Documentary Grassroots Distribution: BROKEN HEART LAND

There tends to be a definition of success surrounding independent film that goes a little like this: make the movie, premiere at a major festival, get picked up by a distributor, move on. 

That narrative leaves a lot out, including potential audience members, potential ROI for the filmmakers, potential awareness of or exposure to the film, etc. And it sometimes forgets why filmmakers make films: to share a story, an experience, a perspective. To change minds and touch hearts. Filmmakers have big, beautiful goals for their films and the traditional, festival-driven and broadcast-based model of independent distribution can sometimes undercut those larger goals. 

This may be especially true of documentary film, especially given that documentary filmmakers are often personally close to the story they tell, and desire to be close with their audiences as well.

Redefining Success and Finding Your Audience

The filmmakers of BROKEN HEART LAND - co-directors Jeremy Stulberg & Randy Stulberg, and producer Eric Juhola (Tisch's own!) - found success, even where it seemed unlikely, by bringing their film - a story about a conservative Oklahoma family dealing with the aftermath of their gay teenage son's suicide, learning that he was HIV positive, and the community's divided reactions - to the communities who wanted and needed to see it via a screening tour. 

Jeremy's recounted their experience for Indiewire, which you should read in full, but here are some of the highlights/steps in the grassroots direction he notes:

1. Decide to Tour. This is a documentary tradition, and one that should be embraced! See also: A TIME FOR BURNING (Bill Jersey, 1967).

2. Get help to access your audience and develop partnerships - an impact strategist is a good person to know. 

3. Do your research: where is the central issue explored by your film most prevalent? Who is most concerned about the topic you address in your film?

4. Partner with aligned organizations who a) serve that concerned population already and b) will promote your film as an excellent communication of their cause/ideals. 

5. Be open-minded. Jeremy writes of his unlikely audience: "...most of the conservative people I met was that they weren't guided by hate, but rather they were misguided by love. It's a very subtle distinction, but one that I think makes all the difference when trying to build bridges between communities."

6. Communicate. You made your film to say something, right? Engage in a dialogue with your audience and make them advocates. 

7.  Be willing to take the film where it needs to go. BROKEN HEART LAND was screened for policy makers and teachers - two majorly influential audiences who have the capacity to amplify the film's message beyond the filmmakers' screening tour or post-screening discussions. 

8. Stay in touch when you're off the beaten path. Maintain a website and a newsletter that will continue to engage your advocate audience, and your film (and career) will continue to flourish. 

Jeremy's expert grassroots plug from the Indiewire article: 

To read more about our impact campaign and to see how you can get involved or donate, please see our latest newsletter here. Visit our website to learn more and to see if the film is coming to an area near you.

And a final word from the author:

When we started making the film back in 2010, we had no idea that we'd be orchestrating a screening tour as a means of distributing "Broken Heart Land."  We thought we would follow the more traditional path that independent documentary filmmakers travel: from festival to festival with a theatrical and/or broadcast as the final moment for the film. In fact, we've learned that each film is different. For "Broken Heart Land," it was the opposite. The broadcast was the kickoff for a longer, deeply affecting tour, which will hopefully continue to stay relevant for some time to come. 

Through the experience, we've been able to redefine success. We learned that targeted reach can lead to deeper and more meaningful impact. We want to continue to bring this film to more communities in other Bible Belt and heartland states as well. We know that there are so many communities that need to see the film, and we want to continue to use it to spark discussion and make change throughout the country. It's been a unconventional trip, to say the least, but if I learned anything from those car trips with my family back in the day, it's that sometimes going off the beaten path can be incredibly rewarding.

Tim League on What Follows in Distribution After IT FOLLOWS Succeeds

badassdigest.com

Tim League's call for greater flexibility in the film distribution landscape - which is broadening rapidly and without any sign of slowing down - is one that should be echoed by filmmakers who want a shot at both theatrical distribution and the revenue potential of VOD. 

League argues:

What I would love to see in the wake of It Follows' success is increased flexibility by allthe major players involved: VOD platforms, cinemas and iTunes alike. Strong indie films with a chance of breaking out would begin with a 2-4 week theatrical window. If they do extremely well, the VOD and iTunes windows would be pushed back to allow the theatrical revenues to be maximized and for awareness of the film to build. At the same time, expansion market cinemas would be willing to pick up the film, provided it crossed certain revenue thresholds in its first two weeks of release. If the theatrical grosses aren't there, the film would stick to the compressed-window strategy or maybe play in those expansion markets with just a few showtimes. 

To date, the cinema industry is largely unwilling to discuss any flexibility in the way independent films are booked. I am in accord with the industry that new-release blockbusters need to have a long exclusive theatrical window. But for independent films, we need greater flexibility.

Read the rest of League's persuasive piece at badassdigest.com. 

Sharing the Love: A Round of Applause for Shonda Rhimes and Kerry Washington

We love that Shonda Rhimes is changing our language about changing film - advocating for more voices and visions on screens of all sizes is NORMALIZING the industry to the realities of its audiences. 

