> Distribution: Thetrical, DVD/BR, All Media

rayw · Nov 9, 2013

My beyond VOD distribution quest has led me so far away from where it began that I felt it appropriate to start its own thread.

Beginning with this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...WGNZNExVQVRnMkFEbDUxRldlSHc&usp=sharing#gid=0
... I felt that I needed some context on just "how many users/views were appropriate" for small release films.

So, I built this context spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...MjdCRnVCTU95TXk2Y2NDd3JmS3c&usp=sharing#gid=0
... using data collected from this link: http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/cha...2=domestic&yr=2012&sort=open&order=ASC&p=.htm
... which:

>> NOTE: I'm excluding foreign films since their primary audience is non-U.S. which renders useless revenue and user data, and documentaries since those are kinda specialty non-narrative films which renders useless data. And animations, too.

I don't have time right now to start building yet a third spreadsheet to overtly outline just how minuscule the theatrical revenue is for these limited theatrical release films, (and most of what we're likely to produce around here is going straight to DVD/VOD [if at all] = even fewer user/views/revenue), but I wanted to provide the preliminary data below ASAP just in case you had a few minutes to burn cogitating on revenue vs. expense.

Profit or Earnings = Revenue - Expenses

* * * * * T H R E A D S * * * * *
Budget & Finance ~ Marketing & Promotion ~ Product Placement ~ VOD Distribution ~ Distribution

rayw · Nov 12, 2013

If I write a screenplay for a film that I wanna direct and produce (or have sensible expectations that someone else will direct and produce) just... how much revenue should I, could I, estimate that film can bring?

I started flipping over DVDs at the WalMart $5 bin, at the local Dollar General and Dollar Tree stores, and even seeing who was distributing some of the really cr@ppy low budget films I could find available free online to see who were the distributors of these gems.

That quest started out to render the following spreadsheet: Film Distribution Company 2013 - 2010 Budget, Rating, Users
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...NZNExVQVRnMkFEbDUxRldlSHc&usp=drive_web#gid=0

Okay.
Great. Wonderful.

But those "users" numbers as a metric to judge about how many people had guesstimated seen the film had no context.

How many "users" are a little, or a lot, or average, for a big budget wide release film (don't really care), or a low budget limited release film (do care), or a no budget (<$1-4million by Hollywood standards) limited release film (definitely DO care), so that I may compare that to some straight-to-DVD/VOD release films.

That quest rendered the following spreadsheet: 2012 Limited Release Films IMDB Ratings & Users - 50 Samples
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...MjdCRnVCTU95TXk2Y2NDd3JmS3c&usp=sharing#gid=0

Yay!
I love context!

Great. Wonderful.

But now (sigh), I wanna see just what cr@ppy revenue some of these distributors are kinda used to seeing in their theatrical release films.
And there's no way to tell how much they spent on P&A (promotion & advertising), which could easily be a quarter to equal the reported/estimated production budget.
(Probably isn't a whole lot for these one and two theater releases.)

And that quest rendered the following spreadsheet: Comparison: Limited U.S. Release Distributor Results for 2010 - 2013
>> Preliminary: Needs budget data, (which is going to take FOR-EVERRRRR)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsBznn8D13zOdGh4SThyS1pFRHgxMWUtZVlDR1N3eUE&usp=sharing

Obviously there's going to be revenue beyond theatrical release in the form of DVD/BR sales, and PPV/VOD, etc.
Those sales could easily exceed the theatrical hauls. (cough, cough.)

But now we can have a fairly decent idea of about how much many films make or, more often, loose.
And a lot of these loose a lot of money.

111

* * * * * T H R E A D S * * * * *
Budget & Finance ~ Marketing & Promotion ~ Product Placement ~ VOD Distribution ~ Distribution

rayw · Nov 16, 2013

6 Lies of Film Distribution

http://www.writersstore.com/6-lies-of-film-distribution/

Myth #1: I’m a director, a filmmaker, a creative person. Telling stories is my thing and if I make a good movie, I don’t have to worry about the business stuff or the marketing because someone else will do that.

Myth #2: Distributors are calling me and they’re excited to see my movie! I’ll send it to them and if they like it, they’ll acquire it!

