“Hollywood” is the epicenter of the pandemic in California. Gov. Gavin Newsom has clearly stated this as California looks to reopen cinema/TV production shutdown by the coronavirus pandemic.
In Los Angeles county, the killing has raced past 2,000 dead.
Personally, I have been trying to gather local, national, and international proposed guidelines for the new workplace of cinema/TV production. It’s a mess. One great value Gov. Newsom can bring to this industry will be a set of uniform, coordinated guidelines.
The biggest challenge is what to do with the talent in front of the camera. Most stories cannot be told without expressive, often attractive, actors interacting closely and even intimately.
Hollywood production values are very high, which is why the public loves Hollywood movies. The audience may be shifting, as it gets adjusted to “stay at home” TV. SNL and late night shows and music competition shows have quickly found ways to increase the production values of stay-at-home broadcasting (such as, USE A DECENT MICROPHONE, DAMMIT) and the public seems to enjoy being along for the ride. If this is a sea change in public acceptance of new production values, that might give Hollywood some leeway in how to work with actors.
Unfortunately, that leeway is most likely to cripple background actors (“extras”), who, especially in crowd scenes, are likely to be replaced by computer-generated crowds and stock footage. Many non-union background actors, usually employed after a certain number of union background actors are first called up, may likely never work again.
On the other hand, all crew categories are likely to expand. With suggestions of parallel “pods” of crews — having duplicate camera, grip, gaffer, etc. crews isolated from each other) means a boom for crew.
Post-production, too, is likely to boom. A lot of post-production is lonely work, and can often be done anywhere, which includes work-from-home. Using VFX to routinely create crowd scenes, for instance, should mean more post-production work.
Even feeding cast and crew will require restaurant-style teams and servings instead of the now-common large open buffet lines.
And trying to keep people a safe six or more feet apart is going to initially create havoc for the very tight production set environment. Requiring double the current space for any working set is possible.
Coronavirus teams will also be needed, a brand new category added to budgets, especially the new world of sanitizing everything.
And nobody knows what the insurance and completion bond industries will do. Nor do we know what will calm the fears of skittish investors.
All of this is a killer for budgets by today’s standard. Budgeting itself will require probably twice the work and new, unproven parameters.
This is what large-scale studio productions will face.
Low-budget indie productions, with their small teams, lack of money, and cast and crew doing multiple jobs, will face incredible challenges. They can’t have duplicate crew pods and new teams of virus fighters. They rely on far-flung practical locations that present unique challenges for virus sanitation, including issues of safe transportation and rental equipment.
The consideration for smaller productions — ten or fewer crew has been suggested as a cutoff — must have unique problem-solving ingenuity or the indie film industry will die.
Of course, the whole goal is to make sure nobody dies or gets sick from or spreads this virus. This is the greatest safety challenge for the entire cinema/TV production industry in the past century.
We will find our new normal. The State of California is a proper resource to bring together all of the various proposals and interests, along with science and medicine, to establish uniform guidelines.
After I was divorced in the early 1990s, I ended up living in a small apartment in Hollywood, near La Brea and Franklin, three blocks from the Chinese Theater. I scrambled to make a living, to be creative, to make movies.
Above the common question “How long is a short film?*” should be the more significant question, “Why a short film?”
Good short films are enjoyable and moving, with stories that can have an impact as strong as good feature-length films or powerful TV series. You can laugh, cry, and be inspired watching a good short film.
But, why a short film? Long considered a sad attempt to mimic the more robust and legitimate feature length film, shorts have often been given … well … short shrift.
Those were the old days.
Today, the entire environment of content, what I term “The Blended Screens,” is changing.
I said to myself, for quite some time now, “I gotta do SOMETHING.” Tired of projects failing, hating the junior high cliquishness of crowdfunding, realizing it’s been too many years. I sought the Holy Grail of indie filmmaking: two people, one room, one day.
BARNARD BUYS VENOM RIGHTS – Daily Variety
Two decades ago, I bought a book.
