came time to premiere the film we found a very high percentage of our audience had discovered the film in print, despite a heavier online presence. The best answer I have is that the print audience is a paying culture and more likely to go to a theater and purchase a ticket whereas the online folks appear rabid at times, but may be more likely to wait for DVD on Amazon, Netflix, or bit torrent.
Lesson 8: Regional Filmmaking = Regional Release
Since we only had 4 weeks to promote and $300 left for P&A, Steve and I began work on a grassroots campaign to build awareness. We printed 200 mini-posters and I e-mailed the 18 string band presidents. Over the next 2 weeks I visited every club I could to talk directly to the members about our film. Meanwhile, Steve connected with Save The Mummers, who began promoting the run through their website (in exchange, we donated a portion of our Saturday night box). I also cut a new trailer geared toward the Philadelphia region, which featured the Vet and more obscure Mummer references. In the two weeks prior to the premiere our Facebook fans went from 220 to 2000! The excitement was electric!
Lesson 9: Free Beer Can’t Hurt
To kick off our run, Steve organized an event at Top Hat, a bar within walking distance to the theater who offered a free beer to each ticket holder. Then, 2nd Street Annie’s (owned by one of the Mummers in the film) offered a free drink to any ticket holder all week! Finally, we paired up with the amazing marketing agency 95 North, who sponsored a free happy hour mid-week! There, we projected bonus materials from the DVD, had a chance to meet fans of the film, and 95 North auctioned off free tickets to the screening! All of these events gave the audience a chance to interact with the cast and crew, and to meet other fans of the film.
Lesson 9: An Event Brings Press & People
After a year of traveling without The South Philadelphia String Band we were thrilled to include them in the premiere. Nobody brings a good time like the Mummers and this was certainly the case as they piled off the bus to play outside the theater.
Within minutes a crowd had gathered and was dancing in the street, cars were stopped, and the press showed up. Fox 29 interviewed me as the band played in the background, and then shared the footage with other area networks! Afterwards, three members from the band participated in the Q&A with the cast, allowing the audience to learn more about Mummery and their unique involvement in the film first hand.
Lesson 10: The Yankees Hate Independent Film
We knew from the get go it would be difficult to go up against Halloween, but never expected the Phils to be playing The World Series that weekend. It was tough competition, but fortunately our grassroots campaign paid off and Landmark extended the film for a second week! Word of mouth began catching on beyond the Mummer and art house crowd that second week and many new fans were disappointed the run ended before their friends could make it. All in all, the theatrical run brought in $6,766.50 on one screen and 1900 new Facebook fans just in time for the DVD release!
So Now What?
Our DVD was released through Carnivalesque Films this week and sales have been incredible! Netflix is backed up and word of mouth has been crazy good. We never expected any of this and are thrilled by the results. I’m especially grateful for the e-mails, hugs, and handshakes I’ve gotten from Mummers in Philadelphia thrilled to see their tradition respected and taken to a larger audience. Meanwhile, Carnivalesque has been helping with additional theatrical events. Next up is a week at Facets Cinematheque in Chicago from December 11 – 17.
When not wearing the many hats of distribution, I’ve begun working on a new screenplay set in the suburbs of Philadelphia where I can apply these 10 lessons. I look forward to learning 10 more.
Tom Quinn’s debut feature, The New Year Parade, was selected for the IFP Narrative Rough Cut Labs, won the Grand Jury Prize for Best Narrative at Slamdance, and was a Gotham Award nominee for “Best Film Not Playing in a Theater Near You.” Tom has been listed one of the “25 New Faces of Independent Film” by Filmmaker Magazine and “Ten Young Writer-Directors to Watch,” by MovieMaker Magazine. He was fortunate to be the first American filmmaker accepted to the Toronto International Film Festival Talent Lab and is currently working toward his MFA at Temple University.
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