"You should get to turn on the TV and see your tribe. And your tribe can be any kind of person, any one you identify with, anyone who feels like you, who feels like home, who feels like truth. You should get to turn on the TV and see your tribe, see your people, someone like you out there, existing. So that you know on your darkest day that when you run (metaphorically or physically RUN), there is somewhere, someone, to run TO. Your tribe is waiting for you...

... The images you see on television matter. They tell you about the world. They tell you who you are. What the world is like. They shape you. We all know this. There have been studies."

And we're gaga for Kerry Washington's call for inclusivity as a resistance to "othering." 

"Having your story told as a woman, as a person of color, as a lesbian, or as a trans person, or as any member of any disenfranchised community - is sadly often still a radical idea. There is so much power in storytelling and there is enormous power in inclusive storytelling, in inclusive representations... We need more LGBT representation in the media. We need more LGBT characters and more LGBT storytelling. We need more diverse LGBT representation... And this is big: we need more employment of LGBT people in front of and behind the camera."

Read Shonda Rhimes' Human Rights Campaign Speech here, and watch Kerry Washington deliver her powerful call to cooperative action right here:

Mark Duplass's Tips for Independent Filmmaking

A few days ago, at SXSW, Mark Duplass delivered a keynote speech that brought the house down. His tips for independent filmmakers were rooted in his own experience and cognizant of today's shifting film marketplace, and he inspired the audience to make movies and monetize their careers. 

Oakley Anderson-Moore of No Film School's did an excellent job of capturing Duplass's point-by-point advice in this article. Two points that are especially valuable are about monetizing a sustainable career :

• VOD is a viable and accessible income stream for indie filmmakers
• Filmmakers should work to license - not sell - the work they produce.

This is how you build an independent career in today's film landscape. 

The added benefits here are creative control and a higher return on investment (since you can make work on your own terms and aren't paying for theatrical distribution). 

How does this happen? Revisit Artel's and Forest's blogs! Artel is building Project Catalyst - a distribution platform to help multicultural filmmakers reach their audiences, and Forest is thinking through how to help filmmakers license their work to aligned brands. The tools they're building will help filmmakers follow Mark Duplass's advice, and join the ranks of full-time, not-starving, creatively-inspired independent filmmakers of today and tomorrow.

#TBT - Grassroots Distribution: HOLIDAY EDITION!

originally published in TIME

Happy Holidays from the CRI! We hope you have all enjoyed, and continue to enjoy, this holiday season!

As promised, this week we'll pick up Nicco Mele's digital campaign theory and structure with Josh and Michael's adaptations for independent filmmakers. 

Last week we referenced Mele's 3 Pillars of a Digital Campaign: build a substantial email list, foster and online community, and complement online effort with offline action. Now, we drill deeper to think about 5 elements that a campaign needs to succeed, adapted for film. 

1. Raise money. FILM EQUIVALENT: A film’s distribution will necessitate some sort of fiscal support, even if it is the bare minimum, though it will never compare to the way that money is the lifeblood of a political campaign. Distribution costs should certainly be accounted for, but whether or not fundraising should be an “ask” in the film’s distribution campaign depends on if the film’s campaign is for the film itself or tied to another cause. If it’s an external action or a social issue film, given Kickstarter statistics, it seems realistic to attempt to fundraise for film (production, post-production, and) distribution costs. Raising money for a film in general (not just limited to distribution) is an altogether different topic, but inextricably linked to ours; we will revisit that in a moment.
2. Have a message. FILM EQUIVALENT: The message is essentially the film itself. If you have a film that no one is excited about, it is the equivalent of having a politician that doesn’t have a clear message: it will be very hard to connect to an audience.
3. Communicate the message through media. FILM EQUIVALENT: This would refer to how the advocates of the film—the grassroots operators, be it on the phone, in person, or over the internet—talk about the film. The mandate for them from an Obama organizing background would be to make it personal: to communicate what about this film and its story resonates with them personally. That honesty will appeal to whoever is being engaged. 
4. Deal with press. FILM EQUIVALENT: Probably the most literal parallel –with a film in distribution, one has to be strategic about what press is reached out to and engaged. A grassroots perspective would also tell you that the best press is not necessarily the biggest outlet. Sometimes a well-placed news item in front of the right niche audience could mean the difference for that community taking your film seriously. 
5. Field or turnout operation. FILM EQUIVALENT: At the end of the day, who do you have working or volunteering for you that will make sure that people turn out to go see the film on opening day? What does the operation on that day—the equivalent of Election Day—look like? Who is your grassroots army, and how have you delegated them? By geography? By theater? Or just via social network?

We hope these adaptations help you produce and distribute your next film! Let us know how it goes, and we'll see you in 2015!

#TBT - Grassroots Distribution: Offline Organizing Leads to Online Metrics

Last #TBT, we looked at growing campaigns, and identified three models, based on social action campaigns, that filmmakers might follow to boost their audience awareness and get their film out into the world in the most effective way possible. This Thursday, we dig into the digital elements of a campaign as outlined by Harvard professor Nicco Mele and, next week, we'll revisit Josh and Michael's suggestions for adapting Professor Mele's digital political campaign model to film. 

