Watching the transition, with Eyes Wide Shut...

The concept of streaming motion pictures instead of purchasing or renting physical DVDs has now reached the point of creating a conundrum for the producers of the media, providers of the service and the rental access alike. The uniqueness of the Netflix scenario is a clear example of the conflict between the future of streaming media, and a pull to protect the older forms of distribution and exhibition.

The push back from the motion picture studios has created a form of self-mutilation. This can only be illustrated in looking at how the Netflix is handled by said studios regarding the future of streaming videos. “That transformation — from a mail-order business to a technology company — is revolutionizing the way millions of people watch television, but it’s also proving to be a big headache for TV providers and movie studios, which increasingly see Netflix as a competitive threat, even as they sell Netflix their content.” (Aragon & Carr, 2010) As has been pointed out, the company is constrained by the major motion picture studios. And in some cases competed against by the studios own platforms as they tried to create separate rental models to enhance their revenues. However this seems to have just the opposite of affect upon consumers. The average end-user is resistant to having to use multiple subscriber base mediums or platforms to see product. Therefore all parties lose because the consumers tend to flow back and hire it cites or by simple when not watching films on one base or the other. If morning on the horizon is the possibility that producers would just completely started by passing all of these platforms including Netflix and a new hybrid version of media streaming may you ball at that point what will the movie studios do to counteract a low world of level of income or revenue streams be available to do

When you remove the aforementioned situations associated with the actual exhibition of product, the most perplexing aspects all center on the curtailing of access for a platform like Netflix.

Aragon, D., & Carr, (2010, November 24). Netflix’s move onto the web stirs rivalries. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/business/25netflix.html?src=mv

Modern Hollywood Mergers: The Shareholders’ Dance

Unlike the mergers that created the modern production studio model, the possible Lionsgate and Summit union brings a strong series of moneymaking franchises to the same plate. This side of Warner Brothers now concluded Harry Potter franchise (Nash, 2011) and New Line Cinema’s Lord of the Rings trilogy (Nash); modern studios have rarely seen a franchise like Summit’s Twilight Saga series (Nash). The profits produced by the latest film (the penultimate project) have been record breaking. Meanwhile, despite a lean year at the box office, Lionsgate is preparing for the release of what most Hollywood insiders believe might be the next breakout series of projects: The Hunger Games franchise. The first of these films premieres in March 2012. Then, whether this series will be on the par of the aforementioned franchises will go a long way to proving if the sustainability of such a merger is viable.

Mergers among production companies are as old as the industry itself. M-G-M (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) was once three separate production and distribution companies. In that light, the recent inference of a possible merger between production and distribution houses Summit Entertainment and Lionsgate Entertainment brings up a series of questions regarding the long-term financial aspects of these companies.

Still, as in all Hollywood mergers, control (financial and operational) seems to be the greatest stumbling block to the possible merger of the companies. Lionsgate is fresh off of the ejection of one of its major investors Carl Icahn from its shareholders at the cost of multi-millions of dollars. As in most deals based on leverage, there are other parties in terms of shareholders to consider in those terms. The dance between the two companies has taken place over the last three years.  In September 2008, a proposed merger between Summit and Lionsgate fell through. Since then, it has been the flavor of the day to speculate on the deal finally actually coming to fruition (Grover and White, 2011). The Summit Entertainment picture and history is clouded in large part by the Twilight Saga series. Before those films, the company was largely unsuccessful in its production record. Nevertheless, that current success is giving Summit a high level of the aforementioned leverage.

In closing, no matter if the reports are true or not, the greater question is whether this union can be successful and profitable. The modern Hollywood landscape is littered with bad marriages (Vivendi-Universal, Viacom, and AOL-Time Warner), the bottom line is not always a matter of break even analysis. It can be a matter of comparable vision and goals being attained.

