The independent movie distribution business is in something of a death spiral. You know the one, where the fighter plane is in a flat spin, hurtling towards the earth. With hands over our mouths we watch the intrepid pilot struggle with the controls to break out of the spin and regain control over his airplane before it smashes into the ground.
Yeah, like that.
The death spiral that we are in is not nearly as dramatic, but it is real all the same. Movie company X makes two films: One a $80,000 slasher film with no name actors, a predictable and derivative plot with lots of blood; the second is a $800,000 lovely, coming of age story, with recognizable actors, and some real production values. Movie production company X gives both films to their distributor. Distributor takes both to the markets, getting MG’s for many of the major territories. They generate $100,000 for the crappy little slasher movie and $250,000 for the coming of age story. Having lost a bundle on the coming of age story, and having made money on the slasher film, which kind of film do you think the filmmaker will opt for next?
Although the decline of revenue for the average indie film has been occurring for awhile, it basically came to a grinding stop overseas in 2013, for the vast majority of recently-produced feature films, which did not have any theatrical exposure. Why? Consumers no longer rent DVDs in any great numbers -- with the exception of Redbox here in the U.S. (and Redbox does not exist overseas.) Kiosks exist in certain foreign territories but not for video rental—only sell through. Unfortunately, unless you have a film which has been released theatrically and/or has a well-known cast, or great audience pre-awareness, very few consumers still purchase hard copies of independent films, unless they’re in the $5 discount bin at Wal-Mart.
I suppose that we are all hoping to be the next Jason Blum.
Since Blum, 45, hit big with Paranormal Activity in 2007, his "microbudget" model has upended the horror movie business. That film, which Blum discovered and pushed after filmmaker Oren Peli made it for $15,000, grossed $193 million worldwide and has spawned four sequels for Paramount. Studios, faced with increased pressure to cut bloat and release more profitable films, salivate over the three franchises Blum has launched in the past four years: Insidious (a $1.5 million price tag) grossed $97 million worldwide; Sinister ($3 million) grossed $77.7 million; and The Purge ($3 million) grossed $89.3 million. The Hollywood Reporter 2/27/14
Since those financial successes even Blum and his distribution partner Universal have struggled to find a market for the low budget horror/thrillers he is turning out with regularity. Like Roger Corman, or Ed Wood before him, Blum is a victim of his own success. A success that gets harder and harder to sustain.
When the overseas film buyers are not paying that much more for good films, as they are for crappy films, how do the producer and sales agent break out of the flat spin, and regain control over their flight?
Answer: Stop buying bad, meaningless films that just bring the market value down on all films.
Here’s your dilemma: You’re probably not very proud of the “art” that you have to peddle these days, but, you can’t sell from an empty cart either. Your distribution company has to acquire films that they can make a profit on. That brings up another problem. At the bottom… the commissions are so low as to make it hardly worthwhile. Even if you’re charging 15% - 25%, on a total buy of $100,000 that does not cover your cost of attending AFM, EFM, Filmart, Cannes and all the other shows that you have to be at to do your job.
The obvious solution for all film distributors is access to more capital. Better capitalization gives distributors the ability to pass on the truly bad films and concentrate on the better ones. Filmmakers rely on the foreign distributors to be able to raise up to 60% of a film’s production budget from offshore buyers. But when your new releases look just like everyone else’s, all you get is minimum buys.
The demarcation line is no longer is it a good movie or a bad movie, it’s “is it commercial”. A North American theatrical release, even as low as 150 screens, will give any film a big lift overseas. It gets reviews, it gets press, its gets access to film festivals and more. Or as one veteran sales agent put it to me, “…since very few genre films are being pre-sold, buyers are waiting to see the final film before making a decision. At this point, they simply do not care what the budget of the film is compared even to obviously smaller budget films in the same genre. As one buyer told me recently, “I don’t care if the producers spent $1,000,000 or $100,000 on the budget of a film. It’s not my problem. If it’s not going to be released theatrically, or have an obvious television sale, one particular film is worth virtually the same to me as another – regardless of the budget.” Simply said, the current marketplace is not rewarding better production values in films – unless they’re released theatrically.”
That is of course the impetus behind so many day-and-date releases in conjunction with Netflix, Redbox, Amazon, Blockbuster and others. It gives your film credibility. Note however that foreign buyers are now savvy to the game of limited US theatrical releases and will ask how many screens, what the P&A spend was, and what the US audience numbers were. Just because you “four-wall” the film in 5 or 6 cities, that does not a theatrical release make.
I’ve financed films before and I know how hard it is. There is just no substitution for a great story, backed by a well thought out distribution plan, with P&A money to support it… and that’s what gets films made, into theaters, and into our DVD collections.
