From Screen To Stream On Liquid Steam

Great post! I agree. We now have our IndieFlix Rogue Screenings where one can discover independent film in unexpected venues and almost always with wine. All you need is a $10 buffet license and we’re good to go on the alcohol service, of course it has to be free. You can’t sell it but you can provide it or the audience can BYOB. Regardless it packs in the audience nicely.

100% agreed. Rum-soaked indie film fans are the best potential audience, period. (OK, beer, too.) I want to put A FATHER AND SON into those theaters because the true target for the story–not the potential marketing strategy, not the fervent indie film fan, but the person I wish I could truly speak to–is a beer-drinking son-of-a-bitch who can’t imagine that real movies exist outside movie theaters. He’s out in the garage working on the car while mom and the kids are inside watching that damn DVD. And maybe he goes inside a theater one time a year, when he has to get all gussied-up and finally, for real, take the wife out somewhere nice or she’ll deny him sex for months.

If I could get HIM into the theater to see A FATHER AND SON by offering him a Budweiser, I’d give him the Bud on me, my treat. If I could get at least ONE good ol’ boy to see the movie and have him think twice about his son, I’d be a happy man.

I know I have to get 10,000 indie film fans to watch the film in a theater or online (paid, not pirated) in order to break even, but if I could get that one man…that good ol’ boy…to sit through the movie, that would be success for me. Bring on the BUDWEISER!

I have to agree- we need to remember not just as artists but as business people that we can’t force on people what we want the consumer to have- people WILL decide for themselves the better experience (just as they did in prohibition) So, high & mighty morals aside- if given the choice people will choose one product over another because they like it more (illegal or no).

If you had a choice- would you go to a theater you could have a nice mixed drink at- or a beer at- or would you go to a soda bar theater? Heh heh well im sure alot of people would rather have a mixed drink- They would rather an adult version of stupid in their theater instead of having the juvenile idiots with friends on their cell phones-version. At least if there is a drunk (worst case scenario) you can throw him out much easier (just as a bar might) and they have every right to. If it is an idiot kid, often there is a gaggle of idiots that wont shut up no matter who comes at them with flashlights-in-face.

I am all for the freedom of independent cinema to craft the experience of movie watching to an art form. More creative ideas is what i say. Bring on the of-age coffee-house theaters with all forms of delights (if it can be allowed legally mind you). Even a designated smoking bar if that suits people. I know in Tampa (Cigar City) people would probably fill the seats if a cigar smoking theater was allowed. More power to ya. Wouldn’t that be like a nostalgic experience? Well for some of us at least.

Hi Mark,

RE: “I’m the most vocal proponent I know for yanking virtually all independent films out of bricks and mortar and propelling them into the cloud and out to the masses.”

As far as mnaking $s from indie films/building careers, for the moment & the near future the following avenue seems like the way to go:
1) theatrical & DVD & cable/on demand with perhaps some money coming from internet on demand. I think the US is still far (10 years or more) off from 1) completely doing away with DVD, & 2) significant reduction of watching movies in movie theaters (this might actually never go away, & that’s cool, I like watching movies in movie theaters).

Anyway, why are you so convinced that the way to go for indie filmmakers is to focus on web based distribution only (as far as making $s, building a career?). I can see how, if you are strictly doing indie filmmaking as an arts pursuit only, a recreational activity only, & not a professional/dependent on earnings thing how web distribution for no or very little $s earned is an easy way to go. Perhaps you see indie filmmaking as being only a recreational activity in the future & not as a pro or semi-pro activity as it has been since the 1980′s (for some at least).

- Sujewa

Sujewa – Welcome to the conversation.

I’m averse to independent movies in bricks and mortar because 99%+ films will never see the inside of a movie theater no matter how hard they try. You can buy your way into some cinemas and every week several of those open in New York City. Fine. If what you want is the reviews and you have $10-$20k to spend for the privilege then wonderful. But that aside, the future for independent film is unequivocally online. I’m trying hard right now in Seattle to build a simple yet incredibly powerful delivery platform that will provide any filmmaker a plug-and-play solution for reaching a global audience for their story. Some will even make a lot of money. But once ROI enters the equation, independence flies out the window. If you read some previous posts here you’ll see a lot of references to dependent and co-dependent filmmaking. that’s the kind of filmmaking and attitude about filmmaking that’s crushed independent filmmaking nearly out of existence. I’d like the independent label returned to its rightful owners. there’s nothing wrong with dependent/co-dependent but it’s just not independent. The label is valuable, meaningful and fragile and it’s been in the wrong hands for far too long.

