For those who can never make it to a film festival

[Danny Aindow]

These days a lot of good independant film that ends up being shown on the cinema starts out at film festivals. Best example is Slumdog Millionaire, as many know it almost went straight to DVD until it was spotted by someone at a festival and the rest is history.

I'm a manager with a large cinema chain in the UK and I have an idea i'd like to run past you guys here. If a cinema where to put on a show that had some shorts or indie films from a film festival coupled with some general footage of the event and whats going on, interviews with some people etc - even live satellite footage of certain things if the timings where ok. Would you pay money for a ticket to see something like that?

We have shown music and comedy events before, some live, and shown premiers of films with live footage and interviews of stars before the film and they generally go down quite well.

Do you think people would be interested in seeing something like this? Would you want to see some indie festival films or shorts on the big screen before they're discovered? Be the first people to see them?

If you could give me any feedback on this i would very much appreicate it as it would be possible for me to speak to the right people and have a go at making it happen. This is of course in the UK but i would appreciate feedback from everyone anyway.

Also does anyone have any suggestions as to things that would encourage them to go see a festival at the cinema?

Cheers for any input.

 

[ussinners]

I think it would all depend on where you are. If your theatres are in heavily populated areas, then you could bring in business if the movies are good and they have potential to bring in an audience.

For instance: Slumdog Millionaire. Before it became wildly popular, does your area have a audience for a movie like that?

Horror and Comedy are always popular, but they have to be good. If you do something like this, and advertise the hell out of it. Tell the public these are great movies that haven't been seen by the general public and they get there and the movies suck. Then you've wasted everyone's time, and lost credibility when you try to do it again.

So, it's always great to want to promote new talent, just make sure there's a market for it, and that the movies are good. Most importantly, that you can actually advertise the product.

 

[M1chae1]

These days a lot of good independant film that ends up being shown on the cinema starts out at film festivals. Best example is Slumdog Millionaire...

Quite frankly, I'm annoyed at what people call an 'independent' film nowa'days. Slumdog is NOT independent. It cost millions. I can not and will not consider a million dollar film 'independent.' I understand films like Slumdog don't follow the same rules or path as Hollywood push-outs...but I will never consider it independent. Robert Redford and Sundance screwed that up for us years ago.

A true indie costs--in my eyes--under 100K...and that's a HUGE indie.

99% of the indies I've worked on or have known about, costs under 40K. They need to make another category for films like Slumdog...I'm not fooled, and I'm a bit annoyed.



Sorry about that little rant...I had to.

And in answer to your query, yes I pay to see independent films. I go to festivals to see cool movies, to meet new talent, and to support local filmmakers and friends.

 

[Danny Aindow]

No worries at all about the rant, exactly the sort of feedback i'm after. I do take your point about Slumdog being different from truly independant film but i do think for what i'm looking to set up the general public would pretty much consider slumdog as independant cinema in terms of marketing the idea. If it got people watching more truly indepent productions though, all the better and perhaps it could develop into another way for new film makers to get their work out there. We are looking at having a competition within our area of cinema's for staff only to make a film at each cinema, no budget sorta thing, and have an awards night showing each film. The idea could develop into an 'open night' for film makers to showcase their stuff much like in London their is a pitching session every now and then in conjunction with Raindance i think.

Just to clarify though, the stuff you said you'd pay for, would that extend to cinema showings of festivals out of your reach?

The point about there being a market for it, i think it would be marketed mostly towards local film group which in my area there are a few but yeah i would like to get the general public more interested in this type of film and would put a lot of emphasis on, like you say, great films that may never see the cinema screen otherwise and being amongst the first to see it.

Basically if the sort of people that frequent these forums would not be intersted in it then i doubt very much it would develop much more of a following amongst more generic cinema-goers.

Great feedback though, keep it coming.

 

[ad2478]

I wil lalways support a real indie film. But i will sugegst it should be kept a real indie film festival. I heard froma friend that SUNDANCE started as an real indie fil fest but now is nearly changed. dont know how much the news is correct but i will suggest to keep it a 100% indie film fest.

 

[directorik]

To me it’s very simple. A movie made with no distribution
agreement or money from any of the “big 6” is independent.
Regardless of the genre, of the style, of the budget or of the
people involved. Independent transcends genre and budget.

To suggest the $250,000 movie I made last year wasn’t independent
is, in my opinion, crazy. I had no studio involvement, I had no
distributor agreement, I worked my ass off to raise that kind of
money and I still can’t get that movie released. What is that, if
not an independent film? So just because I paid people what they
are worth my movie is no longer independent?

