Good article on distribution deals
- Thread starter MichaelP
- Start date
Finn Yarbrough
Well-known member
That is a good article, thanks for sharing. Here's what I wrote as a response, pasted here because I don't cotton to signing up to another app through Facebook.
This is definitely a multifaceted issue. We, for example, just signed to pretty unprofitable terms for a SHORT documentary of ours. The catch is that their license is non-exclusive, and the film has already been released online for free. So we look at this particular deal as a much-needed avenue for exposure on a film that was never intended to be profitable in the first place. We are not likely to jump at such a distribution deal for our upcoming feature, which represents a much more significant outlay of resources for us.
Nevertheless, from the general perspective of this article, our decision makes us one of the many "scabs" who refuse to strike, and that does contribute to the problem, to a certain extent. Most of our income is derived from commercial work that has little to do with our artistic docs. On the other hand, we don't see our artistic docs as a part of a lump commodity with all other docs, meaning that if we stop making them, they just won't get made. Other filmmakers will continue to make their films, but they won't be the same product--so we have to build an audience or access a niche on a more intimate level, much like musicians. Also like musicians, many documentarians who I know are making their living via physical appearances to speak about their films, rather than relying on distribution alone. But this particular path doesn't appeal to me, because I want to spend that time making more films.
I think it's important for us to find the silver lining in all of these clouds of changing media distribution, and think creatively about how we can make the unfavorable conditions work for us. The fact of the matter is that there are probably just way too many of us making media for our own good. So we have to get comfortable with the lack of elbow-room!
This is definitely a multifaceted issue. We, for example, just signed to pretty unprofitable terms for a SHORT documentary of ours. The catch is that their license is non-exclusive, and the film has already been released online for free. So we look at this particular deal as a much-needed avenue for exposure on a film that was never intended to be profitable in the first place. We are not likely to jump at such a distribution deal for our upcoming feature, which represents a much more significant outlay of resources for us.
Nevertheless, from the general perspective of this article, our decision makes us one of the many "scabs" who refuse to strike, and that does contribute to the problem, to a certain extent. Most of our income is derived from commercial work that has little to do with our artistic docs. On the other hand, we don't see our artistic docs as a part of a lump commodity with all other docs, meaning that if we stop making them, they just won't get made. Other filmmakers will continue to make their films, but they won't be the same product--so we have to build an audience or access a niche on a more intimate level, much like musicians. Also like musicians, many documentarians who I know are making their living via physical appearances to speak about their films, rather than relying on distribution alone. But this particular path doesn't appeal to me, because I want to spend that time making more films.
I think it's important for us to find the silver lining in all of these clouds of changing media distribution, and think creatively about how we can make the unfavorable conditions work for us. The fact of the matter is that there are probably just way too many of us making media for our own good. So we have to get comfortable with the lack of elbow-room!
capitalP
Veteran
Best article I have read in a long time related to this topic. It was one of those things that I was thinking it but not out loud I guess. I really hope this gets out to other filmmakers and thanks for doing your part Michael by posting it. I just posted a message over there basically I agree with everything in the article and if enough of us stop taking these deals, we might start shaking things up.
And I know the other side of this is that, distributors will always find a fresh hungry filmmaker willing to give up their work for peanuts, but we may not eliminate the problem altogether but we can put a dent in it. I for one already started doing my part, I have turned down 2 deals in the past couple of years because they were horrible. I got burnt once with my first movie and I vowed never again.
And I know the other side of this is that, distributors will always find a fresh hungry filmmaker willing to give up their work for peanuts, but we may not eliminate the problem altogether but we can put a dent in it. I for one already started doing my part, I have turned down 2 deals in the past couple of years because they were horrible. I got burnt once with my first movie and I vowed never again.
adkimery
Veteran
I don't think even putting a dent in it is possible. I mean, Hollywood level VFX artists can't even form a united front to save their jobs so I don't think there's any hope of getting all the lo/no budget filmmakers across the country (globe?) to hold out if they get offered a deal. Even if it's a crappy deal being able to tell people, "Hey, you can watch my movie on iTunes or cable VOD" has an air of legitimacy that saying "Hey, catch my movie on YouTube" does not. There's just to many people out there trying and dying to make it.
-Andrew
1) Make a striking movie
2) Get into a major festival (hint: there are only about 4-5 of them - Sundance/Cannes, Toronto/Berlin, and on a good day maybe, maybe, maybe Venice/Tribeca)
3) Get audience buzz and industry interest
4) Have a major distrib push your movie
5) Thanks to industry interest, jump into hollywood - start your directing career
or
1) Make a striking movie
2) Market the heck out of the your film through viral means (see: paranormal activities)
3) Get audience buzz and industry interest
4) Have a major distrib push your movie
5) Thanks to industry interest, jump into hollywood - start your directing career
or
1) Make a striking movie
2) You already have industry contacts - through whatever means (friends, relatives etc.) - get industry interest in your film, without bothering to ever show this movie to an audience
3) Thanks to industry interest, jump into hollywood - start your directing career
That's it. You've just described all paths to a career in the film industry. Anything else is Kardashian sex tape type lucky strike - don't bother counting on such luck, if you have such luck, buy lottery tickets immediately and become filthy rich, cause you are a miracle.
