If you regularly read anything I post, you’ll see a repeated theme of really stupid business practices of the film industry from the fantasy value SAG puts on their union talent to any number of ridiculously inept decisions “experts in charge” like to make that are sure to self-destruct their own projects.
The latest example of this came out of a discussion I had with a very knowledgeable individual of which I hope we can work together in the future, regarding the concept of studio backed projects. Now if a studio is dumping 100’s of millions of dollars into a project, they can pretty much do what they want. If they are investing in a low budget feature under $2M, should they stick to the same criteria of marketing that film as they would deploy as with a big budget project?
Their logic being that if you advertise or post material about the project, you are ruining the surprise for the audience and by the time the film is released, everyone will already have seen your film and not want to go see it in the theaters, if they even manage to get it into a minimum 1,300 screens out of the 39,000 screens across America. If you do try and garner buzz and excitement for your film, they can charge you with breach of contract and order you to pay back their investment as well as refusing to distribute your film. That seems a little harsh for trying to tell the general public about your work.
So let’s do the numbers on this. The standard turnaround time for a film, not counting all the pre-production negotiations that have nothing to do with the film, is consistently quoted as 18 months from first day of principle shooting to the release date. If your film is under a $2M budget, chances are you are fortunate enough to find SAG talent that has either been off the public radar for awhile or is relatively new to the public experiencing their work. So 18 months multiplied by30 days come out to 540 days. Divide that by the runtime of your film, say 90 minutes, and for that 540 days you could release 6 minutes of your film everyday in order for the general public to have seen your entire movie. Trailers and interviews normally don’t run longer that 3 minutes tops so what are studios afraid of? To them it’s better to wait until 3 months before the release to come up with some marketing campaign that has no guarantees as to how many people it will reach or has any accountability to how many people even saw their marketing efforts in the first place. Of course if a movie fails to attract a crowd, it’s not their fault. They have invoices of what they spent and they don’t owe you any kind of refund for their failure. It’s the investors’ fault for not pumping more money into advertising that has proven time and time again over the last 10 years that their marketing model doesn’t work anymore… but pay them anyway because they are the “experts.”
Some of you may be overjoyed that you have a deal with anybody and I don’t blame you. Just be careful that you aren’t signing a cul de sac deal that will suck up all of your resources without giving you a favorable outcome and will only leave you at the bottom of a dry well without a rope to climb out of. they hole they dug for you.
What are your thoughts on this? Are you handcuffed, hands free, or hands on? The difference could cost you millions.
1 person likes this
I am wondering if they are gonna spilt thier stocks? Create a new streamer service for discount server and data rates. They could open open a free /create studio streamer like YouTube has and compete for that demographic?
2 people like this
When they first opened Prime to independents, I saw a lot of YouTubers complain that it was to hard to use, the caption requirement was a burden, they didn’t want to fill out tax forms, etc. I saw tha...
Expand commentWhen they first opened Prime to independents, I saw a lot of YouTubers complain that it was to hard to use, the caption requirement was a burden, they didn’t want to fill out tax forms, etc. I saw that as Amazon wanting to distinguish themselves from YouTube. They didn’t want a million short form cat videos or pirated content next to legit movies, so they had barriers to entry. Be a professional and well treat you like a professional.
Over the years, they’ve backtracked a bit, showing less interest in accommodating independent filmmakers. For a while, they stopped accepting documentary uploads, although I think that has opened up again.
As I said, I’m safe for now, but I bet they’ll shut me out at some point. I don’t think they’ll split and then expand to the wide-ranging format of YouTube.
1 person likes this
If you make a great film and do selective marketing that doesn't give away too much of your film's premise, a self-created buzz around your film will attract distributors to you. Remember the more wor...
Expand commentIf you make a great film and do selective marketing that doesn't give away too much of your film's premise, a self-created buzz around your film will attract distributors to you. Remember the more work they do to promote your film, the more hidden costs they can add. If you make their jobs easier, they should appreciate the efforts. If they don't, more times than not, they're upset they can't implement their hidden fees.
2 people like this
I remember back in 2016/7ish when CreateSpace (the DVD based service) became Amazon Prime Video. Those were exciting times. I only made my debut feature in 2010 when I knew it might have a chance at d...
Expand commentI remember back in 2016/7ish when CreateSpace (the DVD based service) became Amazon Prime Video. Those were exciting times. I only made my debut feature in 2010 when I knew it might have a chance at distribution but back then the streaming players with the website tech were in the tens. Now, the channels are in their thousands and I get a different start-up every week emailing me but I just don't see where the money is. Having followed pretty much every development in streaming I can safely say it's all gone backwards in the past few years. The best and worst platform has always been Vimeo. Great because of its simple model and transparency, awful because you can't search a catalogue with any hope of finding a film. I've got 22 films out with Filmhub, with about 9 overlapping on my Amazon account. A few years ago, self-distribution looked positive. Now, the tools are being taken away at an alarming rate...
Al, for the “9 overlapping” films, does that mean you have 9 films that have double listing on Amazon? Don’t Amazon and/or Filmhub stop you from doing that?
(I remember using CreateSpace as well, although I think it was just for print on demand DVDs)