Danny,

The general movie-goer is interested in two things. In order:
who’s in it and is it popular. Even we independent filmmakers
don’t go see movies our peers make.

If you had shown “Slumdog Millionaire” in June of 2008 very few
people would have paid to see it. And you would have advertised
it as a “Danny Boyle” film to get at least some name recognition.

If you had shown it in November of 2008 you would have advertised
it as an official selection of several film festivals. Because
then people would know someone else liked it. And even then, most
movie-goers would have asked, “Who’s in it?” and when they didn’t
get the answer they want, they would pay to see another movie.

I believe if “Slumdog Millionaire” hadn’t been made by Danny Boyle
who had the clout to get meetings with a lot of production exec’s
and festival programmers, that movie would have got straight to
DVD and very few people would ever see it.

I agree with you. I wish there were more venues for us independent
filmmakers to show our work. But somehow the venue must figure
out a way to get people to pay to see a movie they’ve never heard
of, made by people they don’t know and starring actors they have
never heard of.

Even established film festivals have a hard time drawing people to
those films. That’s why they include films made by famous actors
turned directors or movies with name stars.

Can your cinema chain afford to program truly independent film on
one or two screens? How long can you keep paying the bills if you
get a total of 100 to 200 people per week in those houses?
Without extensive (and expensive) advertising, how do people even
know a truly independent film is playing?

 

[ad2478]

Well i object when we talk about Slumdog Millionaire as an indie film. The cast had ANil Kapoor which is one of the most great and expensive starts of Bollywood. How a film with such a big star can be counted as indie? untill its budget is low and the start agreed to work fro low price? we also have to keep in mind the currency thing in mind. May be it was made for 1 million to 10 million US dolalrs which can be a indie film budget in USA but for INDIA it is a big amount. so while talking about this movie currency matter should be kept in mind.

 

[Danny Aindow]

directorik, thank you for your feedback. You are 100% right in saying that Slumdob would have been advertised heavily as a Danny Boyle film in order to drum up interest before it hit properly.

You raise many good points, I have spoken to someone at my head office who is responsible for events outside of normal movies and he said that we have done it before in London and it has been sold out. In the UK London is the place to be for Indy film so yes I do have doubts as to whether or not regional cinema's would generate enough interest to make it worthwhile.

Cost wise, I can honestly say I currently have no idea of the sort of cost that would be involved. Any of the live events we have done so far have been arranged at head office so we are not aware of any rental terms or straight costs.

I agree with you completely that it is down to a venue to figure out how to get people to come see unknown films and pay money for it. I think the most troubling thing is when you say, "Even we independent filmmakers don’t go see movies our peers make".

I think without knowing what would entice those of us who spend most days thinking about this sort of thing into a cinema to watch festival stuff I would have no chance of knowing how then to include the general public.

So i guess my next question is, what would get you guys into a cinema to experience this? What sort of thing would you like to see? Personally i don't think it would be right to charge a normal cinema ticket price for it because your asking people to take a chance on an unknown product, do you agree?

Really appreciate this feedback, the only reason I work in a cinema is because I am crazy in love with movies and i really feel that a big cinema chain needs to get involved in helping independants get their stuff out to more people.

 

[M1chae1]

To me it’s very simple. A movie made with no distribution
agreement or money from any of the “big 6” is independent.
Regardless of the genre, of the style, of the budget or of the
people involved. Independent transcends genre and budget.

To suggest the $250,000 movie I made last year wasn’t independent
is, in my opinion, crazy. I had no studio involvement, I had no
distributor agreement, I worked my ass off to raise that kind of
money and I still can’t get that movie released. What is that, if
not an independent film? So just because I paid people what they
are worth my movie is no longer independent?

That is why I think there should be a separate catagory for films over 100K (certainly over 1 million). If you consider not being with any of the 'big 6' to be independent, well I won't argue with you. Remember though, Slumdog costs millions to make, market, etc...that's on an even different level than your 250K movie. I think budget has a heck of a lot to do with whether you call a movie 'independent.' It's not about being independent from the big movie studios...is about the feel of the shoot, the process, the entire atmosphere--it's the principle.

Like I said, 99% of indies I've worked on or heard about cost under 20K--if you want to lump those films in with million dollar films just because they aren't tied to the 'big 6'...well, I suppose that's your preference. I just can't swallow it.