Grover, R., & White, M. (2011, November 29). Lions gate said to be in merger talks with ‘twilight’ film producer summit. Bloomberg News. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/lions-gate-said-to-be-in-merger-talks-with-twilight-film-producer-summit.html
Nash, B. (2011, November 29). Harry potter box office.The Numbers. Retrieved from http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/HarryPotter.php

Nash, B. (2011, November 29). Lions gate box office. The Numbers. Retrieved from http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/LionsGate.php

Nash, B. (2011, November 29). Summit entertainment box office. The Numbers. Retrieved from http://www.the-numbers.com/market/Distributors/SummitEntertainment.php

Turning the corner... Stu Dodge faces the future of Indy filmmaking...

Stu Dodge has spent 20 years in the motion picture industry. Starting as a production assistant at the beginning of the 1990’s. Dodge used those years to prepare himself for the big step to independent filmmaker.

Cheerleader Autopsy

Nerd of the Living Dead

‘Nerd of the Living Dead’ and ‘Cheerleader Autopsy’ are two independent gore-sexual innuendo fantasy motion pictures that came from the mind of my subject Stuart “Stu” Dodge. His approach to filmmaking has developed him an immense cult following for his movie and his company ‘Drive-in Pictures.’ Over the past decade, he has produced these two movies on a shoestring budget while maintaining relationships that have allowed him to get free services and performances from vendors and performers alike. What has been the key to his ability to accomplish these feats?

“Flexibility” is key according to Dodge. "Flexibility during the production of a motion picture is an absolute necessity, but I'm not a big fan of having to use it...." With the high level of volunteers and the commitment of time, the problems and difficulties of the leader of small independents, the two films from Dodge show the need for leadership and even more importantly for growth in how one approaches their projects.

By the time Dodge rolled out ‘Nerd of the Living Dead,’ his approach was totally different. He had adapted to the new market place and even more importantly the change in the playing field. He knew the exhibition window was now extremely short. He had a project that he needed to maximize his pay-per-view window (on Amazon and using a lock-key purchase system) that allowed him to at least get some revenue before the film could be pirated on the market.

Filmmakers like Dodge are living with the changing face of movie making in the 21^st century. Each new project leads to opportunities and challenges revolving around the management of people and situations.   


Here are Stu's direct answers to my questions:
1. Best alternative negotiating tactics (re: financing) used when making films.

"As I self financed both Cheerleader Autopsy and Nerd of the Living Dead, I didn't make use of any negotiating tactics, other than convincing my own dumb ass to self finance both pictures (see question 2 below)."


2. Financing the films; how was the first one made? What did you learn from the first, that you changed or amended for the second?

"A little back story (not that you want to hear it). I began working in the "real" film business in 1989, and for the first 10 years I worked a lot. As you know, Mr. Skinner, working in this industry can be quite lucrative for a single person with few bills. During those years I was able to put aside a pretty substantial pile of cash; cash that I planned to use to purchase either a houseboat or a pony (suffice to say I didn't have any particular plans for the cash)."

"As "film biz" years 11 and 12 came and went, I began to face the truth that "working" on other people's big budget movies was a living, but was world's away from my lifelong dream of "making" movies! So, I wrote my first script, broke it down (those Asst. Director days paying dividends here), crewed up and shot Cheerleader in 14 days."

"My desire to either "do it right" OR act like a big shot led me to involve the Screen Actor's Guild (NEVER AGAIN) and actually PAY and feed my cast and crew, and I came in about 72 bucks under budget. I won't mention what that budget was, as it was embarrassingly large for a project of this caliber...."


"The film screened theatrically Sept. 10th, 2001. Assholes attacked our country the following morning. A couple of years later, I signed the picture over to a distributor, got screwed out of my share of profits, including a Netflix deal and my little money pit has since been pirated and distributed worldwide."

"Estimates suggest Cheerleader Autopsy has been downloaded over a half a million times, and that's conservative. I've only been able to make back a few hundred dollars selling it myself on Amazon. Failure."

"When it came time to make Nerd of the Living Dead, I essentially repeated the steps above (excluding SAG and Distributor). My cast and crew made money. I've made a few hundred dollars selling it myself on Amazon. Failure (do we see a pattern here?). BTW, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result."