Why? Because Josh and Michael learned that offline organizing leads to online metrics. Offline organizing is already accessible to filmmakers who are taking their films on the road as they screen at festivals and alternative exhibition venues. Online metrics can help filmmakers know where to go next, where to return with the next project, which audience (or audiences) to engage as advocates and supporters, and - not least - online metrics can help filmmakers make the case for their next film to financiers, sales agents, and distributors (see our video with Stewart Thorndike and Alex Scharfman on Distribution as Marketing).

Plus, it's notoriously hard to get data once you give your film to someone else to market or distribute. Treasure the data you can produce for yourself. 

Now: Mele's Three Pillars of a Digital Campaign 

1. Build a substantially-sized email list. "People live overwhelmingly in their inbox."
2. Foster online community. "The care and feeding of evangelists is necessary for online success."
3. Complement online with offline. "Politics is really a face-to-face business and you really have to be able to use the internet to drive people to meet face to face."

Here's an example of these Pillars in practice, from the white paper: 

"Tom Quinn [...] made a film that is set during the Mummers' Day Parade in Philadelphia. Quinn recalls that to distribute his film he 'went around to a good chunk of the Mummers clubs, and talked one-on-one with them about we were going to donate a part of the proceeds back to the parade, and the Mummers organization got behind the film doing press as well, which was huge. I think our Facebook fans went from 200 people to 2300 people in one week."

Offline organizing can lead to a rise in online metrics. 

Online metrics can help you sell your film, or fundraise for your next one. 

Engage the communities that exist around your film, and make them your advocate audience!

#TBT - Grassroots Distribution: Growing (Cam)Pains

Last week we talked about trusting your communities - from production crews, to PR staff, to local supporters, and beyond - to help bring your film to the world. It's a Snowflake Model of film marketing and distribution. 

In order to make that strategy effective, you need to know your film's message, boundaries, and opportunities. You need to define a campaign. 

Josh and Michael identified 3 kinds of campaigns that filmmakers can apply to their film's marketing and distribution plans:

1. Film that is its own campaign 
2. Film for social action  
3. Film as social action  

FILM THAT IS ITS OWN CAMPAIGN. 

The surmountable challenge to organize around is the film’s presence and life in the public consciousness and the larger marketplace. This is what volunteers and organizers would advocate for, and the agenda they would be pushing at every step. This seems the purest form of campaign and best use of organizing tactics; if one is to use grassroots organizing in film, it stands to reason it should be to solve the problem of birthing and supporting a film’s life in the world of an audience, with no other goal.

What we did with Beasts of the Southern Wild, to complement Fox’s mega marketing machine, would fall in this category. We mobilized members of our crew to go to Q & A’s in regional theaters, as a draw to get audiences to come out, and deepen the connection they had with the film, which could then be transferred into their own advocacy (snowflake model!). The thing we were up against, we would say, was the marketplace itself and the very tiny room that Hollywood’s relationship with exhibitors allows for a small independent film like Beasts. We managed the message of our online presence in complementary ways.

FILM FOR SOCIAL ACTION 

In this paradigm, the film—though its own work in and of itself—is being used as a political 
tool to accomplish other action. It is, in other words, part of an organizer’s arsenal—a 
way of bringing people into something larger. One film we studied was Speaking in 
Tongues, which deals with issues of secondary languages in schools. Their campaign 
attempted to raise awareness of the importance of bilingualism through community 
screenings, educational distribution, and community action. In other words, they 
explicitly imagined and positioned their film as a tool for social change 

There are upsides and downsides to the film’s potential life as a film that being subsumed 
to a larger cause comes with. The assumed downside is that grassroots energy is going 
somewhere other than to the film’s success itself. In perhaps too ideal a world, a film 
would be worth supporting just as a film – or perhaps that is too cynical a world, in which 
films can’t stand up on their own artistic merits. Narrative films, especially, can endow 
audiences with real affection because they can come at a fictional world with more of 
their own projected meaning and significance. But especially in the documentary space, 
films have been a successful organizing tool for a very long time. Also, social issue films 
(of which there are more documentaries than fiction films) inherently have a sense of 
urgency and refer to topical things that lend themselves to a campaign-like structure: this is a problem and we need to mount an effort to solve it.

This campaign-like structure also lends itself to a real difference in fiscal support. Of the film projects successfully supported on Kickstarter, 80% are social issue documentaries; filmmakers benefit from the sense on the funder’s part that they are contributing to both a cause and a film.

Finally, another upside of films with external action campaigns is that they do achieve something inherently measurable. You can measure what impact a film had – for example, the BritDoc Impact Reports for the nominees of their PUMA BritDoc Awards. The producers of The Visitor know that their efforts trained 2500 immigration lawyers, who helped 10,000 detainees (read more here).

In a world where the perception of a film’s success is muddled by distributors who want nothing less than to tell you how a film really performed, these metrics mean something. They say: this film did something.

