I haven’t gotten to the case studies yet but hope to shortly. The first on the list is from Byron Hurt’s powerful Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes (pictured right). In the meantime, go ahead and dive in… let me know if anything strikes you are particularly relevant or “new” news.

Kirsner’s Top Five Distribution Strategies

• Make sure DVDs are available when audiences are most interested in the film: during the theatrical run, during festival screenings and at the time of the first TV broadcast.
• Consider producing at least two versions of the DVD, at two different price points: one for general audiences and a second version for educational/group use, with discussion guides and supplemental material.
• Carefully evaluate distribution offers that wrap up digital rights with theatrical or home video rights. What will the distributor do in the near-term to generate revenues with those rights?
• Focus digital distribution efforts on outlets with already-established audiences (such as Apple’s iTunes or Amazon.com’s Unbox); if working with a newer outlet, negotiate for premium placement on the site and additional promotion.
• Whether selling DVDs or digital downloads/rentals with a business partner, insist on regular reporting of sales figures and the ability to audit them. Read the entire article>>

Festival programmers want virgins. So choose wisely where your film is going to lose its virginity, especially if you want to maximize press and sales potential. After the premiere, your film may have trouble being accepted into competition at the next festival, or even being accepted at all. Read the whole article>>

Of course, that is only one piece of advice that I chose because it’s dramatic. Paul offers many more pieces of good advice.

There are a couple of points where I can see the festival side of things. He notes that festival entry fees add up and calls it a “major revenue stream” for festivals. That might be true in some cases, but not most. $30 from 1000 films is $30,000. While that is a nice chunk of money, from that they have to pay a staff person to coordinate those submissions (track & label DVDs as they come in, distribute to screeners, etc.), pay their Withoutabox subscription fees, event staffing, travel to scout films, and create printed materials such as programs and quick guides at the fest. I’m a firm believer that a festival shouldn’t lose money and the better organizers will make that income go far, but dealing with 1000 submissions is no small task even if there are only slots for 90 films (when I worked with Silverdocs in 2005, there were 1200 submissions for about 80 slots–features AND shorts–in case you didn’t know how hard a programmer’s job is).

He digs into fests on the issue of premieres and I agree with Paul from the filmmaker perspective, noting that this is largely a press/industry issue, not an audience issue. But, for filmmakers hoping to create business relationships at a festival, that is at the heart of it. There is a rather small group of industry executives and they travel to a lot of festivals in search of films and filmmakers. If they see a program filled with work they have already seen at Sundance, then why attend SXSW or Tribeca? The festivals that aspire to be places where you can meet buyers have to put on a program that won’t be stale to the executives they are trying to attract. It’s a double-edged sword for the filmmaker. That is where thinking through the strategy becomes critical.

Hundreds of millions of people around the world were able to engage and experience the Olympics online, many of whom never had never had the opportunity to see the Games on their televisions. All of this took place while NBC, the broadcaster that owned the rights to the Olympics in the US, effectively used our Video ID technology to monitor and quickly block copyrighted Olympic content uploaded to the site.

Later, he expands on the details of this technology:

From the very beginning, we’ve been committed to working with content owners to make sure YouTube remains a platform for distribution, not unauthorized uploads. In fact, over 300 media companies, including NBC, RAI, Formula One, the Olympics and Lionsgate are using innovative products like YouTube’s Video Identification tool to better manage their presence on our site. Along with the other tools in our Content management system, Video ID helps content owners decide whether to block, promote, or even generate revenue from their content. Read the entire speech on TechCruch>>

This kind of technology puts control into the corporate hands to decide what you can and cannot upload. I’m thinking that whether or not a content producer has a fair use claim for something they want to show, it could be pulled by a corporate cog because it contains their material. There is no judgement involved. There are a couple of interesting pieces from The Center for Social Media on this issue, A Case of Selective Censorship and Unauthorized: The Copyright Conundrum in Participatory Video.

But the thing I’m most excited about is that Hope was able to get the issue of net neutrality into indieWIRE! Brian Newman, CEO of the Tribeca Film Institute, asked me to start writing this blog many moons ago as a way to share information about critical policy and technology issues that impact filmmakers. The idea being that without AIVF, which had long served as an advocacy arm for the film community, we had better at least be talking about the issues. But I’ve felt like I’m a party of one in talking about those issues here. I’ve received few comments or interest from the film community about an issue that is of vital importance: net neutrality.

All signs keep pointing to distribution via the web to be where all the lanes will converge, yet big media companies are quietly working to limit our access to the net, and thus, whatever we want to see. If they control the pipeline into your home, they have the capacity to control what you can watch, or at least make it very expensive. But, don’t take my word for it. Hope writes:

We have never had this sort opportunity before and the great tragedy is that just as we are learning what it means, forces are vying to take it away from us. The principal that all information, all creators, all audiences should be treated equally within the structure that is the Internet is popularly referred to as Net Neutrality. The Telecos, the Cable Companies, and their great ally, the Hollywood Motion Picture Studios and the MPAA are now trying to end that equality. And with it you will lose the opportunity to be TRULY FREE FILMMAKERS. But they are not going to succeed because we are going to band together and organize, we are going to save the Internet, and keep equal access for all. Read Ted Hope’s comments>>

One thing that continues to strike me is the supposed “glut” of content. But again, I walked out of the Blockbuster empty handed last night. It seemed that every 3rd “new release” was a low-budget hack horror film (I love horror, but have been burned too many times by such derivative fare). So, I checked out the listings on my parents’ pay-per-view service. Again, abysmal selection. I couldn’t find a single film I wanted to watch.

