Me: (tries to visit a local restaurant’s website via iPhone)
Restaurant website: I require Flash. Fuck off.
Me: I just want to know how late you’re open.
Website: Nope.
Me: But I’m on my phone. Don’t you have a little “HTML Version” link up in the corner or something?
Website: I’m ignoring you.
Me: What if I’m on my phone because I’m out, looking for a place to eat? Didn’t that ever occur to you?
Website: Fuck entirely off.
Me: (gives up, switches to computer)
Website: Oh! Hi! What can I help you with today?
Me: What are your —
Website: Hang on, I’m loading the music.

Read the entire original post.

The first assumption is that one cannot build a site that is not “plain, square or flat” with open technologies. Most of the visual tricks you see on those bloated Flash sites can be accomplished with HTML and Javascript, and the open technologies that are built into the browsers discourage the bloat and delays. (Google has proven that slow sites drive users away.) With the HTML5 upgrades that are available in most browsers today, including iPhone, iPad and Android devices, you can really do some crazy stuff, not to mention the further advances that will become available in the next year or two. Keep an eye on Mozilla Drumbeat to see what filmmakers and other artists are developing with HTML5.

Even with the browsers available two and a half years ago when I wrote this post, open tools made it easier to build social features into a site, which I would argue are far more interesting and engaging than visual bells and whistles.

The second assumption with which I take issue is that big movies can take their audiences for granted. Even with a big, fat marketing budget, there’s always room to get more bang for your buck. And the idea that big films are immune to the same attention competition that’s affecting independent film just isn’t true. Remember, this year’s memorial day weekend box office was the worst in 17 years. The studios and major distributors are still trying alchemy – throw huge piles of money out and hope for the best. Websites that fail to honor audiences’ limited time and attention make up one of many examples of how Hollywood is clinging to obsolete techniques for marketing and storytelling.

Did I miss anything?

But in my personal opinion, I think movie sites should be built in Flash if and only if it’s a really big movie. Because people will visit it anyway no matter what technology it is built with. Take Harry Potter or Transformers for example. In one way or another, the fans have to somehow feel like and experience that it is somewhat like an extension of the film. Can you actually imagine a Harry Potter or Transformers site that is plain, square or flat? Although I’m hoping that in the future, with the advancement of technology, we are able to view these sites without having to look at a preloader.

I do think that we can build movie sites in plain HTML or WP if these movie sites are indies since these movies need to get their names out there. But for a movie that stars, say, Julia Roberts, I don’t think building a site that is non-SEO friendly will hurt their sales. Take Twilight for example. They have a Full Flash site but they’re earning millions even during the first few days of their release. If they built a plain HTML or WP website, what good is it going to do? Is it going to bring in more millions? What will it contribute? My 12-year old niece will go see Twilight because Robert Pattinson is in it. Not because it passed W3C standards. And when she sees their website, she is more drawn into the film.

However, if Twilight didn’t make it big the first time, I do think they should build it in plain HTML. But since that didn’t happen, I do like to keep it animated like it is now.

That’s just my two cents. I’d like to hear your thoughts :)

rock on!!! I hope it goes well!!!! super exciting!!!

One of my points was that it doesn’t matter so much in many other communities. So, to take the argument to the extreme (and being only half serious here) – you should be willing to wait a full year if needed to show that film that turns you down for our fest or Cinevegas or whoever. If the film opens in your town anyway, then perhaps your audience is getting served without your help. If it doesn’t open for that year – it’s still new to everyone in Atlanta. I also think you could bring it the next year with the filmmakers in attendance and still get an audience even if it played on tv or is online, etc.

I think regional fests can play with these models more than the big fests, and that’s what will keep them most vibrant to their community and the field. A filmmaker has to consider where is the best place for a premiere, and has to make some hard decisions – that’s not going to change anytime soon. What I was also encouraging was for filmmakers to be more inventive – maybe you do premiere in a big fest and tell regionals that you’d love to play there next, but you’ll also be available for sale on DVD/online before their fests take place, so people are paying for having the filmmaker there.