An article we studied compared two different films, one from each of these different 
categories, to illustrate this point: We Were Here, a documentary about HIV awareness, 
and a romantic comedy titled Henry’s Crime. Although both films apply similar 
grassroots methods by reaching out to core constituency groups to help promote the 
film, We Were Here had a much more successful distribution run. The issue of HIV 
awareness generated a sense of urgency that motivated supporters and advocacy groups 
to spread the message of the film. In contrast, even though Henry’s Crime tried similar 
grassroots tactics like reaching out to the fans of stars in the movie to help promote, there was less urgency surrounding the romantic comedy, and the film flopped (more here).

FILM AS SOCIAL ACTION

The sweet spot—the place where the aims of politics and film meet perfectly for a 
grassroots film campaign – is a film that achieves its external political action goals by
showing the film. The recent example is The Act of Killing, where the political act of the 
film was to show it in as many places as possible in Indonesia. Here the success of the 
film as a tool and as a film are one and the same. (Then there are some who dress up a 
film that just wants to succeed in the prestige circles or the marketplace as if it has higher ambitions. See: Harvey Weinstein framing Silver Lining Playbook as a catalyst for 
discussion about mental illness. See also: our eyes rolling).

What's key here is information sharing: if you know what your film means to your audience, you can use existing campaign models to do some of the strategy work for you. There are case studies out there - lots on Josh and Michael's blog here on the CRI site - that can help you get your film to the right audiences better, faster, stronger. 

Talk back! Share your film campaign story and we'll highlight it in an upcoming post here or on Facebook!

#TBT - Grassroots Distribution: Defining Grassroots

Last week, we revisited Josh Penn and Michael Gottwald's white paper on Grassroots Distribution to look at the challenges posed by "grassroots distribution." This week, we take one more step back to define what "grassroots" means, especially in the context of independent filmmaking. 

We got close to a definition by remembering Josh and Michael's claim that, "in order for that film to stay alive, it needs to be supported by constant work, strategy, effort, enthusiasm on the part of the filmmaker and the filmmaker's team," but that is just the beginning. 

For most people, and for Josh and Michael initially, grassroots has well, roots, in community organizing as well as social and political movements. In order to make more sense of an elusive term, Josh and Michael interviewed Jeremy Bird, 2012 Obama For America Field Director and student of Marshall Ganz. According to Jeremy, grassroots operations provide:

1. Access to data and information. A surprising first descriptor, but in the context of political campaigns, it makes sense. Before the Obama campaign of 2008, campaign workers did not have access to the information they do today, which makes the 2008 phenomenon as much about the technology that was suddenly available as it was about a sea change in enthusiasm about a candidate.
2. Real responsibility and goals at the local level. In other words, a palpable sense of accountability. Trusting that the larger goal would be met not by a few leaders at the very top of a hierarchy, but by each ground-level operation spread across the map doing its part to meet its own goal. And by endowing people present at that ground level with responsibility.
3. The ability to scale and make your campaign accessible. Going off of the last descriptor, this means that you can take the campaign anywhere. It is not tied to some antiquated or traditional geographic centers of power. It is nimble and can move, engaging people wherever it is. 
4. A fundamental belief that volunteers can change the outcome. All of this grassroots, community organizing bluster is just a phony brand that is not worth applying unless you actually do subscribe to the belief that a volunteer force—someone there not motivated by wages—can move the needle towards your goal. With self-distribution of films, volunteers may be all you have available, so it’s a definite they would make a difference.

What does this mean for independent filmmakers? It could be as re-simply stated as:

1. Access to data and information. Build a web presence: website, social media, available press. Apply Google analytics. Find out where your audience is and make sure you stay in touch with them. Find out how much it costs to do that, and be sure to use your resources efficiently. Knowing where your audiences are and where your money goes enables you, the filmmaker, to make advantageous partnerships with people who can and want to help you get your movie out there. 
   • Caveat: Data is hard to come by. Check out Colin Whitlow's writings about his Film Finance Index and quest for data transparency, and keep an eye out for a larger industry demand for better reporting to independent filmmakers. 
2. Real responsibility and goals at the local level. Assemble a team of people to support your film in myriad ways - on set, in the community, online, in the press. Trust those people to "spoke out" from your film's story to find access points and alignments across media channels and audience influencers. 
3. The ability to scale and make your (film) accessible. Bring your film to the people to help your career grow! Stewart Thorndike did this with LYLE - she released a feature for free to raise money and awareness for her next feature and it worked! Check out her interview with producer Alex Scharfman here and here. 2014 CRI Fellow Artel Great is also following this principle by bringing multicultural films to multicultural audiences via the Project Catalyst mobile app!
4. A fundamental belief that volunteers can change the outcome. Make your audience your advocates! Stewart did this by converting her free-to-watch LYLE audience to PUTNEY backers. The BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD team made the immediate community the first audience and the strongest advocates. FORT TILDEN's small, committed crew converted their pride in the film into broad buzz across personal networks, creating a loosely-connected but consistently passionate conversation around the film. As Josh and Michael write, "The extent to which a grassroots entity is successful as such depends not on the fulfillment of these basic characteristics but rather on how each entity or person involved is respected, empowered, included, and, in turn, takes ownership of their part in expanding the movement."