"A very successful L.A. Producer once told me (regarding financing an independent), "1. get investors to give you X to make the movie. 2. make the picture for 1/2 of X, and pay yourself 1/4 of X. 3. Return 1/4 of X to investors as budget underage (they love that). 4. Find other investors and repeat. Whether the picture flops or not doesn't matter, and you can continue to make movies...Oh, and don't pay your cast or crew if you can get away with it." I should have listened..."

3. Separate people from problems (drama?) during prep and production?

"Again, I'll illustrate using Cheerleader (A) and Nerd (B).
Movie A: Shot in the Summer, motivated crew of 18, no cast Divas, lots of wrap beer...no drama."

"Movie B. Shot in the Winter, lackluster crew of 3, huge Diva in title role, no booze...drama and misery."

4. Since you use so many volunteers and vendors, can talk about flexibility some?

"As you know, Sir, we schedule movies out of necessity. Only a reasonable number of pages can be shot in a day; there's actor and location availability to consider, allowances have to be made for "turning" sets; the list goes on and on (and on)."


"I scheduled both films for 14 shoot days (5 on, 2 off) and for the most part kept to the schedule in both cases. I had one big "extra" day on both pictures (involving volunteers) and thankfully things work out each time, partly because I'd taken the time during prep to confirm people's availability (and partly due to accommodating weather)."

"Actually, the only issues that significantly affected either shoot were the failure of a picture car guy (and car) to show up on set on Cheerleader, which necessitated a quick (and if I do say so, shitty) rewrite...and my vegan, Diva actor's sinuses during Nerd, which...well...I don't want to even talk about that."

"Flexibility during the production of a motion picture is an absolute necessity, but I'm not a big fan of having to use it...."

That's enough from me... 

I thank my old friend Stu Dodge for being so open about his experiences. I look forward to his next film...

Angels...

The single or multiple capital sources who can brings resources to bear for financing are called angel investors. (Debaise, 2010) Across the world of finance, startups, and venture capital, these individuals come forth and make ideas come to life. The company that finds an angel and creates the gateway for green-lighting a film, music enterprise, or a corporate enterprise gives the investors a chance to mediate risk. However, it is the bridge to a company either making the possibility of success happen.

Debaise, C. (2010). What's an angel investor?. Wall Street Journal, Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303491304575188420191459904.html

When corporate governance overwhelms long-term hope...

Between 1993 until early 2006, American and international capital, hedge fund investors, and more importantly shareholders went on a wild ride of financial great return and even greater bust not seen since the heady days of the Gilded Age. The simple rules of investing in publically traded companies have always acquiesced around return on the invested sum. The principle of investor return has literally become the tail that wags the dog.

What should be the true role of the investor? In certain periods, should short-term return be decreased for the overall long-term growth (corporate or overall economy? With the economy showing no real job growth, however corporate balance sheets are flush with reserve capital and profits even in the midst of the nearly 3 years of recession followed by two years of economic stagnation, why haven’t corporations turned into job creation sectors? Some have blamed the intrinsic battlefield in Congress. Others have blamed the free markets lack of flexibility in the face of the changing state of the World economy.

The national debt has become a convenient scapegoat for those who are not fans of FIAT currency systems. Still, with an aging population, many of whom are being forced into a pool of the underemployed, the failure of tax revenues to match outgoing obligations can only increase if the economy remains stagnant. Moreover, the failure of investors to obligate boards to see long-term benefits against short-term balance sheet equalization has been puzzling.

The unique reality of seeking resources in start-up financing and operations in the age of economic stagnation is one of gaining capital in a period of fairly unrealistic expectations from investors. Is there truly a place for all of the unused capital funding to continue to on the sidelines? When and if as in the early 1980s will the financial powerhouses of capital finally show their hands?

References:

Bébéar, C. (2003, May 01). Killing capitalism?. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/1756156

Fink, L. (2011, October 02). Learn about the gilded age. Retrieved from http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/gilded_age/index.cfm

Investopedia. (2011, October 01).Fiat money. Retrieved from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fiatmoney.asp

Medina, M. (2011, October 01). Panics, depressions, and economic crisis prior to 1930.. Retrieved from http://www.thehistorybox.com/ny_city/panics/panics_article1a.htm

Venable, R. (2011, October 01). The impact of government and policy making. Retrieved from http://www.rwbaird.com/bolimages/Media/Video/Keys/RoundTable_Government_V2.wmv

The Production Manager

The prime conditions for the operation of a successful motion picture production process revolves around the strength of the the role of the production manager. The most amazing aspects of the most successful levels of a successful filmmaking process needs a steady hand, financial oversight, workplace environment tranquility,  and solidarity of vision in the film project itself.