The problem is not the glut of content. It’s the stupidity of the old-guard in getting that new content to a consumer like me with $5 burning a hole in my pocket.

From Block’s comments here on Resources:

It doesn’t solve the problem that are inherent in most of the independent docs and fiction features. They are not commercial. People don’t want to see most of them. They have no hooks to use in marketing them. It’s not old v new but rather commercial v non-commercial v marginally commercial.

Anthony Kaufman also believes, from his research, that it is “important to temper some of the enthusiasm for the ‘New World’ of distribution.” His reasoning is due to the same idea that Block is getting at, that successful sales require a large cash outlay (e.g. theatrical release):

To sum up briefly, what’s seemingly astonishing about VOD is Sehring’s claim that the gross dollar revenue ratio from VOD to theatrical is 2 to 1. That means a film such as “This is England,” for example, which made about $350,000 in theaters made another $700,000 on VOD.

It’s true that with my festival programmer hat on, I’ve seen a ton of films that I never saw anything about again. And sometimes they were even decent! But I’d suggest that looking to IFC Films to intimate what might happen with a film that isn’t picked up by them is exactly where Broderick is working. There are films that are having success on the festival circuit, building their audiences online and making money selling their DVDs. How about Todd Sklar with Box Elder or David Redmon and Ashley Sabin with Made in China and Kamp Katrina? Low overhead, a willingness to roll up their sleeves and market themselves, and movies that are made inexpensively are the keys to their ability to keep making movies.

We can’t talk about two different markets as though they are the same. Man on Wire is a great example of a mass market success, not a niche success model.

Part I Here.

Part II Here.

Or download a PDF from Broderick’s website.

Here are some of Broderick’s take-away tips about how you should consider approaching distribution:

Be strategic - In the Old World, most filmmakers have reactions not strategies. They chose the best offer from those they receive. It is essential to be proactive in the New World. You need a strategy to navigate it successfully.

Think long term - Be clear about your goals. Are you creating a business around a group of films with common content? Are you building a career as an artist with a core personal audience?

Stay flexible - Implement your strategy stage by stage and modify it as you go. You learn valuable information in every stage that will enable you to improve your plan for the next stage.

Split rights - Retain overall control of your distribution. Take a hybrid approach, dividing certain rights among distributors and retaining the right to do direct sales.

Target audiences - Research, test, and refine your approach to core audiences. Understand who is most responsive to your films, and how to reach them most effectively.

Find partners - Look for national nonprofits, websites, sponsors, and distributors to team up with to bring your film to their members, subscribers, and customers.

Build a team - Find teammates who can help with the website, outreach, fulfillment, theatrical, domestic sales, and foreign sales.

Harness the internet - Use your website to build awareness, develop a mailing list, attract user-contributed content, and make direct sales. Design a compelling site that will have a life of its own.

Be creative - Avoid formulaic distribution ruts. Apply the same creativity to distribution as production. It is often harder to bring a movie into the world than to produce it. An innovative approach to distribution can make all the difference.

Make distribution happen - Design a distribution strategy and find the distributors, partners, and teammates to help you implement it.

Cinemocracy is a platform for commentary and inspiration for citizen reporters, activists and filmmakers. Free to enter, free to view and explicitly bound to the results of the popular vote.

The films which garner the most praise, interest and online votes will be screened during the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

Deadline has been extended! Submit your short of up to 5 minutes in length until August 1st!

Impact Film Festival is a four-day event held during the 2008 Democratic and Republican Conventions in Denver and Minneapolis. IFF will showcase two to three socially-themed documentary and dramatic films per day and feature panel discussions with an engaging mix of filmmakers, entertainers, lawmakers and other civic leaders.

What films will our delegates and (dare we hope) nominess be watching? Here is the full slate:

ACCIDENTAL ADVOCATE (DNC/RNC) / Director: Jessica Gerstle—A moving odyssey of a father and daughter who track down the thinkers, politicians, crusaders and nay-sayers at the heart of the federally-funded stem cell research quagmire. World Premiere.

BATTLE IN SEATTLE (DNC/RNC) / Director: Stuart Townsend—Chronicle of the dramatic events surrounding the 1999 World Trade Organization meetings in Seattle, Washington, featuring Charlize Theron (in attendance).

BLACK LIST (DNC/RNC) / Directors: Timothy Greenfield-Sanders and Elvis Mitchel—Dramatic portraits of some of today’s most fascinating and influential African-Americans. Famed Elvis Mitchell joins our discussion for an in-depth conversation about reclaiming “The Blacklist”.

