Virtual World News: Indie Film Fest to Simulcast in Multiverse Places

Chris Sherman's Virtual World New reports a very interesting report of a film festival developing in the Virtual World community. The short description is reprinted:

Indie Film Fest to Simulcast in Multiverse Places

From Here to Awesome, an independent film festival, will be showing at New York City's Times Square Art Center from October 22-24. For those that can't make it, 7 of the films will also be simulcast in Multiverse's recently launched virtual world, Places. The group also hopes to build a virtual community around each of the films with live filmmaker Q&As and post-screening dance parties held in the virtual Times Square with SHOUTcast radio streams. The virtual edition of the fest ties in particularly well since the organizers are working to promote distribution and discovery with other new media outlets like Amazon, Vudu, Joost, Hulu, NetFlix, and Caachi. You can find out more information on the Multiverse Places line up here. "From Here to Awesome is an experiment to directly connect filmmakers and audiences," Lance Weiler, co-founder of From Here to Awesome, said in a statement. "The internet has provided all the tools needed for filmmakers to make feature films but the struggle to secure a distributor and to market their film is still a paramount obstacle filmmakers face. This is why we created From Here To Awesome."

As described in an earlier post, the virtual film festival is the first step in what I expect to become a full market for independent filmmaking. Soon we will be able to add a potential "investor" room (of pre-screen, accredited investors) to review complete packages. At that point, the power of the virtual film studio will really take off.

With the Market's so Risky, Maybe Film is Worth Rethinking

The news keeps rolling in -- Washington Mutual, Lehman Bros., IndyMac Bank, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and so many more have made the traditional and stable investments in the U.S. suddenly seem like Las Vegas at 5:00 a.m. when we should have gone to bed at 3:00.

Against this level of uncertainty and chaos, investors are left with few safe investments and a great deal of angst. And as we learned during the Depression, the Silver Screen serves as a counter-cyclical investment. Audiences gravitate towards escapism when jobs become uncertain and the economy stalls.

This time, the movie business will be joined by the online and videogame industry as escapist opportunities of choice. Savvy business investors might just realize that in comparison to mortgage-backed securities or venture capital based funds, entertainment products might be a good buy at the moment.

Independent films and start-up videogame companies remain as risky as ever. I would still require filmmakers to insert clauses in securities offerings warning that only an idiot would really expect a return on this investment -- nicely written in much more poetic legalese. Still, investment in independent films have a tremendous upside that makes the analogy to Las Vegas seem appropriate. When traditional investments have nearly as risky a downside and only a limited upside, these opportunities suddenly look enticing.

What I would like to see is a mutual fund for independent films (and a similar fund for games). In such a fund, investors would pool their investments to be spread across a larger number of films vetted by the fund but produced separately. If the fund took only twenty percent of any particular film, it would leverage the chances of success. In turn, films financed by the fund would likely be able to open more doors to distribution deals and cooperative resources among the filmmakers.

The film fund might take away a bit of the Las Vegas risk but it would provide a much more interesting home for the high-risk investor. Of course, don't expect that this fund would receive any bailouts if things go wrong. Only an idiot would really expect a return on investment still applies. So grab a golden parachute and jump right in.

Promotion -- Sensation of Sight

Today's post is a promotion for Sensation of Sight. The DVD version of the movie is now available even as the film continues to play at theaters in various cities. With beautiful cinematography and very strong performances, the film reflects the successful debut of a very talented team.

I have had the honor to work with either/or films, on The Sensation of Sight, written and directed by Aaron Wiederspahn and produced by Buzz McLaughlin. In addition, David Strathairn lent his efforts, both starring and serving as co-producer for the film.

Filmed in New Hampshire, the picture won the Best Feature Film Award at the 2007 New Hampshire Film Festival.

I have been particularly been impressed by the collaborative nature of either/or and the passion the company has earned from the actors, locations, and community involved in the filmmaking. Everyone likes to be associated with success, but Buzz and Aaron have built loyalty based on their passion, vision, and honorable approach to working with their supporters.

Give the movie a watch ... and know there is more to come.

SnagFilms Moving Documentaries to Social Networking

The challenge to The Long Tail's hope of long lasting distribution and sustained revenue from the constant flow of niche markets usually fails on the fallacy of audience awareness. If a title does not appear on the first page of Amazon, Netflix, or Google, the chances of it ever being discovered go down dramatically. The Internet is great at maintaining access, but not very good at building an audience for old content.