With the virtue of understanding these requirements allows the filmmaking process to flow from pre-production, the production phase, the post-production, and ultimately completed project. The most prolific Unit Production Managers (UPM's) shuffle the decks, the relations to keep demanding producers, studios, talent, and the crew in a stable base mode even if the production is traversing the turbulent period of woes. Even more important is the place of moving a process forward by steering the ship.  Then, if the UPM is successful, the completed project is moved into post. Can the UPM get a project to this point, that is what the most efficient UPM strives for in totality.


So, as we examine the production process, we must realize the UPM for all of the assets that they bring to such endeavors.  

The Great Leap Forward...

“The Great Leap Forward” was a phrase long associated with the “Cultural Revolution” of the Maoist Communist movement in China. However, it has come to exemplify a period of restless anticipation in the fields of digital filmmaking. While we marvel at the visual wizardry of box-office darlings like “Avatar” and the “Harry Potter” series, it is in hindsight that we see that these films are still working to catch up technology wise with the vision of the filmmakers. In the case of James Cameron, his vision for “Avatar” was fermented and penned in the early 1990’s. The synergy was there, however, the nexus of technology in terms of the computer processor necessary to compose such powerfully stunning vistas as his fantasy world of Pandora required nearly a decade and half to come about into fruition.

In a TED Talk presented in February of 2010, the Academy Award winning director explained his long waited to create the blue creatures, visual panoramas, and jaw dropping action sequences. Cameron explained it like this: “But we found ourselves lagging in the mid '90s in the creature and character design stuff that we had actually founded the company to do. So, I wrote this piece called "Avatar," which was meant to absolutely push the envelope of visual effects, of CG effects, beyond, with realistic human emotive characters generated in CG And the main characters would all be in CG And the world would be in CG And the envelope pushed back. And I was told by the folks at my company that we weren't going to be able to do this for a while.”  

The great context of Cameron’s comments speak to the scores and depth of the potential stories that are lurking in the minds of Hollywood filmmakers as they await the next great wave of processing and microcomputer technology. The real question is whether a system of highly collaborative infrastructures will finally make their way into everyday filmmaking circles beyond the world of the film-editing suite (the worlds of Avid and FCP)? The possibility of multiple user interfaces in context of production design, set production leadership, and the introduction of cloud based computing technology still sits tenuously on the edge of actuality in the industry.  When will crews have the true ability to work in a virtual set that matches the virtual fantasy of Pandora. So only time will tell on that matter.

A Review of Chimamanda Adichie's TED Talk: Danger of Single Story

Chimamanda Adichie TED talk on the Danger of a Single Story gives the aspect of the power of how media can form perceptions that defy actual facts. A talented young author, Adichie, a native of Nigeria provides an intelligent debunking of the characterization of people across the world by the prism of the vision of a single source to what makes civilization work.

In her discussion, the young author expounds on the experiences of the foundation of her love for literature. The books of her youth were by American and English authors, these formed the heart of her belief system for a long period regardless of the fact that she was a youngster in Nigeria. This cultural influence, a position that shaded her view of the world formed the core of her talk. As she grew to adulthood, travel and the introduction of African authors give her perspective to see beyond the forces that ferment her earlier world- view.

The power of media sources whether they be a children’s book or the more complex novels of a Pulitzer Prize winner like Alice Walker is in how the reader comes to allow it to influence their vision of the world. Adichie relates the story of how a trip to Mexico allowed her to see her own prejudices and the misinformation of media sources had on her vision of the country and the populous. She speaks of the personal shame that she felt for having let such media bias influence her.