In producer-speak, that means I acquired the rights via option to make a movie from a book. I knew a TV news reporter, and she had made contact with a reclusive author who wrote a book she thought I might be interested in. Actually, “reclusive” is too weak of a term; we both had determined that the author was in hiding. Contact was difficult and cryptic. Nonetheless, he and I got on the phone, and he figured that I would be someone he’d like to work with to get his book made into a movie, and I liked the deal, too. We sealed the deal without ever meeting.
How Is a Filmmaker Consumed by a Passion Project?
The following is a guest post from Michael R. Barnard, who is in the final days of an Indiegogo campaign for his film, Everybody Says Goodbye: The Story of a Father and Son.
For many years, I have been chasing a motion picture project that has completely consumed me. It’s called Everybody Says Goodbye: The Story of a Father and Son, and I first began writing the screenplay in 1998. Having come so close to making the movie a few times, I keep referring to this project as “a fish-hook in the eye” because it’s impossible for me to ignore and walk away from.
Photo by Israel Sundseth
I spent a lot of time on the mean streets of Hollywood. I lived there, worked there, had friends there, I walked them a lot. My screenplay for the feature film EVERYBODY SAYS GOODBYE—The Story of a Father and Son is set there, in 1998.
The sketchy stretch of Santa Monica Boulevard between La Brea Avenue and Vine Street is a little nicer now, but not by much. There has always been a veneer of potential violence.
It’s a little different style-wise, too. Back in the 1990s, if you saw a couple walking hand-in-hand along this stretch, and that couple was of opposite genders, and if each of them were their original gender, then you knew they were scared tourists separated from their tour group.
DEAD CAR Photo by Kristian Karlsson
If you remember that there once was a glimmer of hope for more sustainable financing for innovative small business (and, for my concern, an indie film industry) through “Equity Crowdfunding” as demanded by the JOBS Act of 2012, the fact is that it’s not going to happen. It’s already far past the Act’s imposed deadlines because the concept is anathema to the entrenched and self-interested bureaucracy.
CITY Photo by Oleg Chursin
The merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable is a powerful situation that has broad negative implications for society and for filmmakers specifically. It’s not simply a business issue, it’s a democracy issue.
The merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable is another deliberate attack on Net Neutrality.
BLANK COMPUTER Photo by Alejandro Escamilla
On my way to Sundance Film Festival 2014, news broke (see “Federal appeals court strikes down rules protecting net neutrality” at http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-net-neutrality-federal-appeals-court-20140114,0,2138188.story#ixzz2qlsuWDSC
) that made two problems painfully clear, and they will have a huge impact on filmmakers:
LONELY INVESTOR Photo by Alejandro Escamilla
Prolific indie film producer Ted Hope
, who spent the past year as Executive Director of the San Francisco Film Society (as of June 2015, a Production Executive at AMAZON STUDIOS), recently posted “Towards A Sustainable Investor Class: Accessing Quality Projects
” as a call to build a healthy independent filmmaking industry. As always, he makes an astute and excellent comment about the big picture of indie filmmaking. We engaged in a conversation, and here’s my comment about the industry and investors: Continue reading
May 26th was a uniquely exciting (and perhaps exhausting) day for TV lovers. At midnight, Netflix released a brand new season of Arrested Development – more than seven years after the show was cancelled by Fox. The show’s return represents a key component of Netflix’s emerging original content strategy and is the fourth show released by the over-the-top streaming service this year (at a total cost of more than $150M). As such, I thought it would be a good opportunity to pause and evaluate the economics of this strategy and hypothesize what success might look like. In doing so, we can also better understand the role of original content (is it intended to drive net adds, reduce churn, stabilize content costs etc.) and the impact of their controversial decision to release entire seasons at once. This will also tell us about Netflix’s future and management’s POV on this future.
The Value of Netflix to the Consumer
Though inexpensive on the whole, Netflix’s service does not offer materially cheaper entertainment than that of traditional cable TV, costing approximately $0.0024/minute versus cable’s $0.0035/minute.