Approaching, or dealing with tiny and/or scummy distributors is a total waste of time. There are only three paths - see above.
Note one thing all these have in common, the starting point: Make a striking movie. If you do that, you don't have to worry about tiny/scammy distribs, it's a non-issue.
Guess what causes most films to fail right out of the gate. Yes, point #1. 99.9999999 (my finger got tired of holding the '9' key, otherwise it could go on, and on, and on) of the films made a not striking. And so they fail.
Yes, yes, I know nobody wants to believe that, especially about their own film. But that's how it is. Not much more to say, really. Pretty simple. Start with point #1, and the rest will take care of itself - you'll never see or hear from a scammy distrib.
Of course, if you don't care about a career, and are making a film just for yourself, then don't worry about anything at all - though I'd have to question why you'd want to get involved with a scammy distrib. - just stick it on the shelf and move onto the next one.
2) Get into a major festival (hint: there are only about 4-5 of them - Sundance/Cannes, Toronto/Berlin, and on a good day maybe, maybe, maybe Venice/Tribeca)
3) Get audience buzz and industry interest
4) Have a major distrib push your movie
5) Thanks to industry interest, jump into hollywood - start your directing career
or
1) Make a striking movie
2) Market the heck out of the your film through viral means (see: paranormal activities)
3) Get audience buzz and industry interest
4) Have a major distrib push your movie
5) Thanks to industry interest, jump into hollywood - start your directing career
or
1) Make a striking movie
2) You already have industry contacts - through whatever means (friends, relatives etc.) - get industry interest in your film, without bothering to ever show this movie to an audience
3) Thanks to industry interest, jump into hollywood - start your directing career
That's it. You've just described all paths to a career in the film industry. Anything else is Kardashian sex tape type lucky strike - don't bother counting on such luck, if you have such luck, buy lottery tickets immediately and become filthy rich, cause you are a miracle.
Approaching, or dealing with tiny and/or scummy distributors is a total waste of time. There are only three paths - see above.
Note one thing all these have in common, the starting point: Make a striking movie. If you do that, you don't have to worry about tiny/scammy distribs, it's a non-issue.
Guess what causes most films to fail right out of the gate. Yes, point #1. 99.9999999 (my finger got tired of holding the '9' key, otherwise it could go on, and on, and on) of the films made a not striking. And so they fail.
Yes, yes, I know nobody wants to believe that, especially about their own film. But that's how it is. Not much more to say, really. Pretty simple. Start with point #1, and the rest will take care of itself - you'll never see or hear from a scammy distrib.
Of course, if you don't care about a career, and are making a film just for yourself, then don't worry about anything at all - though I'd have to question why you'd want to get involved with a scammy distrib. - just stick it on the shelf and move onto the next one.
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
Look at the guy's doc. Bad graphics, bad audio, bad camera work. What kind of deal he hopes for?
Finn Yarbrough
Well-known member
Technically that would be an ad-hominem argument, Patrick.
But your point is well taken, and brings to mind a thought process that I go through all the time, trying to stay focused on my performance instead of obsessing over theoretical obstacles beyond my control. If/when my projects don't pay off, I'm forced to consider the painful possibility that they aren't as great as I thought they were. And time proves that painful possibility to be the case as I look back at my abandoned or failed projects and realize that there are good reasons that nobody wanted to watch them!
There is something paradoxically comforting to me in being humbled by my limitations in the face of the talents of others. It's almost as though, when I can acknowledge my own shortcomings and take the blame off of big abstract adversaries like "The Industry," "The Audience," and "The Market," there is a weight lifted from my heart and I feel once again capable of getting out of bed. And don't feel that I'm doing any harm to other filmmakers, as the article suggests, by partaking in the general fray of low-budget filmmakers and thereby contributing to the general over-saturation of media. Because people will watch my movie online all the way through if they like it, and if they don't they will close the tab and watch something better. They should not be forced to watch my material through lack of choices. And if a contract doesn't appeal to me, I don't have to sign it. Other filmmakers may agree to the terms that I refused, but they can only do so for their own work, not mine.
I may be getting a bit off track here. I do feel that there is a fundamental difference in "culture" between the worlds of documentary and fiction video production, and I belong to the former. It has been politely pointed out to me, in other threads, that this debate does not apply to my kind and perhaps I should abstain from putting in my oar. Either way, I've said enough on this topic it seems.