Free film

My last post was dedicated to the decline of the traditional film distribution model, especially for serious films for adults. Fortunately, some of the same forces that are killing that model are helping people to build a new one. Some elements of this emerging model are specific to film, but others could be applied to any art form, and may have enormous untapped potential for the theater artists who figure out how to use them best. This new model is called the “New World of Distribution” by one of its gurus, Peter Broderick, who was the keynote speaker at IFP Media Arts’ Producers Conference last year. Legendary indie film producer Ted Hope says it’s “Truly Free Film,” or at least has the potential to facilitate film that is truly free, rather than merely “indie.” The core of both of their visions is that, through inexpensive equipment and software, digital distribution, DVDs, blogs and social networking, filmmakers have all of the tools they need to control not only the way their films are made, but how they are funded and how they reach their audience. No longer are they dependent on studios and distributors. This new world includes no huge checks from the folks in Hollywood, but it could mean a real living for artists who are efficient, hard-working, and close to their audience. Some of these concepts of the new world that apply beyond the film realm are also touched upon in Scott Kirsner’s book Fans, Friends and Followers: Building an Audience and a Creative Career in the Digital Age—the most important of which is how to view your audience. Broderick tells us that in the new world:

Filmmakers target core audiences. Their priority is to reach them effectively, and then hopefully cross over to a wider public. They reach core audiences directly both online and offline, through websites, mailing lists, organizations, and publications. In the Old World, many distributors market to a general audience, which is highly inefficient and more and more expensive. Notable exceptions, Fox Searchlight and Bob Berney, have demonstrated how effective highly targeted marketing can be. Napoleon Dynamite first targeted nerds, Passion of the Christ began with evangelicals, and My Big Fat Greek Wedding started with Greek Americans. Building on their original base, each of these films was then able to significantly expand and diversify their audiences.

This means they are thinking about what community or subculture is most likely to identify with or be attracted to the content or aesthetic of their film, and they build buzz there first, and if it spreads beyond the core, all the better. It means actually joining that subculture on line (if they are not already a member) and observing it for a while to understand better what motivates their participation. It means they think about their audience even before they begin shooting, and potentially letting people in on their creative process in order to build anticipation and excitement. This close, early engagement with audiences can even help artists fund their pieces in advance. Political documentarian Robert Greenwald has made a career of using the blogosphere to raise money for his films from the liberal grassroots. On line services like Kickstarter lets artists of all types set fundraising goals and find donors (wait, not ALL types, theater is missing!). In this new model, the goal is more than finding an audience for the current project. It’s finding the True Fans that will follow your artistic career and come back to you again and again (as long as you produce high-quality art that is relevant to them). As Broderick says: “Think long term. Be clear about your goals. Are you creating a business around a group of films with common content? Are you building a career as an artist with a core personal audience?” Having been out of the theater game for a while, I know these ideas may be old hat to some of you. Any of you have stories to share of theater artists using these concepts?