Remember: "The structure of a grassroots entity takes the form of the Snowflake Model, with each module of organized activities both an extension from another and its own center of many others." Don't be afraid of branching out beyond your film and its narrative. A film can be many things to many people. 

ChemStuff

Cargo Collective

alk back! Have you applied these principles to your own work? What do you do to motivate the communities (paid/unpaid, professional/bystander, etc.) around your film?

#TBT - Grassroots Distribution: The Challenge of Indie Film Distribution

Over the next two months, we'll be re-releasing Josh Penn and Michael Gottwald's white paper on Grassroots Distribution in targeted installments. This #tbt, we revisit some fundamental thoughts and challenges posed by independent film distribution and explored by Josh & Michael. 

Some thoughts to start with:

• "If film lives online and online content is shared, then these days anyone who sends such content via email, a social network, or a blog is, in a way, a film distributor. But how do you mediate that process to build enthusiasm about a film in a smart, strategic, grassroots way?"
• "...distribution is not the finish line of an independent film's process, but rather just the third act... or even the beginning of a film's life."
• "And, in order for that film to stay alive, it needs to be supported by constant work, strategy, effort, enthusiasm on the part of the filmmaker and the filmmaker's team."

CRI Mentor James Belfer noted, in a conversation with the CRI, the paramount importance of finding and cultivating an audience in the current independent film distribution climate, which requires that filmmakers know their audiences not only to get a film seen to but to get subsequent films financed. It's not unlike a market-research requirement that a venture capitalist fund might deliver to an entrepreneur, a comparison James drew on his blog last year:

A true EP should be viewed just as the startup world views VCs. We need to be an integral part of the indie film venture. We need to be the ones looking out for the financial success of the film. We need to be the ones capable of assessing the overall value of the film and strategizing its monetization.

Knowing your audience helps you to determine your best strategy and the best use of your (presumably) limited resources.

Similarly, MBA/MFA and 2012 CRI alumnus Ryan Heller and BAD TURN WORSE director Zeke Hawkins detailed, in a Grad Film Chair's Workshop co-hosted by the CRI, the necessity of a film's advocacy network and support system. Ryan noted how important it is for filmmakers to think of their relationships with distributors as partnerships, wherein filmmakers leverage the access and capabilities of the distributor while constantly advocating for the project, and actively working towards its positioning in the marketplace. Zeke shared his epiphany that a film's marketing comes in non-traditional forms, such as in the enthusiastic support of casting directors who present a film to the talent industry in a way that can elevate its credibility and contribute to its top-of-mind positioning. Informed and passionate casting directors, talent, local crew, invested vendors, etc. can all help independent filmmakers in their distribution efforts. 

Finding, engaging, and maintaining an audience is a central problem of independent film distribution and hard work, but Josh and Michael see an opportunity in the vastness of the independent film audience "market:"

Film... is inherently a thing that many people can endow with many different meanings, that a huge cross-section of people can appreciate from a multitude of angles and for a plethora of various reasons.

Just like then-candidate Barack Obama, they note, audiences connect with films in myriad, sometimes even conflicting ways. Find out what your film means to people, and bring it to the people who care. How? Check in next week for more insights and tips on Grassroots Distribution, or read ahead in the

Talk back! Tell us what you wish you knew in your first meeting with a distributor. 

CRI Mentors: Jeffrey Kusama-Hinte

We're thrilled to announce that Jeffrey Kusama-Hinte, Academy Award® and Emmy Award® nominated, Golden Globe® winning Producer, has joined the Cinema Research Institute as a mentor to its Fellows. Welcome, Jeffrey! 

Jeffrey Kusama-Hinte is an Academy Award® and Emmy Award® nominated, Golden Globe® winning Producer working under the banner of Antidote Films, the company he founded in 2000. He has also directed two documentaries.

Kusama-Hinte's latest production was John Turturro's FADING GIGOLO, starring Mr. Turturro and Woody Allen, Sharon Stone, Sofia Vergara, Live Schrieber, and Vanessa Paradis. Prior to this, he most recently produced Lisa Cholodenko's THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT, starring Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, and Mark Ruffalo. The film received four Academy Award® nominations, including Best Picture, and four Golden Globe® nominations, winning two Golden Globes® for Best Actress (Annette Bening) and Best Motion Picture (Musical or Comedy).

Kusama-Hinte directed and produced the documentaries CHARLOTTE: A WOODEN BOAT STORY and SOUL POWER which screened at the Toronto and Berlin International Film Festivals, and won the 2009 Los Angeles Film Festival Audience Award.