The overall context of the talk is inspiring from the standpoint that she allows the world to she her flaws as human being while chastising the premise of the influence of Western culture on the masses. In reality, entrepreneurism is not a sole property of the West. Cultural character as well is not the sole property as well. Her talk shows the desire of all individuals to have cultural pride.

In conclusion, Ms. Adichie gives the strength to her convictions that is translated to her audience. By the end, the viewer or the attendee has been opened up to rich history of cultures while being given the powerful warning that allowing a single source to much influence in crafting one’s world view can be limiting.



References

Adichie, C. (Artist). (2009). (n.d.). The danger of a single story. [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story.html

Independent Film regroups...

Independent filmmaking and TV producers unlike independent insurance agents are not given a finished product to sale or resource to promote by a larger industry. They are the ones who create, produce, and then try to sell a finished product. While a solitary enterprise in theory,  indies dwell in a system that requires collaborations and associations.

In 2006, the most venerable face of the independent motion picture community in North America the Association of Independent Video and Filmmakers ceased operation.  Into the void left by the AIVF's departure a number of trade groups have tried to fill the huge chasm left for indie filmmakers.

The strong effort at industry consolidation in the form of studio mergers and the acquisition of once powerful forces for the distribution of independent films for the equally once powerful theatrical exhibition industry like Miramax and The Samuel Goldwyn Company by larger production studio houses. Disney and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) acquired these two companies. Disney and Warner Brothers went even further and created their own independent studios to take advantage of the trend. 

Still, with these consolidations has come a saturation of productions for the big and small screens that never attain distribution. These voids in access and difficult scenarios for getting films to market have brought the New York based Independent Film Project (IFP) greater influence and membership.  On the other hand, The Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA) has been at the forefront of marketing and distributing sponsoring the American Film Market in Santa Monica, California where independent filmmakers can pursue distribution deals.

Currently maintaining a membership over 10,000, the IFP has taken a role to lead filmmakers in their industry pursuits. The association sponsors the Independent Filmmaker Labs™, the Independent Film week™, and the related industry surrounding the independent filmmaker. Ultimately, the association funnels resources for the independent industry in ways that aid them in trying to get films made and more importantly to the marketplace. 

Whereas, the IFTA has started championing the access of independents to the TV market place which has decrease to 18% down from the 50% access available to indies in 1995. Representing 150 companies from 23 nations, this trade association is headquartered in Southern California. By launching the website Fight for Independents, the Alliance see the battleground as one that is between the diminishing window of opportunity for indies and the strength of the consolidated studios and distributors scenario that now monopolizes the market. 

These two associations situated on the two American coasts are now the places where Indies now turn for their unity. 

The Florida Southern College Teaching Through Technology workshop...

Professor Sydney Chalfa of Macon State continues to break new ground in the expanding field of Digital Storytelling. One of the leading proponents of the use video in the telling personal non-narrative stories, her teaching style enlightens non-professional to higher levels of skills and attributes in telling those comprehensive tales.

Recently Sydney joined numbers of Digital Storytelling proponents in Lakeland, Florida in teaching a workshop on the subject. Between July 11-15, Professor Chalfa shared her personal teaching style with educators from across the Southeast. The genre allows even the most inexperienced child, adult, or a storyteller to get their point across in the most personal form. A former student of the groundbreaking Joe Lambert led San Francisco Center for Digital Storytelling, Chalfa has been a pied piper for the genre.

With the increasing tone for not-for-profit budget cuts and the drying up of grants for documentary film-making. Digital storytelling has the possibility of being a gateway or bridge mechanism for filmmakers until economic stability is regained and the documentary genre is stabilized in the not so near future. 

http://www.flsouthern.edu/evening/TeacherWorkshops/

From Theory to the Proof...

The man who put Tarantino on the road to ‘Reservoir Dogs’ keeps plugging his brand of guerilla filmmaking.

I finally took the plunge and signed up for a nearly legendary cult status filmmaking workshop for independent moviemakers: Dov S-S Simens’ “2 Day Hollywood School” while recuperating from nearly a life ending accident in 1996. It had me kicking myself for majoring in television and film production 10 years and $32,000 in tuition, books, and room and board earlier. It changed my outlook on the process.