SnagFilms is hoping to help documentary filmmakers overcome this challenge. In a Wall Street Journal report, Walter Mossberg described the new distribution strategy for SnagFilms. The company has created small widgets which can be placed on blogs, websites, Facebook pages and other sites. The company currently has a small roster of films, but will be accepting submissions from documentary filmmakers. The company shares a small amount of advertising revenue with the filmmakers, creating at least a modest opportunity for revenue.

The posting of a film takes only seconds. Each post creates a viewer for a particular film. Whether SnagFilms will develop a large enough roster to become a documentary film force remains to be seen. But at least documentary filmmakers have a new way to climb up from the tip of the tail.

The New Hollywood Studios

The New Hollywood Studios

We knew it was only a matter of time before the Hollywood Studios hegemony would give way to the new media titans, but I think few saw that the path of their demise would come from the successor to Pong.

At the E3 Media & Business Summit in Los Angeles, Sony and Microsoft each announced strategies to expand motion picture distribution directly to the consumer using their videogame stations. In the case of Microsoft, the Xbox 360 will stream Netflix’ on demand movies and television shows directly from the console. Xbox owners will be required to have a Netflix account beginning at $9.90 per month and subscribe to Microsoft’s owners "gold" membership, at $50 annually.

Sony, which has maintained a Hollywood studio strategy since it acquired Columbia Pictures in 1989, has entered the market with a non-subscription model. Rental content will range from $2.99 to $5.99 while purchased content will cost $9.99 to $14.99. In addition, Sony’s films and televisions can be transferred to a PSP (PlayStation Portable), allowing the PlayStation to compete with Apple’s iPhone and iPod touch.

Apple’s iTunes store and line up of video and audio players make it another viable Hollywood contender. Netflix, Nintendo, and Amazon remain potential rivals to Sony, Apple, and Microsoft. In each case, these companies maximize strategies emphasizing reintermediation – creating necessary interaction between the company and the consumer.

Hollywood has been losing market share and relevance in this battle because it has no relationship with its consumers. Fox has developed a strong editorial brand under Rupert Murdoch’s ownership, but the brand bears no relationship to its movie studios. Warner Bros., Paramount, and Universal all suffer from the same lack of brand or distribution relationship. Disney remains the exception. The tiniest of the old Hollywood Studios, Disney has struggled, but returned time and again to its focused, family entertainment shepparded by Mickey Mouse and Company. Warner Bros. never understood the importance of Bugs Bunny. The franchises of Harry Potter, Batman, and Superman will continue to drive ticket sales, but they don’t define the company or tell the audience anything about a Warner Bros. film.

Since focusing on content is a difficult strategy for developing a brand, the core relationship between Hollywood and the consumer will be the distribution strategy. Netflix use of social networking builds a strong audience base, and to the extent that consumers can rely on the recommendations, it will have an important place in the living room. The arrangement with Microsoft nicely benefits both companies, increasing Netflix reach and allowing Microsoft up from the kid’s basement or out of the office and into the living room as well.

Apple’s strategy begins with children when they are in school, introducing them to their proprietary brand of computers. It has added a brilliantly integrated technology platform and proprietary content store. Together, these steps represent the most effectively integrated approach to reintermediation, contrasting its business plan with the commodity-based PC computer manufacturers.

The new Hollywood will be reluctant to become studios, but as the need for high quality and expensive content continues, they will have the funds available to assure that expensive content and tent pole entertainment brands are developed. They may have learned from Sony that companies should not embrace Hollywood, but they will also have learned from Sony that Hollywood is essential to their strategy.

The curtain on the latest saga is about to rise. Who knew what Pong would bring?

Returning to the One-Reeler

YouTube and other video sites may be changing our motion picture experience in ways other than draining our patience for broadcast television commercials. Given the shrinking marketplace for released theatrically independent films, filmmakers committed to traditional feature films may turn to Amazon’s CreateSpace video distribution outlet, YouTube Partnerships, or other vehicles for self-distribution.

I anticipate another change, however, which will follow the corollary of “form follows function” that “technique shapes content.” This axiom may be best known from Aristotle’s three unities for theatre of time, place, and action. Although Aristotle was describing Greek tragedy, his Poetics became a structure for classical theatre. Deft playwrights used the unities, challenging them for dramatic effect. (They have also been adapted for film.)