Kusama-Hinte also produced the documentary THE DUNGEON MASTERS, directed by Keven McAlester, which premiered at the 2008 Toronto International Film Festival, and Marina Zenovich’s ROMAN POLANSKI: WANTED AND DESIRED, which received five Primetime Emmy® Awards nominations, winning two Emmys® for Outstanding Writing and Outstanding Directing for Nonfiction Programming. Kusama-Hinte’s other productions include the critically acclaimed eco-horror thriller THE LAST WINTER directed by Larry Fessenden, the Jon Reiss-directed graffiti documentary BOMB IT, Julian Goldberger’s THE HAWK IS DYING, Gregg Araki’s MYSTERIOUS SKIN, Catherine Hardwicke’s THIRTEEN, Lisa Cholodenko’s LAUREL CANYON and HIGH ART, and Larry Fessenden’s WENDIGO.

Jeffrey Kusama-Hinte resides in Brooklyn New York, with his spouse and two children.  When he is not making films he can usually be found making furniture in his woodworking shop (aka Brooklyn Verkstad); he also serves on the Boards of the Independent Filmmaker Project (IFP) and The Nation Institute. 

#TBT CRI-Style: Josh Penn & Michael Gottwald on Grassroots Distribution

Welcome to Throwback Thursday at the Cinema Research Institute!

Over the next few months, we will be posting throwbacks to some of the highlights from the CRI Blog and Research, in addition to the fresh content being published by our current Fellows. Our #TBT series begins with a look at 2013 CRI Fellows Josh Penn and Michael Gottwald's white paper on Grassroots Distribution. 

The paper, available in full in the Projects section, is a thoughtful and thorough consideration of the ways in which independent filmmakers can apply grassroots organizing principles to their film distribution campaigns to establish strategy, build enthusiastic audiences, and maintain momentum for their film's success. The recommendations noted in Josh and Michael's white paper are informed by their experiences as Obama for America campaign staffers, producers of the Academy-Award nominated film BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD, and as CRI researchers who had the opportunity and access to interview filmmakers who have applied grassroots organizing principles to their own film campaigns. The paper is a must-read for filmmakers who are building an audience for their next project, thinking about marketing and distribution strategies, and who would like a basic roadmap for getting their film to the public beyond a festival run. 

For those of you on-the-go, we'll summarize the key points in blog posts published every Thursday for the next two months. Stay tuned, talk back, and share with friends and fellow filmmakers!

To kick things off this week, we thought we'd introduce (or re-introduce) you to Josh and Michael via this conversation hosted by the CRI and illy Cafe. Enjoy! 

Visibility Equals Power

Visibility equals power. Period. You cannot find solutions using the same consciousness that created the problem.  Can the unseen filmmaker claim to exist in a world where Main Street starves and Wall Street eats?  Not at all.  You cannot change a dream from inside, you must step outside of the dream to change it. The question becomes how do multicultural image-makers increase their media visibility in order to connect directly with communities who care most.  My work with Project Catalyst continues to tackle this pressing issue. We’re pioneering a digital settlement in the wild west of the web, offering an uncompromising signature destination for art passionate, tech savvy, socially aware, multicultural millennials who yearn for a mediascape where creators and connoisseurs can connect, voice, see, and hear fresh perspectives reflecting our diverse society.  

Artel Great, Project Catalyst, Technology and the Future of Multicultural Entertainment

Recently, I was invited to participate in Urbanworld Digital, a New Media program held at the HBO Theater in New York City.  The one-day event served as a digital media conference that focused on addressing the impact of technology on the creation and marketing of new media content. Executives ranging from HBO to YouTube and various film and media professionals shared their expertise as a primer for the 18th Annual Urbanworld Film Festival. 

My presentation highlighted the role of Project Catalyst in ushering in a brighter future for multicultural entertainment. Our disruptive model thrives outside of the dominant system. Through our advancements in new technology and strategic focus on audience building we find ourselves at a moment impregnated with empowering possibilities.

By focusing on real-world issues, we’ve found real-world answers with the Project Catalyst Multicultural Movie & Music App. We’ve heard from a global audience on 6 different continents now spanning 32 countries and counting. Take a look at the map below to see where the app's growth is most rapid. Project Catalyst App users around the world have demonstrated their interest in liberating the multicultural image from the shadows of dominant media culture.  We are currently working to uncover even more solutions. My commitment is to bringing communities progressive content curated to empower, illuminate, and inspire.  Together we can open new windows of opportunity for content creators to expand the reach of their work and for diverse audiences to stay on the cutting edge of indie film, music, and art.  Together we can increase our media visibility--- not only for this generation, but for the sake of a better multicultural future. 

The 32 countries that are currently watching content on the Project Catalyst  Multicultural Movie & Music App

So if you’re only watching broadcast, cable TV, or Hollywood film, you’re missing out on really amazing artistic works. Take control of your image and download the Project Catalyst App. You’ll see a better world. 

FILMMAKER MAGAZINE Highlights Artel Great & Project Catalyst

Thanks to Scott Macaulay for the recognition of work CRI Fellow Artel Great is doing with his innovative Project Catalyst App!

FILMMAKER MAGAZINE is the latest publication to be talking about Project Catalyst - keep an eye out for more news as the project grows!