 

[M1chae1]

Well i object when we talk about Slumdog Millionaire as an indie film. The cast had ANil Kapoor which is one of the most great and expensive starts of Bollywood. How a film with such a big star can be counted as indie? untill its budget is low and the start agreed to work fro low price? we also have to keep in mind the currency thing in mind. May be it was made for 1 million to 10 million US dolalrs which can be a indie film budget in USA but for INDIA it is a big amount. so while talking about this movie currency matter should be kept in mind.

Exactly. If Slumdog would have been shot in the US, with US actors...it would have cost that many more millions to make. It simply isn't an indie...I appreciate the tone it had, the indie feel...but I can't compare one of the self-distributed horror films I worked on to a film of that caliber.

 

[directorik]

What I'm seeing is that there is no definition of
an independent film. Some set a budget limit, some
set a cast criteria, some narrow the definition to
style and feel. So the term "indie" depends entirely
on each individuals personal point of view and has
nothing at all to do with studio involvement.

So if all the principles are met - the feel of the shoot,
the process, the entire atmosphere - and the budget
is $1,500,000 is it no longer independent in your view?
What is you budget cut off to call a movie independent?

What do you call my $250,000 film?

And if a major studio like Paramount made a movie with
a budget of $20,000 and released it on 1,500 screens
would you call that an "indie"?

 

[ad2478]

Well this question is tricky only because in above cae Paramount will release it on 1500 screens. Apart from that well if the amount of cinemas is low (because indie filmmaker never get this big offer) i will consider it an Indie movie because the major problem with indie filmmakers which make them INDIE is the finance.
If anyone (not familier with filmmaking) has $ 50 million it will not be called an indie movie because after all he didnt had the finance problem.
The case goes vice versa. A Big studio, a giant one make s amovie for $ 20,000 thats means atleast for me it will be an indie or low budget movie. Because at the end of the day for making film you need finance

This is my point of view.

 

[Danny Aindow]

Well for arguements sake then can I rephrase indy films to festival films/shorts/footage.

Seems that the general point of the thread has drifted into a discussion on what classes a film as indy, whilst interesting, doesn't really help me too much. I would be interested in looking at showing independant cinema in general but its more specifically festivals i'm reffering to in the original thread.

 

[oakstreetphotovideo]

Danny, since I'm not an industry guy (just a commercial shooter and video effects software developer), I think I can speak for those of us with an interest in the industry who aren't up to our armpits in it. I go to local film screenings and I pay to see a wide range of low budget, short films, etc. What I like to see is the behind the scenes details of how the movies are made, the human element behind the movie, and anything that helps me feel connected with the people involved in making the films. Some of the films are better than others, but I find things to like in all of them, and they often inspire me to do things that I might have otherwise not considered. It's especially interesting when the film makers, actors, etc. are local people.

I've paid as much as $20 to watch a series of short films that lasted 2 hours. However, that was when the host was raising money for a "good" cause. Typically, ticket prices are $5-$10 and I have no problem with that, since I don't attend that many local screenings in a typical year.

... of course, that's just me.

 

[Spatula]

I think we should separate into two categories: Independent Film and Low Budget

A film can be both, either or neither. That should clear up the confusion and put things in their right place. Then, a studio can make a low budget movie with financing problems and I can make a million dollar movie independently.

As for festival habits...

I work with the Toronto Film Fest annually as a theatre rep (glorified uber-usher) and we get to see some films as part of the deal. What I find is that I generally try and get tickets to 3-5 of the bigger "buzz" films or ones with names I recognize and follow.

The other ones I try and see usually fall along my line of interest- specifically the Midnight Madness program, because it tends to have the "quirkier" films. Here's the films I've seen in the past two years:

2009:
Ghost Town (Ricky Gervais)
Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist (Michael Cera, took the girlfriend cause it looked like good date movie, and was)
Blindness (Various names, but I saw it cause I loved the book)
Che (part 1) (Benicio and such, but again, more of interest in the subject)
The Burrowers (JT Petty, a director I met in 2007, and Midnight Madness)
The Martyrs (Midnight Madness- unknowns, French film... one of the best I saw)
Dead Girl (Midnight Madness- again, unknowns, but buzz about being over-the-top gross/funny)
Detroit Metal City (Mid Madness - relatively unknown, Japanese, thought the idea looked funny... again, one of the best at the fest)
JCVD (Jean Claude Van Damme... what can I say, he's the best!)

