The Democratization of technology in moviemaking

I think part of the problem (and hence the chaos that we're seeing in the marketplace today) is that people are trying to stick a square peg in a round hole, so to speak.
We're coming at this new distribution model (which has yet to be established) and we're trying to impose the same old marketing, advertising, and revenue streams on it - and it's just not going to work that way.

Online viewing (like Batutta pointed out) is not TV.
Much like TV is not the theater.

Every new distribution outlet needs a new marketing and advertising paradigm.
Once that is settled on and implemented - I think things will truly take off.
But it's going to be a little while before things settle down, advertisers aren't as nervous, and the money starts coming in.
 
Barry made an interesting comparison in talking about books. Another aspect of it, though, that's critical to this age of media, is translating the idea of "literary lifespan" to movies. There are people out there who are neurotically terrified because there are so many books in existence that they know they will not have time to read them all before they die. This has been true for a long time, and now it's true of movies as well.

The era of shared experience is, in a sense, over. Until the '60s and '70s movies were such a communal experience that you could assume most other people shared in that experience. When you saw The Wizard of Oz, you saw it the same way everyone else did: in a big dark room surrounded by strangers. It was larger than life, and everyone experienced it the same way.

Now, it's different. Did you see it in the theater? Did you watch it on DVD? Hi-Def? Did you download a torrent that was corrupt halfway through? Maybe you watched half of it on your iPod and then had to stop because the plane was landing. Did you watch the alternate ending and the deleted scenes? Did you see the director's cut or the original release? Was it projected in digital or on film?

Even if we've seen the same movies, chances are rising that we've seen them under very different circumstances, which greatly affects the way they're received! The very nature of a crowd can drastically change the perception you walk away with. See a bad movie in a lively theater with good friends and maybe you have a good time. Watch it alone in your basement and you wonder why you're wasting these hours of your life.

There's probably no cure to these issues, and as we move on into the 21st century, full of personalization and always-on media, it's only going to get more schitzophrenic. So like Curtis originally says, it's all a question of the cream rising to the top.
 
Postmaster said:
And the studios have enough marketing power that the can make at least a break even (almost any time) even with the worst flick.
Click to expand...

The whole backbone to the L.A. Times article is that marketing costs are rising disproportionate to revenues. Marketing costs money. Many, many pictures lose money. It's not as bad as, say, the games industry, but I wonder if major Hollywood releases aren't heading that way. I certainly hope not.
 
dougspice said:
Barry made an interesting comparison in talking about books. Another aspect of it, though, that's critical to this age of media, is translating the idea of "literary lifespan" to movies. There are people out there who are neurotically terrified because there are so many books in existence that they know they will not have time to read them all before they die. This has been true for a long time, and now it's true of movies as well.
Click to expand...

The sad truth is that the VAST majority of writer's, even moderately successful ones, can't support themselves on their writing alone. There are the Rowling's and the Grisham's who make billions and then everyone else who fights over an increasingly narrow piece of the pie.
 
Marketing-Schmarketing. If the make better films more poeple spend money to see them. Period!


If a friend comes out of a movie and tells me OHMYGAWD that flick is killing I go and see it.

If he says forget it I forget it and spend the money on a pizza no mater how much the studio marketing pumps in it.

Make better films - save on marketing.

Frank

I
 
This requires a lot of thinking...

But there's two things I believe in. OK, three :) :


1. The Internet is the future of distribution. You'll [theoretically] be able to make it just via viral marketing and\or word-of-mouth.

2. If you make a good movie, it won't stay unnoticed.

3. The first 30-60 seconds of the movie will become even more crucial, cause people will have TONNES of sh*t on the Internet, and if you don't have a real grabber, you're lost - they'll switch to the next indie flick on Vimeo.

...

And the fourth thing I believe in :), is:

4. It will matter much less where you and your cast\crew are from, because 1. The Internet is the future of distribution.

I don't think that us, wild indies, have anything to be worried about. It will be different in the future, maybe easier to get distro, maybe harder, but I have no doubt at all that:


If you make a good movie, it won't stay unnoticed.


That has always been the real key and the hardest part.

Otherwise, the 1-s and 0-s are getting us closer to Coppola's dream.

The future is bright, I have no doubt about this.

We will all be dancing under Scarlet skies.

:laugh:
 
Postmaster said:
Marketing-Schmarketing. If the make better films more poeple spend money to see them. Period!



I
Click to expand...