Rambling thoughts on willingness to pay for movies

Over the last several months, I’ve gathered a lot of financial and operational data about the movie industry from publicly available reports from the major theater chains. The SEC/Edgar is a treasure trove.  Now I’m at the herculean stage of modeling those “what if” scenarios. To do these models, I’ve got to make some logical assumptions about moviegoers’ responsiveness to price changes.

The moviegoing audience can be separated into three segments – frequent, occasional, and non-going. Frequent moviegoers are pretty inelastic. Occasional moviegoers and non-goers are probably more elastic. Of these two groups, what percentage would respond to lower (or higher prices)? If I break these two groups by income, maybe I can presume x% of the group with x% of disposable income would be more interested in moviegoing during off-peak times.

Then there’s the group that goes to dollar-theaters or deeply-discounted theaters. Maybe if I gather data about trends within this group, there’s more guidance to estimate how many people would return to major theater chains if the price were lower. Back to the internets, then…

Food to film: lessons from variable pricing in restaurants for movies

An extremely cliff-notes version of variable pricing in restaurants:

Three years ago, the Chicago restaurant Next shook up the restaurant scene by launching a restaurant ticket system. Since then, owner Alinea Restaurant Group launched its proprietary variable ticket and reservation system across its own and other (so far) high-end restaurants. The group’s detailed post about restaurant ticketing is a good read (and the comments are interesting) but more importantly, it offers some relevant learnings for this research project. Here's one way the system works:

Screen that Next customers see

On the other end of the spectrum, casual-dining chains like Applebee’s and TGIF have also experimented with promotional pricing to drive demand on slow times.  Examples include “2 for $20” at Applebee’s and a “Wing Tuesday” promotion at Buffalo Wild Wings. The discount wings are a significant sales driver. These chains are engaged in price wars (all the while food costs continue to rise) as part of the industry’s response to increasingly popular fast-casual spots like Chipotle. (As an aside, is the analogy Chipotle: Target:: McDonalds: WalMart apt?)  Groups like Buffalo Wings have found success in promotions such as discounted wings on Tuesday.

Fast-casual and high-dining alike are trying to address the same problem we are trying to answer with this research project: if you decrease prices on off-peak times, can you increase demand and make more money on otherwise empty seats?

Unlike the previous industries we've studied dynamic pricing (broadway, sports, airlines), there are some closer parallels in Alinea's blog post (and the restaurant business) that will help guide our hypotheses:

DIfferent, but similar, eh? 

Price in two directions. At theaters, just like at Next, the consumers must be provided with transparency and choice and whatever moves up, the opposite must go down. If tickets are more expensive in one scenario, they must be cheaper in an alternative scenario. A center row vs. a front row seat. A Saturday night 8 pm movie vs. 10 pm Tuesday night movie. Whatever price option exists, the consumer has the freedom to opt-in or opt-out. This exists in Broadway shows and sporting events, but it is a fundamental principle to customer retention and should not be forgotten.

Don’t charge more than what the good/service is worth. This one is particularly tricky. In a mature industry, there’s tremendous risk aversion to do anything to pricing that might undermine or cannibalize your business. But this brings up a larger issue. Do theatergoers consider the average movie ticket price worth the good? In other words, is the entire theatergoing experience (content, concessions, seats, audience) worth its current price? So far, on average, yes. There is enough demand for theatrical movie experiences. But viewing behavior continues to shift, and the consumer’s willingness to take on price increases could reach a tipping point.

Demand has better and worse times. Like restaurants, movie theaters services are in greater demand at certain times (weekend, evening) than others.

Despite these good parallels, there is an elephant in the room, a distinct difference that exacerbates the challenge of launching dynamic pricing in movie theaters:

Ruh-roh.

This ticketing system works for “small, chef-driven, limited-seating per night, high demand” restaurants. Places with a sense of exclusivity, limited supply, but enough demand for a secondary market. This type of variable pricing is much easier to institute in the high-end restaurant business than in the movie business. The only comparable scenario is auteur or event-driven tickets for “sure bets” (Mockingjay, Part 1 and Interstellar to name a few). Plus, the wait for movies is really not too terrible except for event movies on opening night.

What now?

Self-punch? *Head desk*?

Reading the background surrounding Alinea’s ticketing system really helped organize my thoughts about the kind of hypothetical scenarios we’ll be modeling out. Our buckets of variable pricing will include: events/seasonality, day of week, time of day, weather, and seating locations.

P.S. Another interesting scenario we won’t explore is passes during busy seasons, e.g. unlimited number of movies during summer and winter break. I would gladly pay for both of these. Oscar Season is upon us and I have not the youthful stamina to watch that many movies in one-straight go. 

CRI Fellow Artel Great Talks Project Catalyst & the Dilemma of Multicultural Media Distribution

2014 CRI Fellow Artel Great is a thought leader on media visibility and an advocate for the improved representation of both multicultural content creators and audiences. As a PhD candidate in Cinema Studies at NYU, a filmmaker with degrees from UCLA, and a CRI Fellow, Artel has been tirelessly instigating positive change on both sides of the camera.