Myth #3: My movie was selected for the Sundance Film Festival! Woohooo! All I have to do is show up and I will get a deal!

Myth #4: I was rejected by the top festivals, so now I’m submitting and getting accepted by the next tier of festivals. This is cool. All I have to do is show up to my screenings and I’m treated like a rock star. Distribution, here I come!

Myth #5: I’ve submitted my movie to the 15 home video companies out there. I’ve even talked to producer friends and looked at industry reference books for whom to submit to. If these 15 companies say ‘No,’ I’m out of luck for a home video deal.

Myth #6: I’m going to bypass traditional distribution altogether, sell my movie on the internet myself and make a ton of money from DVD sales and digital streaming (VOD).

Yup.
All this looks vaguely familiar.

176

* * * * * T H R E A D S * * * * *
Budget & Finance ~ Marketing & Promotion ~ Product Placement ~ VOD Distribution ~ Distribution

mus · Nov 16, 2013

Interesting report, Ray.

I always enjoy your sense of realism/cynicism about filmmaking as the perfect contrast to a naive amateur's optimism. People really need to realize that it isn't a walk in the park to make a movie.

ChimpPhobiaFilms · Nov 16, 2013

+1 Mussonman. Ray is a great teacher. I've learned more about distribution from him than the majority of seminars and books I've been to and read.

At a seminar I attended a few months ago, someone asked about how to get people to watch your film and make money off of it. He responded with this:

"If you make a good movie, it'll be discovered one way or another!"

:bang:

Thanks for the informative posts, Ray. It's great to hear someone with a more realistic and informed view on the subject on the subject of distribution and crowd funding.

mus · Nov 16, 2013

"It'll be discovered" is such... what's a meaner term than 'bullshit?'

If you've ever discovered an indie movie that was so awesome, you thought "This HAD to have been successful!" Then looked it up, and it apparently only exists on Netflix, then that is testament enough to the bullshittery of that statement. Sure, YOU discovered it, but apparently distributors didn't.

I think that's why so many filmmakers flock to horror movies... because the term for that genre seems to be:
"If you make a terrible movie, it'll be discovered and insanely profitable!"

GuerrillaAngel · Nov 16, 2013

mussonman said:
People really need to realize that it isn't a walk in the park to make a movie.

It's less brutal to owe 10G to a bookie. :lol:

kjones · Nov 16, 2013

ChimpPhobiaFilms said:
...

At a seminar I attended a few months ago, someone asked about how to get people to watch your film and make money off of it. He responded with this:

"If you make a good movie, it'll be discovered one way or another!"

.

I've heard / read this a number of times about screenplays, as well: "if you write a great screenplay..." Maybe in the old days when far, far fewer movies were being made? Hate to be so pessimistic, but I think this stuff is thrown around mostly by those wanting to make money *off* your dream, not really help you reach it.

Thanks for putting in the time to put out this great info, rayw.

ChimpPhobiaFilms · Nov 16, 2013

kjones said:
I've heard / read this a number of times about screenplays, as well: "if you write a great screenplay..." Maybe in the old days when far, far fewer movies were being made?

Definitely. Before advancements in digital technology and filmmaking tools being more available to the those with little money, there were less indie films being made, and considering that indie films make up a large portion of the films that come out today, there were a lot less films, meaning a lot less competition. It drives me crazy when people use movies made before the 2000's as examples of how to reach success. People talking about if you have a strong vision, talent, and confidence, there is no way your film can't be successful! There was less content from low budget filmmakers coming out then compared now, and considering all of the leaps we've taken in social media and digital technology, there's a far larger amount of content being churned out, and at a more rapid pace each day. Now, any random person could pull out a cheap camera and a basic editor, and get results that could only be dreamed of by someone with little money 20-30 years ago. It's much harder to get your work seen and to get your foot in the door now.

But of course, I don't think that making your way in is impossible. A balance must be found between optimism and cynicism. You don't want to be that indie filmmaker who thinks that with their DSLR and sparkle of hope, you will make a wonderful film that will play at Sundance and get picked up for theatrical distribution because it has a good script and some nice job shots. Nor do you want to be that person that does nothing their whole life because they are bitter looking at those who have talent and have gone no where because of lack of knowledge in an area of filmmaking - usually distribution. Staying level headed and having realistic expectations seems to be an important factor in having success for a film. It's sad to see people with talent waste it upon frowning upon the difficulties of getting into the industry, or investing all their money and time into making a film without any distribution plan. Those who have a clear vision, both for their film and the distribution of their film, seem to be the ones who are successful.

