Your Brain On Film

One of the hardest things to do is convince someone that experiences can be (at least partially) objective. This is especially true in the arts, where the most passionate fans and critics tend to have deeply held personal beliefs about the qualities of the art they observe. This makes it especially difficult for someone like myself who tries to find the commonalities within film and use them to predict what someone may like or dislike.

There is no way that I can predict with any real accuracy how another human being will respond to a film, right? I mean, since we're all such unique, precious snowflakes.

As it turns out, our brains present the opposite argument. In much the same way our occipital lobe is active as we sense visual activity, so to do certain areas of our brains respond as we watch a film. And according to Uri Hasson, a psychologist at Princeton, they activate in pretty much the same way for all of us.

Hasson showed an audience a scene from (the incredible) The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly and measured the viewers brain activity using a functional MRI. He saw that the same parts of the participants' brains lit up when responding to the film. When doing this experiment with Dog Day Afternoon, "there was a significant correlation in activity across nearly 70 percent of [the particiants'] cortex." 

What does this really mean? Well, much of the similarities in brain activity are related to things like visual and auditory cues. Audiences of highly directed narrative films tend to look at the same places and listen for the same things all at the same time. Not quite as foreboding as it first appears, but there are plenty of other areas of the brain (more devoted to high level thought) that are also activated.

People often scoff at the idea that films have personalities, and as such can be parsed into chunks that can be used to find an audience. But consider the fact that, for some films at least, most people have identical patterns of brain activity. And if we determine that someone enjoys a film that activates those areas of the cortex, could we assume that different films with similar effects would also be enjoyed by that viewer?

Of course I'm not advocating that everyone step into an fMRI machine in order to get movie recommendations. To me, this study simply provides the foundations for the idea that, maybe, audiences are more similar to each other than they are different and there is a better way to explore those similarities. 

Community vs. Blob

I've written plenty here about innovative and exciting platforms for independent film distribution and/or discovery (plenty enough to make at least myself and probably you repulsed by the words Innovative, Exciting, Platform, Distribution, And/Or, and/or Discovery). I've also written a lot here about how few of these platforms actually deliver on their promises to connect filmmakers and fans. My CRI project is about this connection, about community--defining it, understanding why it is a critical component of the online ecosystem for filmmakers, and studying the attempts that startups and institutions have made to build and address it. Community is critical because if it isn't there, than it really doesn't matter if your film is. Is a good library enough to draw community? Recognizable and trustworthy curators? Interaction? Involvement? Empowerment? I think it's some kind of combination of all of the above, with an emphasis on everything that came after "good library." Which is not to say that the quality of content doesn't matter in the online ecosystem. Of course it does. And there are enough quality films not getting (or not getting enough out of) traditional, theatrical distribution to populate a robust online ecosystem. Rather, online communities want an ontologically online experience--they want a unique kind of empowering involvement that does not exist in an offline world. And so some excited rambling about two organizations (a bootstrap startup and a leading institute) that are tackling the community question in truly Innovative And/Or Exciting ways:

One of the platforms I've been researching that I think is killing it is Seed&Spark, (whose COO (and my Tisch classmate) Liam Brady is using the platform to seed and spark his film, FOG CITY). Emily Best, founder and CEO of the company, writes that she "founded Seed&Spark to allow indie filmmakers to leverage this WishList crowd-funding method specifically to build and grow their collaboration with their audiences for the entire life-cycle of a film," because "...when you activate the imaginations of your broader community, you set off a chain of actions, reactions and connections the result of which can push the boundaries of your film beyond what you imagined." The "WishList" to which she refers is essentially a wedding registry for an independent film. Best first experimented with the WishList idea for her film LIKE THE WATER:

What we came to call the "WishList" rendered our filmmaking process transparent to our community and sparked their imaginations. They started coming up with ways to get involved we hadn't imagined. They became deeply meaningful collaborators in the film who then lined up – literally – around the block to see the film when it was finished. ... When both you and your supporter can name the material contribution they made to your film, you both understand your supporter’s importance beyond the number of dollars they contributed. And they should feel important because they are.