Yes but it's not easy. I just saw "Prince Caspian". Apparently it took over 2,000 people to make that movie--not to mention a truckload of dollars and despite the fact they were building upon an established franchise based on a famous children's series by an equally famous writer, the movie still isn't especially good. It's not bad, but it's just nothing special. So it ain't easy what you say everyone should be doing. It's like saying all you have to do to win a basketball game is score more points.
 
This actually ties into another thing that's been on my mind lately, which is the globalness which karapetkov mentions. It used to be that Hollywood was it. If you were serious about making a movie, you had to get yourself to Hollywood.

Now, though, I honestly believe that it is HARDER to make a movie in Hollywood than practically anywhere else in the world (maybe barring Iraq, Burma, Somalia). Most everyone now has access to the tools, and more and more access to the talent. There are terrific incentives all over the world for local filmmakers, able to operate at greatly reduced costs.

On any serious production I think very hard in pre-pro about the benefits and drawbacks of shooting outside of L.A. I wonder if my career, ironically, wouldn't be further along if I lived somewhere else.

Regardless, I think the future lies in collectivism. Organizing a collective of like-minded filmmakers with a known brand will be the easiest way to get noticed in a crowded field. This isn't anything new but I think it will become more important than ever.
 
I have nothing to contribute, but there's some really good posts going on here alone. Taormina (Adam's) post, Barry's, Isaacs, Dougspice's... me agree.

That is all.
 
karapetkov said:
This requires a lot of thinking...

But there's two things I believe in. OK, three :) :


1. The Internet is the future of distribution. You'll [theoretically] be able to make it just via viral marketing and\or word-of-mouth.

2. If you make a good movie, it won't stay unnoticed.

3. The first 30-60 seconds of the movie will become even more crucial, cause people will have TONNES of sh*t on the Internet, and if you don't have a real grabber, you're lost - they'll switch to the next indie flick on Vimeo.

...

And the fourth thing I believe in :), is:

4. It will matter much less where you and your cast\crew are from, because 1. The Internet is the future of distribution.

I don't think that us, wild indies, have anything to be worried about. It will be different in the future, maybe easier to get distro, maybe harder, but I have no doubt at all that:


If you make a good movie, it won't stay unnoticed.


That has always been the real key and the hardest part.

Otherwise, the 1-s and 0-s are getting us closer to Coppola's dream.

The future is bright, I have no doubt about this.

We will all be dancing under Scarlet skies.

:laugh:
Click to expand...

BUT HOW DO YOU MAKE MONEY ONLINE!!!! I'm all for revealing truth through art, but I need to pay the bills while doing it.
 
want to make money on the internet? easy Batutta, the internet is nothing more than one big massive telephone, instead of carrying voice its carrying data, once you realise this fact, you realise that being an ISP pays off always :D its not about creating the content but delivering it through that yummy fibre/copper wire/less, I'm hungry..
 
Anhar Miah said:
want to make money on the internet? easy Batutta, the internet is nothing more than one big massive telephone, instead of carrying voice its carrying data, once you realise this fact, you realise that being an ISP pays off always :D its not about creating the content but delivering it through that yummy fibre/copper wire/less, I'm hungry..
Click to expand...

True...But I want to make money making MY films, which seems like a rapidly dwindling prospect in today's marketplace.
 
So how to profit on the web? People don't want to pay for shorts, YouTube and viral videos have taught everyone that shorts are free. Features, if people pay for them, they expect to watch them on their TV and receive the tangible product of a DVD.
 
Batutta said:
But still, how do you make money off it, at least enough to support your next endeavor? I think on the whole people don't want to pay for content online. Like TV, they expect it to be free or it's not worth their time. Not to mention the fact that once in the digital domain content has a way of shaking loose of whatever copy protection is placed on it. The only proven way to make money online is through advertising, but most people resent having ads shoved in their face while trying to view content and will go out of their way to avoid them. People don't mind it so much when lazing in front of their tv, but when you're behind a computer you want to be in control of what you see.
Click to expand...

Apple found a viable business model for selling something that was free. Before itunes the music industry was losing billions of dollars due to online file sharing. Many people were saying that they could not see a way to make money off digital music files. Apple opened their eyes pretty quickly. Movies will follow the same route.
 
hmm, for every legal "itune" sound I'd bet there are 10 illegal download methinks. Of course the same could apply to movies, but that would mean instant download of movies would need to happen OR streaming DVD quality movies (well VOD@DVD quality) people hate waiting...
 