Anyway, I'm rambling

rayw · Nov 17, 2013

The collective appreciation for the contributions I make to IT are sincerely appreciated.
Thank you.

Applies to screenwriting as well.

The reason I found IT was that when I was an active member at a screenwriting forum (I used to have "front burner" aspirations of writing for big budget Hollywood directors. Ha!) I noted that while investigating spec screenplays that had gone into production the high incidence of writer/directors.
Roughly 80%.

And a IMDB rundown of the films in the Comparison: Limited U.S. Release Distributor Results for 2010 - 2013 spreadsheet will corroborate this.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...SThyS1pFRHgxMWUtZVlDR1N3eUE&usp=sharing#gid=0

That substantiating data tease-out will follow in the next few weeks, BTW.

At that time of revelation I knew pitching a spec screenplay was a one in a few hundred thousand shot, so learning how to shoot your own screenplay just to get your foot into Hollywood seemed obvious.

Yeah...
Well...

I'm now seeing that that isn't neccessarily the Golden Ticket, either.
It COULD be, but... it sure isn't easy, or magic, or guaranteed by a long shot.

Here's the math:

700 to 800 MPAA rated films annually
+ 500 to 600 non-MPAA rated films annually
Page 13 - http://www.mpaa.org/Resources/93bbeb16-0e4d-4b7e-b085-3f41c459f9ac.pdf

"There are an estimated 4,000 - 5,000 independent films made every single year. Here's the unfortunate truth: Less than 5% of all these movies end up with distribution."
http://www.distribution.la/
Probably not the most reliable source of intel, but it doesn't sound like complete BS.

Maybe this'll be better...
"Only about 40 of the 3,812 finished films that were submitted to Sundance this year will get any kind of distribution at all. That’s slightly over one percent. The other 98% you will never get to see – not even on Netflix."
http://www.culturalweekly.com/indie-films-state-of-the-union.html
Looks somewhat more credible.
And considering that not every indie film gets submitted to Sundance (on a lark) their 3,812 number suggests the previous distribution.la numbers were low balling the total number.
I bet it's closer to 8,000, give or take a thousand. Or two.

Lettuce move onto spec screenplays...

"I often see the figure that 40,000 (or more) scripts are written each year... " (2004 figure)
http://messageboard.donedealpro.com/boards/archive/index.php/t-7081.html

"According to the Writer's Guild of America, 55,000 pieces of literary material are registered annually, 30,00 of which are screenplays."
http://www.screenwritingtostandard.com/

"An old adage in Hollywood is that in spite of the hundreds of thousands of rejected scripts every year, a good script will find an audience. Format properly, be professional, and write a killer script, and your chances are maximized for success."
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-spec-script.htm
Perhaps a little melodramatic, but point made - it's more than a few thousand.
Certainly more than the number of never-to-be-seen feature films made.
A LOT more.

If you want to get into the film industry to sell screenplays - the easiest route is be a writer/directer for the sole reason just to get a toehold in the film business.
People are MORE interested in your film than in your screenplay(s).

This is a industry built on networking and relationships - MUCH MORE - than producing a fine product.

Four monkeys that can get a chimp eating a banana on film will do better than a genius pounding out PC/Mac thespian gold.

I/we gotta be smart about actually making a feature length film, unless you're just cool with blowing a few dozen thousand to few hundred thousand dollars on a film.
Personally, I'd rather have a car or rental house for that expense.

Figure out your distribution and marketing even before writing FADE IN:
Otherwise you're probably just wasting your time.

ITREF
235

* * * * * T H R E A D S * * * * *
Budget & Finance ~ Marketing & Promotion ~ Product Placement ~ VOD Distribution ~ Distribution

rayw · Nov 19, 2013

LMAO!

