FA —Winter 2007

Independent Empowerment:

Like the prediction of a good fortune cookie, the entertainment market of 2006 was an exciting glimpse into the future of technological entertainment.  The entertainment industry has already begun its next transformation as the information age continues to empower more people with less effort.  Size (so it seems) does not matter when it comes to antiquated business models and technology. Not even the biggest entertainment egos are safe from this change.  For example:
Once a 24-hour store with over 200 locations, Tower Records closed its doors on December 23rd, just as iTunes sold 1.6 billion tracks and 20 million TV shows for a buck each.
Another 1.6 billion is made as Time Magazine’s “Invention of the Year” YouTube sells after only 20 months since its induction.
Blockbuster loses 4 billion dollars in 4 years, slowly bleeding as Netflix mails 4 million DVDs out per week.

Does this mean the future of entertainment is as fickle as it is risky?   On the contrary, it merely suggests that the correlation between company size and product saturation are no longer physically dependent on each other.  The concept behind compressing the overhead of business and replacing it with more efficient tools isn’t a new idea; just ask any credit card company. But only until recently have artists been able to adapt these tools and use them with a much more creative approach to dominate more old-fashioned models of business entertainment.

In my opinion, the most exciting thing about the 2006 arts and entertainment evolution is that the industry is reinventing its channels for content saturation. The fact of the matter is iTunes, YouTube and Netflix are just a few of new major distribution pipelines that are directly linked to literally hundreds of millions of customers.

Furthermore, the foundation of these pipelines have not only been endorsed, but also largely designed by the demand from consumers themselves.  Hits, downloads and links are breaking record after record; insuring the content providers that consumers are not going to slow down their addiction to alternative entertainment channels anytime soon.  Plus, a technologically hungry consumer is fueling the market for the enhancement of tools for fast implementation of even better pipelines.

So how does this empower the independent filmmaker?  The 2006 segregation of the marketplace created a serendipitous trade off in which consumers drove manufacturers to build better computing tools to deliver alternative content.  All the while, the same tools were adapted by filmmakers to create the content in which to deliver.  -The result?  The sharing of technology that satisfies the wants and needs of high definition acquisition and distribution with a cost that even some student films can afford.
2006 was the latest big step for independent filmmaking opportunities across the board since the induction of the MiniDV format in 1996.

Because of the high level of consumer participation, dozens of new ways to get products onto the market for viewing are being carved for the millions of receivers on the other end.  Independent filmmaking has had its theatrical releases followed by VHS and DVD.  But the pipeline for distribution outside of these channels was very thin until now.  With the ability to Podcast, stream, download and mail content growing, the need to fill the libraries with more content is growing too.

In 2006, only about 150 films received theatrical distribution on over 1,000 screens.  Take that number and compare it to 100 million video viewings per day on YouTube.com.  For many independent filmmakers, distribution has always been the most difficult part of the process.  But consider the problem hasn’t been with the distribution potential of a particular film, but rather with the limited scope of distribution options offered to a film.  If the market can expand to insure more avenues for content, then so will follow the demand for content itself.  And as the consumer smartens with available higher quality content delivery (such as H.264 downloading, HD-DVD or Blue-Ray Disc) the filmmaker will smarten and produce higher quality content to deliver.

In all, the independents always win in a battle for evolutionary change for a couple of reasons.  First, independents are rarely afraid to explore new options for content creation, even if it means taking risks.  Second, independents spend a lot of time researching for their own educational benefit, which inevitably leads to a more successful project.  And third, independents already make up a significant portion of alternative distributed content.  The demand will get bigger, the tools will get better and the content will need to be brilliant.

My advice to all of us is to remember there are no actual rule makers in this industry.  Fresh ideas coupled with fresh technology are always a winning combination.  Research the new cable channels, online distribution agencies, cell phone art and online film festivals.  You might be surprised at the amount of new ways to move content popping up in every corner.  Contributing as a shaper of this opportunity as its just getting started is perhaps the most promising part for eager filmmakers.  No rules.  No boundaries.  No politics.  -That is independent empowerment.

by Michael Cioni