In early film, the example came from the one-reel and two-reeler silent films. Early filmmakers purchased film stock in 1000 foot reels, which defined the length of a motion picture. Harold Lloyd, Charlie Chaplin and others used the reel as the structural length into which a film could be created. Two-reelers dominated the early motion picture industry. When D.W. Griffith defied convention with a twelve reel motion picture, he redefined the industry.

The one-reel film ran 10-15 minutes depending on the playback speed. This was standardized to 11 minutes at 24 frames per second, but some theaters pushed the film speed to increase the number of showings. As a result a one-reel film was sometimes shown in six minutes. Later, perhaps coincidentally, the short film preceding the feature became standardized at six minutes.

The short-film technique gave rise to the genre of the serial or cliffhanger, in which action film shorts were shown each week – bringing the audience back to see what would happen in the next episode. In turn, the serials shaped the development of television and its weekly 22 minute episode.

On the Internet, six minutes is on the very long side. And a YouTube video cannot exceed ten minutes – roughly the length of a one-reel film. These new techniques are beginning to shape the nature of the content produced by independent filmmakers.

Independent filmmakers can learn a great deal of craft from developing their projects in the 6-10 segments. Moreover, crafting a motion picture as a series of scenes built in blocks of thee, six and ten minute segments is a small step from the structure of screenwriting taught in film school today.

Independent filmmakers may find that the new, interactive film craft of posting scenes and interacting with the audience will enhance the production process. Like the serial novels of Charles Dickens and Harriet Beecher Stowe, creating works by serialization need not lessen the craft. At the same time, the approach will allow the best of the new filmmakers to find an audience, separating the compelling projects from the rest.

If the technique shapes modern independent film, the age of the one-reeler has returned.

The Democratic World of Independent Filmmaking

The future of film is finally here. And its going to be a bumpy ride.

Just as the word processor provided the tools for thousands of new novelists to join the ranks of the unpublished or unread and easy music editing software has enabled millions of garage bands to upload their unheard songs to the Internet, the excitement for ultra-low budget films and modest budget films have flooded the market, drowning out some potentially great projects among the thousands hitting the market. In every field, the production of content has exploded while the audience has remained flat or even shrunk.

Mark Gill, former president of Mirimax Films and current CEO of The Film Department presented a bleak picture at the L.A. Film Festival regarding the state of independent film and the motion picture industry more generally. His litany of woes included the shuttering of indie film houses, the erosion of Wall Street Capital, and the brutal glut of product. 5000 films submitted to Sundance?

The loss of key independent production houses provides the clearest indication that the market is changing radically. Digital distribution from has radically reshaped the ability for a filmmaker to gain access to an audience, but it has yet to provide any monetization. (And remember the lofty visions if ifilm.com and atom.com - now both TV portals.)

Moreover, the naive hope of "the long tail" is giving way to the more economically rational "fat middle" model for content distribution. While the long tail postulated that the Internet and other low-cost distribution mechanisms would provide much more sustainable revenue streams for products in a longer life cycle, this had always been the case. Publisher's backlists have provided much of the revenue for book publisher, music labels, and television producers. The Internet may have helped this modestly, particularly for niche markets, but the audience must know about the content in the first place. An unknown band will not do better on the Internet five years after it first put its songs on Napster. If it didn't get a buzz, it won't get downloads.

Advertising, promotion and social buzz are critical to public awareness of entertainment. Mere access is never enough.

The reality of the Fat Middle is that blockbusters and modest hits will be able to maintain their backlist status better because of the ease of access to the content. Netflix recommendations are far better than Blockbuster shelves for encouraging the rental of a five or ten year old movie. But the key is the audience awareness of the content. Like the rat swallowed by the snake, the lump continues to shrink as it travels through the body being digested. Revenue streams will simply have longer viability. If the audience was not there in the first instance, the public is unlikely to discover a hidden gem in the Netflix or YouTube aisles.

Mark Gill ended his talk on an up note. "But if you really want to make movies--even after all the unvarnished bad news I've dumped on you today--then by all means do it. ... [T]he independent film business--leaner, harder-working, but still wearing black and drinking too much caffeine--will indeed survive."

He's certainly correct. But today's filmmakers need to recognize that the engagement with the audience begins well before the movie is shot. Websites, shorts, novelizations, or other tools are critical to move one's film from the 5,000 submissions to the 5-20 independent films actually supported for theatrical release.

Making movies may be easier than ever; getting them seen is not. Welcome to the business.