Some of the horrible sh!t I run across on these searches:

Playback: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playback_(film)#Release
"Although a theatrical release, Playback was shown in only a single cinema. Playback was declared the lowest grossing film of the 2012 year by Movieline., grossing just $264 from its one-theater release, $252 on its opening night and $12 more during its first week, after which it was pulled. These figures reflect approximately 33 tickets sold."

Budget: $7,500,000 (estimated)

It's just... MAGIC!

Moving-picture-100-dollar-bill-money-to-burn-animated-gif.gif

And there's plenty of others, too.
This one was just the last straw.

rayw · Nov 20, 2013

>> First page U.S. Theatrical Revenues completed!
Comparison: Limited U.S. Release Distributor Results for 2010 - 2013: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...hyS1pFRHgxMWUtZVlDR1N3eUE&usp=drive_web#gid=0

At a later date I will compile a second sheet of the "to date" foreign & domestic revenues, along with additional info.
The purpose of this first sheet is to cultivate some sense among limited release films and distributors what their U.S. theatrical release revenues are compared to the (estimated) production budgets of these films.

There are "fun with math" variables to keep in mind, though.

Revenues are for U.S. theatrical release only. Many of these films made much more revenue outside the U.S. than in it.
(Estimated) production budgets are sometimes pretty infrequently provided. Fewer budgets = increasingly useless averages.
However, by only including the provided budgets without placing zeros in for docs and foreign films we still get a "better representation" of an accurate average.
Foreign film revenues/budgets is almost useless. Their markets are in their own homeland. Consistantly they make less revenue in the U.S., so there's no point in counting that for this page. I will on another page, though.
Documentaries operate under a much more altruistic principle than narrative films, so their revenues/budgets are useless.

All that in mind, it's obvious very little theatrical revenue comes from these films, no matter their budget or casting, foreign or domestic.
Theatrical release revenues, minus four extreme outliers, are only 12% of (estimated) production budgets.

The most appropriate business model for distributors to function under is that of a discount store that purchases quality remainders from larger retailers for their own marked up "discount" retail sales, (think TJMaxx or Marshall's: Buy seasonal leftovers from Target et al @ 10% retail, markup 3X to 30% retail.)

Largely, this page indicates film producers easily loose 80 - 90% of a film's cost upon theatrical release only.
Distributor still makes money, though.

Until I acquire additional information about revenues beyond theatrical release filmmakers themselves bear the risk of financial loss more than the distributors do.

323

* * * * * T H R E A D S * * * * *
Budget & Finance ~ Marketing & Promotion ~ Product Placement ~ VOD Distribution ~ Distribution

Sweetie · Nov 20, 2013

Largely, this page indicates film producers easily loose 80 - 90% of a film's cost upon theatrical release only. Distributor still makes money, though.

This doesn't sound right, compared to most information that I've read. Assuming you're not talking about micro budgets here.

Until I acquire additional information about revenues beyond theatrical release filmmakers themselves bear the risk of financial loss more than the distributors do.

I'd also like to find more accurate/semi accurate information about revenues in the other release windows, platforms etc.

rayw · Nov 20, 2013

Sweetie said:
Largely, this page indicates film producers easily loose 80 - 90% of a film's cost upon theatrical release only. Distributor still makes money, though.

Click to expand...

This doesn't sound right, compared to most information that I've read. Assuming you're not talking about micro budgets here.
I'm only talking about (estimated) production budgets as a percentage of U.S. limited theatrically released budgets.
By that metric these films are clearly bringing in less revenue than their (estimated) budgets.
By far!

When you run across some more of that information about either producers or distributors making bank I'd like to take a look at that.
I'm trying to make this all make business sense.
And so far it poorly does.

Until I acquire additional information about revenues beyond theatrical release filmmakers themselves bear the risk of financial loss more than the distributors do.

Click to expand...

I'd also like to find more accurate/semi accurate information about revenues in the other release windows, platforms etc.
If either of us runs across a reliable data source let's agree to share.
For all the digging around I do THAT's the crucial data that eludes me, because these numbers are sorry.

rayw · Nov 20, 2013

Don't have time right now to hunt down verifying info, but two films I know did terrible in the box office but went on to make bazoodles of profit afterwards are 'Hobo With a Shotgun' and 'The Human Centipede.'