Over the weekend I revisited Dov’s course and technique by going to Los Angeles and re-enrolling in the class. 15 years ago, I had 5 years, 8 feature films, 2 Emmy nominated TV series, and a major network mini-series under my belt by that time. Therefore, I felt extremely confident in my knowledge of the budget and planning process. There is the “Hollywood Myth” of what a movie cost to make and the reality of what the actual cost truly is in the end. The only good thing about being a low level office PA is that you sooner or later, you get to see the “bible budget” while mass copying it for the need to know executives, producers, and security bondsmen. The most startling revelation aspect in the workshop is just that, the myth far exceeds the truth “above-the-line” and “below-the-line” figures that are nightly bandied about on shows like Entertainment Tonight or Access Hollywood. Simen’s is famed for demystifying the process.

Now, 15 years later with 10 more features, 6 more TV series, and 3 more mini-series in my rear view mirror, I flew to Southern California to see just how relevant his ideas were on the matters that he presented to us.

The process is always 87% cost control, 7% product, and the remaining 6% being the wash of the experience. If you can acquire the property reasonably, sell the idea without ceding to much control, and lastly make the film with reasonable acquisitions of talent, equipment, location, and post-production necessity, then one can generally  stand assured that the final piece: distribution may leave the filmmaker in the position to succeed regardless of the quality of the work. Producer Roger Corman made a career of this formula while at American International films.

Making your first movie of any kind is always the most daunting matter on a beginner's or industry veteran’s plate. Still, as Simen’s finished his 38 steps of production and the avenues of getting the project acquired in some manner for distribution; the premise had not changed over that period of time. It got Quentin Tarentino to the brink of getting a film made with a mostly then D-list performers and one mega star in Harvey Keitel to be in ‘Reservoir Dogs.’

The Exhibition Wars...

Exhibition Wars

Welcome...

Welcome to Distinction Biograph.

Bienvenidos!

Hello, I’m Jerrell Skinner and this is my blog.

I hope you will join me as we discover new aspects in storytelling. Please visit my LINKEDIN profile and my IMDB link. This will provide you with my professional background.

I hope that you will find this blog to be entertaining and informative over time. Moreover, I hope you will visit the links that I will put up periodically to give you my take on better choices spending your entertainment dollar.

Yours truly,
Jerrell

Our Personal Learning Network

The hardest portion of gaining and maintaining one's place in the working world is our professional relationships. One misstep can lead to years of missed opportunities and the chance that other people can dictate what the world thinks of you. As they say, perception becomes reality.

The choice of mentors, networking circles, and eventually the individuals who have the most influence on our professional mindset has to be taken with get care. Moreover, the choices must cover the people we may have  alienated or done a disservice to along the way. Pressures, in the workplace are manifestation of how we handled the problem(s). 

Unlike most professions, artistic pursuits rarely fit the Wharton Business School models. Of course the rules of business are practical at all times. Still, the painting of Sistine Chapel is not the daily running of Boeing Aerospace. They are both enterprises, but they are vastly different in what they accomplish and how they get to completion.

So I'm including a link for a collection of resources for those in the arts or those related pursuits: Social Arts Practices Network (SPAN). There are timely articles and information on the arts, grants, and finance.

So feel free to drop me a line if you like...

Jerrell

Sexism in venture capitalism, what happens when opportunity is stifled...

Hi everyone...

I've come across a very intriguing article on the 'Business Insider' by Alyson Shontell. It is regarding the environment among many venture capitalists (VC's) in terms of the lack of understanding of how to evaluate startups led by women. It serves in a way as a microcosm of the problems faced by all minorities groups. What happens when the evaluator is unable (or unwilling) to build an environment to properly determine the value and possibilities of a concept or a company?

In a domestic economy that has been stubbornly stagnant for nearly 4 years; both in its ability to expand and innovate. This scenario is part of a larger problem. How can you ramp up hiring when the market gatekeepers are still using outdated principles to judge the worth of a company.

Here's a link: "Hey VCs: Stop Saying This Female Entrepreneurs!"