During his CRI Fellowship, he has dedicated himself to Project Catalyst - an app that delivers content produced by multicultural filmmakers to multicultural audiences. Through Project Catalyst , Artel is working to give voice to often-marginalized artists and to satisfy a largely underserved audience's demand for better, more resonant entertainment . In this interview, writer/director/producer Kiara C. Jones talks with Artel about Project Catalyst - from the philosophy behind its development to how to download the app for free. 

Artel claims that "visibility is power" and we wholeheartedly agree. If you do, too, share the interview and download the app! 

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. 

Case Study: Distribution as Marketing - LYLE

Last week we shared Part I of our case study on Distribution as Marketing with Stewart Thorndike and Alex Scharfman. Today, we're pleased to share with you their thoughts and lessons learned on the marketing side of the equation. Watch, share, enjoy!

Case Study: Distribution as Marketing - LYLE Part I

Earlier this year, Stewart Thorndike was approaching financiers to make her first feature film - a female-driven, female-directed horror film - but was told there wasn't an audience who wanted that content. Disappointed but resilient, Stewart and her producer, Alex Scharfman set out to make a movie called LYLE, find an audience, and fund their next one, PUTNEY. Their plan - to use free distribution of one movie to market another - worked. 

We talked to Stewart and Alex, and filmed it for you in two parts. PART 1 is about self- distribution and is available for you now - Enjoy! 

Do Multicultural Movies Make Money?

Why does it seem as if Hollywood is always surprised when a Black film comes in #1 at the box office? The most recent example being, No Good Deed starring Idris Elba and Taraji P. Henson. The film's $24 million showing out earned the blockbuster superhero fantasy film Guardians of the Galaxy.  

When will Hollywood ditch the fallacious logic that says diverse films don't sell?  A

nd when will they begin to see the value in multicultural experiences, images, and stories?  According to an insightful study conducted by the Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American studies at UCLA, films that have more diversity in the cast bring in more cash at the box office.  "Those [films] with a relatively high amount of [multicultural] involvement (21–30 percent) on screen posted the highest median global box office receipts ($160.1 million). In contrast, films with the least minority involvement (10 percent or less) posted much lower box office receipts ($68.5 million)."

So why the counterfeit surprise when Black films do well on opening weekend?  If Hollywood is truly about the bottom line (as most will readily admit) how can such stark numbers be overlooked?  Seems odd for billion dollar corporations to be so naïve.  And if it's not an oversight, perhaps a lack of social value would be more appropriate?

Throughout our national tour to launch the Project Catalyst App, we have encountered many valuable lessons. We got off "On the Good Foot" in New York City.  We engaged with diverse communities in Chicago about "How to Solve 2 of the Biggest Problems in Multicultural Media Distribution."  And in Los Angeles we gathered feedback and put all of our ideas to the test launching the app in the heart of Hollywood on the backlot at Raleigh Studios.  Our goal was to determine once and for all if multicultural audiences would turn out to support diverse underground artistry.  The red carpet event was sophisticated and vibrant.  Guests of all colors and ethnicities came together and shared knowledge and ideas.  I designed the event as part industry mixer, part app presentation, and part film screening in the studio’s Charlie Chaplin Theater. Guests were treated to the finest libations and the delectable soul fusion fare of Artistic Endeavors-LA.

The turnout was incredible. So far Los Angeles has been our largest event resulting in the most app downloads in a single outing.  Way to represent!  Attendees included celebrities Nelsan Ellis (Get On Up, True Blood) and Craig Robinson (The Office), as well as studio execs, producers, actors, directors, musicians, entrepreneurs, journalists, and other art enthusiasts. 

During my presentation, I encouraged the audience to recognize their own agency to act and change the images they consume.  I reminded them that we are all apart of a bigger story that has to do with reinvesting and making a contribution to the culture.  Above all, the visual media we consume should reflect us, relate to us, stimulate and energize us to be our very best.  That’s what it’s all about. 

So is there really a market for multicultural media?  Absolutely.  Are you kidding? Stevie Wonder could see it and show it to Ray Charles!  In fact, if the tremendous success of the Los Angeles App launch showed me anything it’s this--- when we come together we can make amazing things happen, and when we are aware of better entertainment options that reflect our true potential we will support it. 

Multicultural audiences have always been here.  Ask Oscar Micheaux, Melvin Van Peebles, Spike Lee, or even Tyler Perry for that matter.  The question is when will Hollywood wake up and ditch their antiquated logic?  Who knows.  The most important thing is the Project Catalyst App was designed to bring a poetic solution to this fifteen year stalemate. 

Since August we’ve reached audiences on 6 continents across 22 countries— and counting.  If you haven’t downloaded the app get it free here.  If you have the app already, share it with a friend or family member.  Help make a positive contribution to spread high quality multicultural stories.

Use the comment section below and tell me if you agree or disagree that a multicultural media market exists.

Great ideas can change the world, but it takes great people like you to make it happen.