I don’t see independent filmmaking as something that can’t result in revenue. In fact, quite the opposite. And the revenue will be earned online. Theatrical, DVD, VOD. these all cost money and are unlikely to earn much these days for independent films. My plan is to demonstrate – sooner rather than later, this year or next, not in 5 or 10 – that the obvious is true. That the future for everything is online and most especially for independently produced filmed entertainment.

If you haven’t seen Zac’s guide to how to build your own streaming website, you should check this out: http://workbookproject.com/newbreed/2010/06/21/build-your-own-vod-portal/
Speaking of supporting indie films, check out my blog on Alexia Anastasio at Comic Con. I first heard of her project right here on Mark’s blog. I sincerely believe that we indie filmmakers have the power to propel ourselves to great success, if only we’d take the time to help each other out instead of chasing the illusive pot of gold on the other side of the Hollywood rainbow: http://outinthestreetfilms.com/wp/?p=175

Mark,

RE: “I don’t see independent filmmaking as something that can’t result in revenue. In fact, quite the opposite. And the revenue will be earned online. Theatrical, DVD, VOD. these all cost money and are unlikely to earn much these days for independent films. My plan is to demonstrate – sooner rather than later, this year or next, not in 5 or 10 – that the obvious is true. That the future for everything is online and most especially for independently produced filmed entertainment.”

Sounds good, looking forward to your demonstrations.

For the moment, I am happy about 2 developments – a friend of mine is selling several DVDs (so i hear, at least the last time i talked to him about DVD sales a few weeks ago) a week (via mail order) of his ultra indie/DIY low budget movie (light drama, about a young artist/friends/family – title of the flick is Whale, by Amir Motlagh) through just word of mouth on the web/very little advertising type postings.

And about the opening of ReRun theater in Brooklyn. Perhaps it will do well & spawn more new venues dedicated to real indie movies

- Sujewa

Hi Mark,

RE: “If you read some previous posts here you’ll see a lot of references to dependent and co-dependent filmmaking. that’s the kind of filmmaking and attitude about filmmaking that’s crushed independent filmmaking nearly out of existence. I’d like the independent label returned to its rightful owners.”

Where would you place Stranger Than Paradise in the dependent/co-dependent scale?

I am a huge fan of that movie (actually I dig Mystery Train more, of Jarmusch’s movies), but, wasn’t STP made for over $100K, w/ help from many sources ($s wise), including investors? In that sense, it seems like the prototype for 90′s indie break through stories (features made for a low budget – but low in a Hollywood sense – in the $10K+ range – Clerks, etc. – so, in rest of life $10K is a lot of money, but in comparison to a Hollywood budget it isn’t – that’s what I mean, & then those features going out & gaining critical acclaim, lots of $s (compared to cost of production) via theatrical, home video, etc.). So, is that kind of thing – basically the STP model – no longer independent in your view?

If not, I guess then we have ultra-low budget (under $10K), mostly self financed & self-distributed films to file under independent now.

[Not that these labels matter all that much, from an audience perspective (the people who are paying to make these projects & any directing/filmmaking carrers attached to them financially viable) what matters is an interesting or entertaining movie, as far as I can tell. But from an indie film history perspective, it is interesting for me to find out what people who were a part of the STP wave of indie filmmaking now consider to be indie in 2010, about 25 yrs later]

- Sujewa

Sujewa – Couple of thoughts. First, Stranger happened prior to the co-opting of Independent by those whose ambitions outgrew independence. So I don’t think looking back that far for answers is the best use of our time. More important, my definition for independent has nothing whatsoever to do with budget. It’s only got to do with the the investors’ expectation for recoupment and/or ROI. If there’s any expectation for either, it’s not independent. I don’t care if the budget is $5 or $5 million. In any case, I can pretty much guarantee that investors in Stranger had little if any “expectation” of making money. There was certainly hope for recoupment and maybe even for ROI but hope is one thing, expectation quite another.

Thanks Mark, I think I unbderstand the distinction that you are making. So, pre-Stranger success people made movies (including Stranger) without a great expectation of making like 10x the budget back from theatrical, home video, etc. And after Stranger’s success, it (indie filmmaking) became more about the profit potential than creating interesting work (right?).

Yeah, independent filmmaking without great profit expecations may produce some interesting work. Several indie filmmakers (myself included) have also come to this conclusion – treating indie film more like traditional art (painting, literature, etc.) & less like get-rich-quick-schemes. I think it depends on the project also – certain topics/types of movies may require Hollywood-like/indiewood-like financial planning to make happen (something like Malick’s (sp?) The New World (is that the title? , for example).

Anyway, a new wave of indie filmmakers making movies w/ out worrying about great financial returns on $s invested may give us some great movies. (As long as such filmmaking & distro can be done w/ out going into significant debt, or where projects do at least a little better than breaking even – which is probably possible for most well made & interesting projects, over time, w/ DVD, VOD, etc.).

- Sujewa