This is interesting for two reasons
1. Despite being commercial-free and infinitely more flexible than live linear TV (in terms of time, content and screen), Netflix is unable to command a price premium for its entertainment service
2. Average time spent watching Netflix per user is up more than 10% year-over-year. However, with prices still $7.99 a month, Netflix has not benefited from this increase in customer value (directly, at least, as it would improve word-of-mouth and perceived value). Increases in both the quality and size of its content library content quality is no doubt a major driver for increased usage, but this has contributed to a 16% increase in quarterly licensing costs ($1.355B in Q1 2013).
This matters because it means Netflix may have limited means to raise prices – and when it does, they will still lag customer value growth. As the instant decapitation of Qwickster demonstrated (among many other lessons), Netflix’s customers really do control the relationship.
MORE … click here to continue reading.
It is a great time to be a lover of television. Content, for one, has never been better. Not only have many declared today the “New Golden Age of Television”, some such as Vanity Fair’s James Wolcott, have gone as far to ask questions such as if “anyone thinks The Artist (which had recently won the Academy Award for Best Picture) is better than Mad Men?”. The rise of digital distribution and portable, media-focused devices has also fundamentally increased potential “demand” for this content. The ability to watch content whenever (and wherever) we want means that we can watch more shows than was realistically possible when we were tethered to 2-3 hours of “appointment TV” per night (and we could watch only one show per primetime slot). Not only does this save older shows, such as The Sopranos, from irrelevancy after airing, it opens up the creative medium. Hyper-serialized shows such as LOST and Game of Thrones would not be possible without the ability for viewers to easily catch-up on a missed episode (or “marathon” past seasons). Digital-only distribution (such as Netflix’s House of Cards) has further freed creatives to pick scene lengths or runtimes based on the needs of the story, rather than the need to cut to a commercial break every 4-7 minutes or fill out an hour-long timeslot.
Market behavior clearly illustrates the New Golden Age hypothesis. Movie stars are increasingly moving to the TV screen (from Ewan McGregor or Zooey Deschanel) and many TV stars are bigger celebrities than most movie actors (such as Kim Kardashian, regrettably). TV budgets have also exploded. Game of Thrones costs upwards of $60 million for a 10-episode season and many hour-long dramas at the Big Four broadcasters can cost $40-75 million per season ($2-4M/episode). Content has also become an increasingly important differentiator for cable networks such as HBO and AMC, which traditionally focused on films and one-off specials, but are now defined by and dependent on hits such as Girls and The Walking Dead.
MORE … click here to continue reading.
There has been a battle going on in Hollywood for a while now that threatens to upset one of the premises of the entire film industry. You might think it must be about digital disruption, but it’s not. Is it about 3D? No. Maybe it’s about lack of creativity in an industry swollen with sequels, prequels, and comic book heroes. Nope. Is it about Steven Spielberg’s prediction that a few mega-flops will likely destroy Hollywood? Nope.
It’s all about who will get coffee for the producers. The unpaid intern.
If you have a driving passion to break into the industry (and who doesn’t? You wouldn’t be reading my blog if you didn’t.), there are few ways to do it. The Number One best, most reliable, undeniably greatest way to break into Hollywood? Become an unpaid intern.
(It used to be “work in the mailroom at an agency,” but that’s no longer true. Who sends MAIL anymore??) Continue reading
When looking at what I’ve termed “The Blended Screens” — the destruction of all the different ways that used to define what we were watching (it was a “movie” because it was shot on film and shown in a movie theater; it was a “TV Show” because it was shot on tape and broadcast by a TV station; it was “Home Video” because it was burned to VHS tape or DVD or Blu-Ray and shown on a machine in the living room; it was a “Web Series” because it was carried over the Internet and watched on a computer; etc., etc., etc.) — it becomes clear to me that THIS IS THE SECOND ‘GOLDEN AGE OF TELEVISION.’ Continue reading
Production is morphing into … what? Is it “filmmaking” if there’s no film? Are we “taping” a program if there’s no tape? Are they “films” or “movies” it they are viewed on a smartphone? Is it “Television” if it’s streaming online on demand?