You can’t sustain a restaurant selling bad food, you can’t sustain a retail store selling bad merchandise and you can’t sustain a distribution business selling bad films. Sooner or later the customers will simply stop coming.
Yeah, like that.
The death spiral that we are in is not nearly as dramatic, but it is real all the same. Movie company X makes two films: One a $80,000 slasher film with no name actors, a predictable and derivative plot with lots of blood; the second is a $800,000 lovely, coming of age story, with recognizable actors, and some real production values. Movie production company X gives both films to their distributor. Distributor takes both to the markets, getting MG’s for many of the major territories. They generate $100,000 for the crappy little slasher movie and $250,000 for the coming of age story. Having lost a bundle on the coming of age story, and having made money on the slasher film, which kind of film do you think the filmmaker will opt for next?
Although the decline of revenue for the average indie film has been occurring for awhile, it basically came to a grinding stop overseas in 2013, for the vast majority of recently-produced feature films, which did not have any theatrical exposure. Why? Consumers no longer rent DVDs in any great numbers -- with the exception of Redbox here in the U.S. (and Redbox does not exist overseas.) Kiosks exist in certain foreign territories but not for video rental—only sell through. Unfortunately, unless you have a film which has been released theatrically and/or has a well-known cast, or great audience pre-awareness, very few consumers still purchase hard copies of independent films, unless they’re in the $5 discount bin at Wal-Mart.
I suppose that we are all hoping to be the next Jason Blum.
Since Blum, 45, hit big with Paranormal Activity in 2007, his "microbudget" model has upended the horror movie business. That film, which Blum discovered and pushed after filmmaker Oren Peli made it for $15,000, grossed $193 million worldwide and has spawned four sequels for Paramount. Studios, faced with increased pressure to cut bloat and release more profitable films, salivate over the three franchises Blum has launched in the past four years: Insidious (a $1.5 million price tag) grossed $97 million worldwide; Sinister ($3 million) grossed $77.7 million; and The Purge ($3 million) grossed $89.3 million. The Hollywood Reporter 2/27/14
Since those financial successes even Blum and his distribution partner Universal have struggled to find a market for the low budget horror/thrillers he is turning out with regularity. Like Roger Corman, or Ed Wood before him, Blum is a victim of his own success. A success that gets harder and harder to sustain.
When the overseas film buyers are not paying that much more for good films, as they are for crappy films, how do the producer and sales agent break out of the flat spin, and regain control over their flight?
Answer: Stop buying bad, meaningless films that just bring the market value down on all films.
Here’s your dilemma: You’re probably not very proud of the “art” that you have to peddle these days, but, you can’t sell from an empty cart either. Your distribution company has to acquire films that they can make a profit on. That brings up another problem. At the bottom… the commissions are so low as to make it hardly worthwhile. Even if you’re charging 15% - 25%, on a total buy of $100,000 that does not cover your cost of attending AFM, EFM, Filmart, Cannes and all the other shows that you have to be at to do your job.
The obvious solution for all film distributors is access to more capital. Better capitalization gives distributors the ability to pass on the truly bad films and concentrate on the better ones. Filmmakers rely on the foreign distributors to be able to raise up to 60% of a film’s production budget from offshore buyers. But when your new releases look just like everyone else’s, all you get is minimum buys.
The demarcation line is no longer is it a good movie or a bad movie, it’s “is it commercial”. A North American theatrical release, even as low as 150 screens, will give any film a big lift overseas. It gets reviews, it gets press, its gets access to film festivals and more. Or as one veteran sales agent put it to me, “…since very few genre films are being pre-sold, buyers are waiting to see the final film before making a decision. At this point, they simply do not care what the budget of the film is compared even to obviously smaller budget films in the same genre. As one buyer told me recently, “I don’t care if the producers spent $1,000,000 or $100,000 on the budget of a film. It’s not my problem. If it’s not going to be released theatrically, or have an obvious television sale, one particular film is worth virtually the same to me as another – regardless of the budget.” Simply said, the current marketplace is not rewarding better production values in films – unless they’re released theatrically.”
That is of course the impetus behind so many day-and-date releases in conjunction with Netflix, Redbox, Amazon, Blockbuster and others. It gives your film credibility. Note however that foreign buyers are now savvy to the game of limited US theatrical releases and will ask how many screens, what the P&A spend was, and what the US audience numbers were. Just because you “four-wall” the film in 5 or 6 cities, that does not a theatrical release make.
I’ve financed films before and I know how hard it is. There is just no substitution for a great story, backed by a well thought out distribution plan, with P&A money to support it… and that’s what gets films made, into theaters, and into our DVD collections.
You can’t sustain a restaurant selling bad food, you can’t sustain a retail store selling bad merchandise and you can’t sustain a distribution business selling bad films. Sooner or later the customers will simply stop coming.
RSS Feed