BOOGIE MAN: THE LEE ATWATER STORY (DNC/RNC) / Director: Stefan Forbes—The life and controversial times of Lee Atwater, the late political strategist for the Republican Party.

FLOW: FOR LOVE OF WATER (DNC/RNC) / Director: Irena Salinas—While oil grabs headlines, the world’s most important commodity is water. This compelling documentary examines what we are all taking for granted – and shouldn’t.

FREEHELD (DNC) /Director: Cynthia Wade—The community unites to support police detective Laurel Hester’s struggle to transfer her earned pension over to her domestic partner in this Academy-Award winning short film.

I.O.U.S.A. (DNC/RNC) / Director: Patrick Creadon—A bold examination of the rapidly growing national debt and its consequences for the United States and its citizens, brought to you by the director of WORDPLAY.

KICKING IT (DNC) / Directors: Susan Koch and Jeff Werner—For those who live on the sidelines of life, Director Susan Koch trains her camera on what happens when the homeless grab the ball and get in the game at the Homeless World Cup.

ROBERT KENNEDY REMEMBERED (DNC) / Director: Charles Guggenheim—Iconic portrait of Bobby Kennedy who gave voice to the aspirations of a generation and who continues to inspire with his message of hope and commitment to social justice. The film was originally presented at the1968 Democratic Convention forty years ago.

TROUBLE THE WATER (DNC/RNC) / Directors: Tia Lessin and Carl Deal—2008 Sundance award-winner about poverty in America as seen through the eyes of a couple trapped in New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina.

I won’t be at the convention but I’m grateful that these films will be there. And if you will be at either Convention, help spread the word about these wonderful, important films!

Big news this week is that Christian Gaines, director of AFI Fest in Los Angeles is leaving his post for a job with Withoutabox. Eric Kohn at indieWIRE has coverage of the move. I’d like to point your attention to the end of the article, which is to me the most interesting. I’m not sure what it portends, but there is something here:

Gaines displayed confidence about mastering both the physical and online components of the festival world. “Neither experience is better, just different,” he said. “For filmmakers, film festivals have become, more and more, an ad hoc theatrical distribution infrastructure. Still in flux is how to formalize this distribution platform so that there is a financial upside to taking this route for producers and sales agents as well as a tie to audience feedback and thusly festival success.”

Gaines’ new job marks the second major movement of a festival programmer to the digital realm, following South by Southwest film festival producer Matt Dentler’s new job with Cinetic Rights Management. Both cases signal major decisions being made in an effort to import aspects of the established film world into uncharted terrain. “The bottom line is that festival audiences crave quality cultural experiences,” Gaines noted, “And the challenge to the film festival community is to positively influence the changes that will occur as they mature over the next ten years.” Read the whole article>>

I’m totally reading between the lines here, but if the festival circuit becomes the de facto theatrical distribution circuit for independent films, the next logical step seems to be monetizing. Right now, filmmakers generally get their travel to the festival covered and occasionally, some get token screening fees, but after submission fees, costs for marketing and publicity (postcards, posters, etc.) and the incidental expenses incurred from traveling, most festival appearances are at best break even.

When Tribeca raised the cost of their festival tickets in 2007, there was a not-so-minor uproar. How can you charge $18 for a film that no one has ever heard of? Corporate sponsorship is one of the main revenue streams for fests–they get what amounts to gap financing (the cost difference between what they get in admissions and what it actually costs to put on the event) and the sponsors get their logo in front of fairly erudite eyeballs. How could the economics of festivals make room for more of a cut for distributors, sales agents and filmmakers? That part is unclear to me, but Gaines seems to hint at it with his “audience feedback” comment.

Interestingly, I worked as a theater manager at the AFI Fest in 2006 when Withoutabox was launching this audience feedback feature. They had young, cute people handing out postcards after screenings encouraging audience members to go online and register their opinion of the movie. To me, it seemed odd and I didn’t notice enthusiasm with exiting audience members. If I were handed that postcard, first off, I wouldn’t take it, but if I did, it would hit the trash at the next opportunity. There were no computers around to get them to do it right away, and why, as a non-media industry person, would you ever go to a site like Withoutabox. At best, I’d go back to the festival’s website to comment or decide what my next show would be. What if there were handsets at your seat in the theater where you could rate the movie right then? Well, we should probably get digital projection before we worry about being online at the time of a screening.

I guess Christian, and perhaps Matt Dentler (as hinted in the indieWIRE article) are the new vanguard of linking the online payola (such as it is) to the festival distribution network.

“…In the short term, Universal has canceled bookings of anything archival coming directly from Universal City and can’t honor any film bookings of prints that were set to ship from there. Let me be clear: I am assured by insiders that the negatives are not affected, thankfully — only the actual 35mm prints used for repertory circulation of classic films. Prints from that very rich vault which also includes pre-1950 Paramount include such classics as Frankenstein, Son of Frankenstein, Duck Soup, Hell’s Angels, Brides of Dracula, Incredible Shrinking Man, Buck Privates, Hold That Ghost, and so many, many more.” Read the entire post>>