But some of these films... I just don't know HOW they'll ever make money, such as the aforementioned 'Payback' and others like:
Citizen Gangster - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1709654/business?ref_=tt_dt_bus
The Samaritan - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1867093/business?ref_=tt_dt_bus
The Oxford Murders - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0488604/business?ref_=tt_dt_bus
Syrup - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0762138/business?ref_=tt_dt_bus
The Good Doctor - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1582271/business?ref_=tt_dt_bus

and on and on...

Their box office numbers are just horrible.

When I get around to doing the second page with total theatrical revenues I'm honestly not thinking that'll be much better.
Some, but no saving grace.

:no:

mlesemann · Nov 20, 2013

When you say these are "horrible," I assume you mean the box office numbers?

Above a certain budget level (I think it's $2.5 mil but I'm not positive), SAG-AFTRA contracts require a theatrical release - it doesn't need to be a wide release, though. I suspect that these numbers reflect a release only to satisfy that requirement.

I actually think that those movies that you listed (Citizen Gangster, etc) will recoup at least their cost, and probably make a profit, if $$ info from all platforms were readily available. I think, however, that it's close to impossible to obtain the numbers as they tend to be closely guarded by distributors and producers.

rayw · Nov 20, 2013

mlesemann said:
When you say these are "horrible," I assume you mean the box office numbers?
Correct.

Above a certain budget level (I think it's $2.5 mil but I'm not positive), SAG-AFTRA contracts require a theatrical release - it doesn't need to be a wide release, though. I suspect that these numbers reflect a release only to satisfy that requirement.
Interesting.
I definitely need to investigate into such contract requirements more.
Your suspicions are very likely right.

I actually think that those movies that you listed (Citizen Gangster, etc) will recoup at least their cost, and probably make a profit, if $$ info from all platforms were readily available.
I would really like to get ahold of even some anecdotal data on that to understand how any of these producers, and to some degree the distributors, are staying in business.

I think, however, that it's close to impossible to obtain the numbers as they tend to be closely guarded by distributors and producers.

LOL! They better!
Or else some crazy guy might try to figure out how to replicate the business model! :lol:

(Psst! Any such anecdotal data you guys run across... please... just float it over thissaways.

Much appreciated. :yes:

)

mlesemann · Nov 25, 2013

When I read this, I thought it would make an interesting addition to this discussion:
http://filmmakermagazine.com/82535-hal-hartley-offers-ned-rifle-distribution-rights-as-kickstarter-rewards/#.UpOC-3-9KSN

If you're not familiar with Hal Hartley, you can see his credits here:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001325/?ref_=nv_sr_2

rayw · Nov 26, 2013

That was a pretty cool find, Mara.

Thank you for sharing it.

I love the idea and was looking forward to integrating the concept into any future campaigns I would consider - until I revisited the link:
"UPDATE: Shortly after Hartley sent the above letter to his backers and we posted this piece, he was required to remove these rewards from the Ned Rifle Kickstarter page. He writes, “It’s outside Kickstarter’s rewards guidelines as a form of investment. I agreed to play by their rules. But we hit a grey area in those rules. Now things are pretty black and white. It’s was pretty exciting there for a few hours, though!”"
A comment associated with that article:
"Of course, now that people know he wants to do this they can always reach him outside of KickStarter channels and sell them as a normal investor...the challenge with film investing is accessing the interested investor with cash to spend...which he has done...at least to a few or selected people who knew of the K campaign...or of course see this article.
#MissionAccomplished"
I think there's a good valid point to that POV, but am also afraid it doesn't do any good to future crowdfunding projects since KS, & likely IGG, will be all over this in the future.

Rats!

Surely it could be part of a film's non-crowdfunding site (which it should have anyway), but people are funny about clicking on "too many" links. :rolleyes:

People these days are fantastically lazy. Drives me nuts.

Looks like Hal's gonna need some hail Marys to save this project:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260302407/ned-rifle?ref=card

Code:

$199,484 pledged of $384,000 goal
8 days to go

mlesemann · Nov 26, 2013

Thanks for the updated info, Ray!

This kind of thing may come (back) into play once the SEC finishes the equity investment rules for small investors, which I think is expected for next summer. Those will (for better or worse) open up crowdfunding to equity investment, as I understand it.