Anhar Miah said:
hmm, for every legal "itune" sound I'd bet there are 10 illegal download methinks. Of course the same could apply to movies, but that would mean instant download of movies would need to happen OR streaming DVD quality movies (well VOD@DVD quality) people hate waiting...
Click to expand...
Yeah the infastructure is not yet there for instant movie access. But in 2000 it took me about 30 minutes to download an MP3 via Napster and DSL. By 2001 it took me 3 minutes via Napster and cable.

Two years ago I watched streamed video over the internet via slides or about 128kb/sec. The picture would stop and start. Today I can watch 1m/sec video with perfect clarity via P2P applications.

Technology changes and develops so fast on the web. Today it may take us an hour to download a film. I am pretty sure that within 2 years it will take minutes.
 
mjjason said:
Apple found a viable business model for selling something that was free. Before itunes the music industry was losing billions of dollars due to online file sharing. Many people were saying that they could not see a way to make money off digital music files. Apple opened their eyes pretty quickly. Movies will follow the same route.
Click to expand...

But they only succeeded by making it nearly free. I guarantee you if downloads cost much more than 99 cents, people wouldn't go there. And movies will never be priced that cheaply. Not to mention the fact that they take forever to download (although this will improve at some point)...Honestly I can't remember the last time I bought anything from itunes, or even paid for music at all. The other thing is that the experience of listening to music isn't diminshed by downloading something and playing it on your ipod. The audio quality is very good now, and the experience is the same as if you bought it from the store. That's not true for films. Downloading a film and watching it on a computer screen, or even a TV, is not the same as watching it in a theater with an audience. The bottom line for me is that I got into filmmaking because I wanted my movies shown in theaters, with audiences, on a giant screen in THX surround sound. That's what excited me. And the fact that this is becoming less and less likely for smaller budgeted fare is depressing.
 
Batutta said:
BUT HOW DO YOU MAKE MONEY ONLINE!!!! I'm all for revealing truth through art, but I need to pay the bills while doing it.
Click to expand...


Forget DVD sales and DVD rentals.

It will all become "the movie download".

Legalize and regulate what's now known as "Internet piracy".

Make Internet downloads ubiquitous, legal, easy and cheap...

... Cheap enough to make people not bother whether they'll pay a legal download or download the pirated copy.

For that to happen there has to be a high-speed Inet connection and a powerful-enough computer in every home. Or in the majority of households.

If you and everyone else can download a DVD-quality movie for under 10 min. and for a price of one buck, piracy will cease to exist, noone would bother to sell pirated DVDs or whatever DVDs, cause everyone will be able to download them for under 10 mins. and for 1 $.

1 mln. clicks would mean 1 mln. dollars for your movie.

Make an indie gem, upload it to the [future] virtual video-rentals.

If the movie gets 1 mln. clicks - that's 1 mln. bucks for you.

Of course, it's not that easy - that's the perfect scenario.

And inet access and people's mentality is not there yet to make this work.

But it will happen.... and you'll get your bills paid from legal Internet downloads of your movie.

If it's a good movie, of course.

Trust me, I'm a fortune-teller.

:D
 
Batutta said:
But they only succeeded by making it nearly free. I guarantee you if downloads cost much more that 99 cents, people wouldn't go there. And movies will never be priced that cheaply. Not to mention the fact that they take forever to download (although this will improve at some point)...Honestly I can't remember the last time I bought anything from itunes, or even paid for music at all. The other thing is that the experience of listening to music isn't diminshed by downloading something and playing it on your ipod. The audio quality is very good now, and the experience is the same as if you bought it from the store. That's not true for films. Downloading a film and watching it on a computer screen, or even a TV, is not the same as watching it in a theater with an audience. The bottom line for me is that I got into filmmaking because I wanted my movies shown in theaters, with audiences, on a giant screen in THX surround sound. That's what excited me. And the fact that this is becoming less and less likely for smaller budgeted fare is depressing.
Click to expand...
I don't think you can apply the same system. Actually I beileve movies will follow the netflix model of 1 month subscription for a certain number of download. That way new movies can be add to your list like they do today with already released movies.

Also, I believe with more and more homes having networked computers and cable system you have to throw out the old model of a standalone PC. Most likely devices will be linked so that you can stream content from your media center to any monitor in the home including your TV. So you are no longer limited to your small screen. Apple tried this with the apple tv but the content and the system isn't there yet. But it will be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top