Cracker, did you have specific kinds of movies in mind? Some genres, we should keep out or no big budget mainstream films?
This touches on a point that's kinda is important to me, especially when I'm "investing" more than just casual, token or flippant time into a project.
I suggest analyzing & deconstructing either a genuine independent film - or - a magor/mini-major studio release that had issues, especially with public opinion about it.
Rottentomatoes.com has a more sensible apples-to-apples critic v. public rating system than metacritic.com which tends to be rather cryptic and less intuitive.
I would like for this to not be a "book of the month club" AKA "let's go watch our favorite movies and discus!" project.
I wanna look at plane crashes and collapsed bridges.
I want to know where and how they failed and what can I/we learn from those take-aways so as to not repeat those in our critically budgeted attempts.
Indie films have no budget to spare for mistakes and misguided judgments.
Because the margin for error is nil I'd like to get the most bang for my buck.
FWIW, I'm mildly fascinated with the BABYLON A.D. debacle.
It had everything but still failed both in the box office and with audiences.
Why?
Nuts and bolts.
When I watched the 2010 indie films I could tell why they didn't get wide release. They were largely effing miserable dramas.
Indie filmmakers are forced to make these because studios/investors are smart enough to know hardly anyone wants to see these - yet - sometimes miserable movies, like NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN or THERE WILL BE BLOOD, do fantastic both in the box office and critically.
Why?
Nuts and bolts.
Why were the miserable NCFOM or TWBB so popular while other miserable indie films get no theater owners to book 'em from distributors?
Nuts and bolts.
I hope this approach strikes a cogent chord for some.