The technology of production and the delivery methods are no longer pertinent to defining what creators do. We create. We no longer create things clearly defined as “TV shows” or “Movies” or “Web Series.” What we create is now going out on all of “The Blended Screens.” Some have called it “content” but I think that term is weak and too broad.
For me, I’ve decided it’s all “story-making” and that’s what I choose from now on.
MICHAEL R BARNARD PRODUCTIONS logo
FILMMAKERS, IT’S 2013. DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR JOBS ACT IS? Part 2 of 2
Michael R. Barnard
Written by Michael R. Barnard
Michael R. Barnard is a writer and filmmaker who has been researching the American JOBS Act since it was first proposed. Barnard is currently working on creating an independent feature film, A FATHER AND SON. He lives in Brooklyn, New York, and is the author of the historical novel NATE AND KELLY. Find him on Twitter at @mrbarnard1, Facebook at michael.barnard and LinkedIn at michaelrbarnard.
This article is an overview and observation, not legal advice.
SUMMARY: The independent film industry in America is not enjoying the growth that would be expected from the surge in the quantity of indie movies being made. The American JOBS Act, passed in April 2012, offers hope to reinvigorate the independent film industry.
In Part 1, we discussed the reasons behind the difficulty raising equity investment. Continue reading
Norman Berns of ReelGrok, the website “Where Filmmakers Get It,” has reviewed several of the programs available for indie filmmakers to schedule and budget their movie projects. He reviews Movie Magic, Showbiz, Gorilla, Hot Budget, and scenechronize.
How will independent filmmakers fully embrace digital distribution for maximum value? It’s a new world, and the old methods cannot be squeezed and twisted to work in it. There will be a new approach to bringing indie films to the audience.
Old Movie Theater
I call it the UNIVERSAL FILM ACCESS POINT.
I was at a seminar this week that purported to be about the new EQUITY CROWDFUNDING, but sadly, the panel was populated by finance professionals whose disdain for those of us who are not “high end, high net worth” made the panel useless.
These types of professional fundraisers, coming from the status quo investment community, are not willing to acknowledge that the true value of EQUITY CROWDFUNDING is the escape from the expense, time and headache of pursuing Reg D exemptions and PPMs (“Private Placement Memorandums”). They collect monstrous fees to create those, so they have no respect for those who pursue crowdfunding as an entry to the financial world. Continue reading
Here are my video reports from the 2012 NAB Show in Las Vegas, reporting for ReelGrok “Where filmmakers get it.”
Written by Michael R. Barnard for ReelGrok.com “Where Filmmakers Get It!”
President Obama signed the JOBS ACT into law on April 5th, 2012.
ReelGrok.com “Where Filmmakers Get It”
Called the ‘‘Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act,’’ the goal is to increase American job creation and economic growth by improving access to the public capital markets for emerging growth companies. It will make it easier for small businesses to raise money so they can create jobs and rebuild the American economy by amending the Securities Act of 1933. It can have a profound impact on the independent filmmaking industry.
President Obama said, “We are a nation of doers. We think big. We take risks. This is a country that’s always been on the cutting edge. The reason is, America has always had the most daring entrepreneurs. When their businesses take off, more people get employed.”
That’s a boost the independent filmmaking industry needs. “I think we’ll see the $1 million range and down to $100,000 or so flourish with this new model,” says entertainment attorney Gordon P. Firemark.
The American Jobs Act
READ MORE AT REELGROK.COM “WHERE FILMMAKERS GET IT”
FILMMAKERS, this is very important:
WHAT CONGRESS DID
The house has passed the Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act which offers a tremendous opportunity to rebuild the independent film industry. The Act is designed to allow businesses to raise capital through crowdfunding. Under current securities laws, filmmakers can only ask for donations, and donors support the film without any participation in its potential profit.