Straight Talk

By in Columns, Festival Circuit, Line Items, Reports
on Thursday, June 24th, 2010
Producer Mike S. Ryan challenges the current preoccupations of our independent film scene.

Call me crazy, but I don’t think distribution is the greatest problem facing independent cinema right now. Distribution is a problem, but it has always been. Returning investment is perennially difficult, but even when we had a few exceptional profit leaders most films lost money. The brief heyday of what seemed like a profitable indie industry was just a bubble, like dot-com and real estate. Bubbles typically self-inflate with the hot air of the people inside, spewing gas to mask secret truths. In the case of independent film, it is this: uncompromising, quality work that exists outside the mainstream has only ever been profitable for a few. Today most of us in independent film are looking for new ways to justify investment in our movies. DIY output deals, VOD and niche marketing seem like the new hot ideas. And recent successes with new platforms are a true sign of hope. Our expectations are adjusting to reality; innovative, passion-driven films are finding their audience again. What concerns me, though, is not the slow, vague emergence of new business strategies but the idea that filmmakers need to adjust their ideas to conform to these so-called new models. Post-screening, filmmakers are used to hearing from potential distributors: “Great film, but we’re not seeing the poster.” In other words: “We’re passing because we don’t know how to market this.” These distributors don’t believe they can interest a mass audience in original, unclassifiable films. Today that marketplace concern has not only become more intense but is almost accepted as a justified reaction to difficult movies. And it’s not just distribution execs but also the press and even other filmmakers who retreat to this mind-set, dismissing innovative work that seems alien to our commercial marketplace. Roger Corman was famous for mocking up one-sheets before his films rolled camera. Today, filmmakers are told to have Constant Contact lists of their target audiences on their hard drives before their first days of filming. The required strategy is to first launch a Facebook page, make your fans your “audience” and allow their swelling numbers to serve as your green light. And, then, as you shoot, make sure these fans don’t get away by marketing your film through Twitter updates, blog posts, and other forms of social-media messaging. This is indeed a great strategy for certain films – but not all films allow for such easy niche preconceptions. While defining a film’s possible marketing plan early can be helpful, a promising marketing plan should not justify a film’s existence. And, more importantly, the lack of one should not designate a film as worthless. Developing content and nurturing auteurs should be our top concern, not figuring out distribution models or revenue schemes. The whole purpose of independent film is to make films that aren’t prefabricated to hit a target audience of someone else’s devising. In fact, it’s that kind of market-centric thinking that puffed up the bubble with derivative films; it’s those goals that made indie go flaccid in the first place. Audience-driven content posing as truly independent film has numbed the audience that is hungry for innovative work. Powerful statements told in direct, aesthetically challenging and possibly uncomfortable ways are what mark visionary work. The outer margins are where true visionaries live, and the fact that these artists may not reach the mainstream is not sad; it should be embraced. I’m not interested in dragging everyone I know to the new Bela Tarr film. Bela Tarr is not for everyone (his work is actually for very few), but it is exceptional work, and it deserves to exist, despite the fact that Bela does not have Facebook or Twitter accounts. I’ve heard it said that because filmmakers like Todd Solondz and Jim Jarmusch don’t have readily-defined young audiences reachable through all these various wired platforms that their work is considered less relevant today than the latest viral sensation. Frankly, I find that a sad and scary opinion.

You can follow any follow up comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

  • http://DavidEllisFilm.com David Ellis

    Funny, I always thought revenue was, well, important…

    The author’s premise seems to be there is no leeway
    for beginning filmmakers to start out making anything but
    perfect works.

    While I agree they should try their best, I seem to recall
    vaguely that most filmmakers improve over time as they learn their
    craft (and develop their team, auteurs can clean my toilet Mr Ryan). But that’s just me…

  • Pingback: Why Worry about money?

  • http://www.patrykrebisz.com Patryk Rebisz

    We are human beings thus we operate in this strange space where we go from re watching Godard’s “Weekend” to watching yet another episode of “Family Guy” on Hulu… We go deep and shallow all in a span of just a few hours. But how do we make those choices? How do we pick what to see, and how to spend next 2 hours of our life? We look at the poster (is it visually bold to draw our attention?), we look at the title (it it unique, intriguing, poetic?), we look at the cast (is my favorite actor in it?), we look at 2 sentence synopsis on Netflix instant watch (is there something to hook us in those 2 sentences?), is the director famous and has he done work in the style we enjoy, has the film won awards at major film festivals, did I just hear someone talking about the film at the office? There are so many things people look at before making the choice to watch it almost seems that the film itself is irrelevant. And if the film is irrelevant then the game of being a filmmaker is not about the product anymore but how to entice people to pay attention that product.

  • http://finchclasses.blogspot.com Randy Finch

    Newsflash. Content still matters. Even with DIY distribution and new business models.

    But isn’t Michael S. Ryan going after an enemy that doesn’t exist?

    This isn’t the first time that Mr. Ryan has pounced upon non-existent enemies. Mr. Ryan famously ripped the innocuous John Cusack film, Grace is Gone, writing: “Profit drives its aesthetics, just like profit has driven this war.” Yikes! John Cusack made an indie film about a grieving family to profiteer off the war. Cusack is like Halliburton.

    Apparently Mr. Ryan can only go full bore.

    OK. Take a breath. Exactly who is Mr. Ryan refuting? Did someone really say that films made without a marketing plan are “worthless?” (Did someone tell Mr. Ryan that a particular film of his was worthless?) Has any filmmaker ever really argued that a indie film marketing plan is reason enough? Or that lack of a marketing plan alone made a specific film “worthless?”

    Has any of the things Mr. Ryan rails against ever really happened to an indie filmmaker? Ever?

    Sorry, I loved every minute of your film, I laughed, I cried, but unless you can give me a marketing plan… well, it’s worthless.

    It’s hard to argue with Mr. Ryan when he says: “Developing content and nurturing auteurs should be our top concern, not figuring out distribution models or revenue schemes.”

    It’s hard to argue, in fact, NO ONE IS ARGUING WITH MR. RYAN.

    Developing content and nurturing auteurs is the top concern of every film educator I’ve ever met. And no one in the independent film business (even the most cynical marketing executive I’ve ever met) ignores content. No one is saying make bad meaningless indie movies. OK. No one. Sometimes bad movies just happen. Even to filmmakers with the best of intentions. Maybe worthless movies happen more frequently now than ever. But don’t blame people seeking a revenue model for the films they care about.

    And, in a world with so many real evils, why is Mr. Ryan repeatedly bloviating about problems that don’t exist? To me, sounds like Mr. Ryan is angry about something, but I suspect it isn’t that film educators are teaching film students how to use online marketing tools.

VOD CALENDAR

Filmmaker's curated calendar of the latest video on demand titles.
All In: The Poker Movie A NY Thing #Regeneration
See the VOD Calendar →
Filmmaker's Best Of 2011

Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Filmmaker Magazine is powered by WordPress.org.