Best understands that a community needs to be empowered and thus feel important in order to thrive. So many brands spend so many corporate dollars trying to create online communities and make them feel important. But this is a difficult verging on deceptive task since the individuals who comprise these "communities" are ultimately as important as any other individuals from like demographics. For an independent film, however, individual supporters are actually important because they can, as Best points out and as Seed&Spark allows, contribute uniquely to that film's actualization. I have $50 to donate, you have a car to rent cheaply, he has c-stands to lend, etc. It's kind of beautiful how the needs of an independent film and its online community align like this. All independent films depend to some degree on the good will of communities--local communities, friends, family and peers of the filmmaking team, etc. And a community by definition thrives on supporting its members (that's why it's a community and not a nebulous blob of loners). Seed&Park offers online tools to facilitate this good will and thus connect filmmakers and fans in a profound and uniquely online way.

The Sundance Institute has announced that its Artist Services program will expand its suite of digital tools through partnerships with Tugg, Vimeo, Reelhouse, and VHX. These partners join Kickstarter, GoWatchIt, TopSpin Media, as well as the usual retailer suspects. The above hyperlinked IFP release as well as this IndieWire article provide information on these platforms, and I've also written about several of them on this blog. Artist Services is further partnering with other organizations which will select filmmakers to share Artist Services privileges with Sundance alumni. The organizations are: The Bertha Foundation, BRITDOC, Cinereach, Film Independent, the Independent Filmmaker Project and the San Francisco Film Society.

It is clear that the Sundance Institute is committed through Artist Services to exploring the community component of the online independent filmmaking ecosystem. Between their retail partners (iTunes, Hulu, Netflix etc.), and the partner platforms that help filmmakers strategize their direct-to-fan distribution and marketing (TopSpin, VHX, Reelhouse), #AS is providing their filmmakers a pretty robust toolkit for self-distribution. By additionally partnering with platforms like Tugg and Vimeo, #AS is acknowledging that an engaged community is as important as quality marketing or visible shelf-space. Tugg directly involves and thus empowers its community to bring the films they want to see to their local theater. Despite their nascent experiments with monetization, Vimeo is essentially a community of people who make videos and people who watch them. Although YouTube's community is bigger (like hundreds of millions bigger), Vimeo's superior user-interface/experience, profile customization, and opportunities for discovery (staff picks, categories, etc.) make it feel like a prettier, comfier, more tight-knit community. (There are other differences, of course.) However it stacks up against its opponent, Vimeo is indisputably a community, not a tool for direct to fan strategizing. Artist Services does not end its suite of tools at direct to fan strategizing platforms because tools that empower communities are as vital to a film's self-distributed success.

I'd like to believe that we are in fact being wired together, not apart, but I also think that there's space and time for both the movies we watch together in theaters and the ones we watch alone on personal screens (as long as they're at least 13 inches or so). Personal feelings about the anthropological impacts of online connection aside, the independent filmmaking and loving community is very real and very capable of helping each other make and discover movies online. To me, online community means a collection of real individuals that make real things happen via the Internets (online communities fund films; online nebulous blobs produce analytics). To different platforms, community means different things. Some don't need it (Netflix) and others can't live without it (anything I've written about here). I'm interested in online tools that by virtue of being online tools help a widespread group of like-minded people come together and Seed, Spark, Kickstart, Gathr, and Tugg stuff--tools that empower our community.

Weissman & Hirschhorn on Disruption in Film and Media [VIDEO]

In THIS talk, Andrew Weissman (Union Square Ventures) and Jason Hirschhorn (Media ReDEFined) discuss the new tools available to filmmakers in this brave new (internet and social) world. It's well worth taking the time to watch the whole talk but if you can't, my three takeaways:

1. The cost structure of releasing films needs to be challenged. The biggest opportunity is in marketing and using social media to reach people more cheaply and efficiently. These changes will be difficult and painful as the current cost structure supports an entire industry.
2. Windowing allows revenues to be maximized but it hurts the user experience. The industry needs to be much more focused on giving a better experience to the fans.
3. Filmmaking is more entrepreneurial than ever as artists have to be creative on the fund raising, storytelling and deal making sides of the business.