2008:
Sleuth (Kenneth Brannagh, 'nuff said)
No Country For Old Men (Coen Bros)
Battle For Haditha (Reenacted Iraq Movie with method actors- sounded interesting)
Darfur Now (Saw because I wanted to learn more about Darfur)
Stuck (Midnight Madness- plot sounded amazing- homeless guy gets hit by a drunk driver and gets stuck in the windshield of the car in her garage... AMAZING movie!)
Flash Point (Midnight Madness, unknowns- saw cause it was right after my shift and a kung fu cop movie!)
Joy Division (Doc on the band)
About a Boy (Doc on Kurt Cobain)
Amazing Journey: Story of the Who (Great Doc on the band!)
Smiley Face (Anna Farris, stoner comedy, what more can I say?)


And yet every year I keep saying to myself "I should see more unknown films, cause that's the truly unique part of the festival and I can always see these films later", but what it often boils down to, in order are:

-Who is involved in the film?
-What is the film about?
-What have I heard about the films? Or when I ask other people what they are seeing, what do they recommend?

So often I get tickets based on the people I already know of, then I look for films that sound interesting to me, and then I ask around with other staff and patrons to find out what they've seen, are going to see, or like.

So if your film doesn't have a name in it, you have to figure out a way to nab those second points.

I'd suggest creating blocks of programs by genre/taste... as in "Horror Night" or "Kung Fu Krazy", because at least you'll appeal to particular groupings... and try and build loyalty into the programs. Colin Geddes, who runs Midnight Madness is great because he develops a rapport with the audience and shares their fan-boy-ness. Then people say "Well I like Colin's pick here, so I might as well just sign up for all of his picks".

Then you gotta build word of mouth- and honestly, it could be as simple as one person standing by the ticket line suggesting to people to see the indie films instead. I'd imagine if every theater around the world had a rep for each film there actively selling it, those films would do well, because there's someone bringing attention to your product.

So those are my suggestions- build up a fan base for a particular program (or festival on a larger scale) and do whatever you can to market it, even if it's just a crazy guy with a sign.

 

[directorik]

Well for arguements sake then can I rephrase indy films to festival films/shorts/footage.

Seems that the general point of the thread has drifted into a discussion on what classes a film as indy, whilst interesting, doesn't really help me too much. I would be interested in looking at showing independant cinema in general but its more specifically festivals i'm reffering to in the original thread.

Sorry about derailing your subject. It happens on message boards quite often.

 

[Danny Aindow]

Thanks for the great feedback Spatula and everyone else who contributed. Just waiting to hear from head office now that the people they are in touch with over festivals are interested in doing it nationally and if all's good i'll give it my best shot.

Directorik, don't worry about it all, no ones fault just that the feedback so far had been great and very usefull so i wanted more of it

 

[M1chae1]

Sorry about derailing your subject. It happens on message boards quite often.

Ya, I'm sorry as well. As long as the thread returns to its original point, a little derailing is sometimes a natural evolution, one in which interesting new ideas are discussed--it's not always bad.

I think it's preference...the whole, 'what makes any independent film.' Clearly there are overlaps of examples...but I think true independent filmmakers know where I'm coming from. A multi-million dollar film directed by Danny Boyle is not 'independent' film...not in my eyes, nor in the eyes of every filmmaker I've ever worked with. You can paint a dog pink, and teach it to walk on two legs...but it's still going to be a dog.

I'm sure your 250K film was indeed independent...one of the very few examples of a cross-over. But there is a big difference between your film, and a multi-million dollar film with a famous director attached...

We can agree to disagree.

Thanks for letting us derail.

 

[Danny Aindow]

It's all good, if you need to go the long way round to get to the point its fine all leads to good stuff i s'pose.

I'll be glad to get back in touch with head office armed with some of the feedback you guys left.

 

[Scoopicman]

What do you call my $250,000 film?

An indie with investors. EVIL DEAD falls into this category, produced for $384K, which is around a million in todays dollars.

Examples are the best way to get this across:

EL MARIACHI was indie, while its sequel DESPERADO was not.

EVIL DEAD was indie, while its sequel EVIL DEAD 2 was not.

TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE was indie, while TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE 2 was not.

See the pattern? In each case, Hollywood players, Dino De Laurentis, Columbia Pictures or Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus (of Canon Films) stepped in to produce the sequel.

And if a major studio like Paramount made a movie with
a budget of $20,000 and released it on 1,500 screens
would you call that an "indie"?

A studio film. You see, the distribution pipeline is already there, which is why I don't consider SLUM DOG an indie. Danny Boyle is pretty famous, with plenty of inroads.

"An independent is a film that, when you make it, does not have a distributor. That’s the end of the story. "

- Bruce Campbell, Film Threat interview Xmas 2004

I've written about this before and a large part of "indie" didn't just mean independently produced, but independent of Hollywood, Studios and pre-mass distribution guarantees.