5 Reasons BACHELORETTE'S Early VOD Success Matters

In advance of next month's theatrical run, Radius-TWC's first pickup, Bachelorette debuted at #1 in the iTunes charts and is already generating healthy revenues (a reported $500K in the first three days).  While it's admittedly a bit early for analysis, this is a great bit of news as the industry tries to understand the power and potential of VOD.  This development is significant for many reasons... To name a few:

(1) No P&A. The movie is grabbing attention and earning revenue (of the low fixed cost digital variety, by the way) without the benefit of a studio-sized P&A spend. Radius-TWC has maintained itself as a multi-platform--as opposed to direct to VOD--arm.  To that end, if the theatrical works, this strategy will be seen as further proof for a model we all want to work... and the pre-theatrical VOD window may start to catch on as "marketing that pays."

(2) Pricing is king. Some are skeptical of the $9.99 "Ultra VOD" pricing model given that studio fare typically rents for $3.99 in the VOD window ("why rent a small movie for $10 when you can rent The Avengers for less than half the price?"). But on the flip side, there are those that maintain that great content in an early window deserves a premium price.  There is also the argument that $10 is still a deal given the cost and effort required to get to the theater.  In this case, the price point doesn't appear to be scaring audiences away... a glimmer of hope for those hoping VOD is the savior of independent film.

(3) Female-driven comedy continues to connect. While some are pointing out that a few of our biggest comedic stars appear to be falling from the sky, audiences continue to be interested in hilarious women in interesting roles.

(4) iTunes/VOD is a discovery platform. Without the ability to outspend studios, smaller films depend, in part, on editorial support from distribution partners to get discovered.  The combination of a strong PR presence (see: free marketing) and iTunes' support (the film has masthead placement alongside the likes of Battleship and The Dictator) seems to have been enough to allow audiences to connect the dots and discover this film.

(5) No one knows anything (except maybe Tom and Jason). While Radius-TWC co-Presidents Tom Quinn and Jason Janego are not new to multi-platform distribution (they developed and perfected the model at Magnolia), parts of the industry seem to be catching up to the idea that the marketing and distribution for an independent film can be as special, unique and tailored as the content itself.  The early success of Bachelorette might just advance the argument in favor of flexibility and experimentation as opposed to restricted windows and pricing.

The changing tide of digital distribution (June 2012)

A glance at the trades tells us everything we need to know about the current state of independent film distribution... it's changing. Cases and points:

Title: BIG EASY EXPRESS

• What: A music documentary that follows a ten-day road trip (via train) with Mumford and Sons, Edward Sharpe & the Magnetic Zeros, and Old Crow Medicine Show
• Release: "Run in reverse" method by which the film debuts on iTunes today as an exclusive.  Press and attention is white hot and iTunes is cross promoting the title alongside music by the artists, all of whom seem natural fits for the iTunes audience.  DVD/BluRay is to follow next month, followed by digital/VOD at a later date.
• The Takeaway: One great partner can be the difference-maker in terms of a successful launch.

Title: 1,2,3... FRANKIE GO BOOM!

• What: A comedy starring Charlie Hunnam, Lizzy Kaplan, Chris O'Dowd, Chris Noth and Whitney Cummings that premiered at SXSW.
• Release: Through a new joint venture between  Variance Films (a theatrical distributor) and Gravitas (a digital one), the film will premiere on VOD in September, followed by a theatrical release in October.
• The Takeaway: The Magnolia premiere on VOD model is spreading downstream.

Title: THE PAPERBOY

• What: Lee Daniels' controversial follow up to the critically and financially successful Precious, the movie is an erotic thriller starring Zach Efron, Nicole Kidman, Macy Gray and John Cusack.
• Release: After failing to receive an acceptable post-Cannes offer, Millenium Entertainment will be self-distributing the title in the fall.
• The Takeaway: Even specialty distributors are exercising extreme caution in picking up risky titles.  For such movies, the distribution may have to get as creative as the material itself.