A Filmmaker's Life

My Response To NY Times Article On "Independent" Film

2008-06-30T15:55:00.000-07:00

Dear Times Business Editor,

I'm writing in response to David Carr's article "Little Movies, Big Problems" (June 30, 2008) to voice my frustration at the NY Times publication of an article about independent film that is so clearly NOT at all about independent film. The article's central voice, Mark Gill, is NOT and independent filmmaker. He is a smart and talented film executive who cares about film and makes films outside the studio mainstream. But he still makes them through a traditional studio paradigm, and therefore, is not a meaningful authority on independent film.

The perspective of the article is from that of a classic studio paradigm where success is measured in terms of commercial theatrical box office. That paradigm is indeed dead for truly independent cinema, or at least, completely irrelevant, and has been for quite some time - with the occasional media-inflated exception that then somehow becomes the expectation. That studio paradigm not only offers a very narrow conception of an independent film's financial viability, but in fact, negates the true financial health of independent film as a whole. Many truly independent filmmakers have turned completely away from the commercial theatrical paradigm because of the expense of it versus that path's potential return. Financial return flows to independent filmmakers in a multitude of other ways - festival screening fees, private theatrical screenings, retail DVD sales, foreign sales, digital downloads (although this is a nascent technology that offers very little financial return at the moment) and, most dynamically, DVD sales via the internet.

Also, to continue mentioning Sony Classics or Warner Independent - the boutique arms of major studios - as "independent' is maddeningly erroneous. Without arguing for the definition of independent - which is a great on-going argument in its own right - films produced and/or distributed through major studios are clearly not independent films. Even if the films were produced independently, when they are subsequently released by one of these boutique arms, they are then swept up into the studio marketing/distribution paradigm. And again, that is a paradigm based far too narrowly on theatrical box-office performance.

But worst of all, the ridiculous conclusion that the poor theatrical box office of independent film spells a crisis born of over-production is not just specious, it is absolutely bone-headed. It's analogous to saying that the health of the art world should be measured strictly in dollars and cents, that those dollars should only be measured in terms of gallery sales and, finally, if those sales are weak, it must be because there are too many people painting pictures. I hope that sounds as ridiculous to you as the article I read was to me.

The 5,000 films made per year, to which Mr. Gill refers, do not compete for the commercial theatrical audience's attention, only the six hundred or so that actually get a commercial theatrical release. And that alone does little to measure an independent film's success. Besides being only one small, increasingly meaningless, aspect of an independent film's total financial health, it ignores all of the non-financial goals of an independent film. Now, I know this article was written for the business section, so independent film's financial viability is a key issue, but there are other goals that eventually feed into independent film's total financial picture. A lot of these 5,000 films are made by first-time filmmakers learning their craft and/or building audiences for their work. In a way, this is independent film's R&D process. And it works quite nicely in a very organic way.

So, what is the source of the crisis facing the commercial theatrical success of so-called "independent" films? There is no simple single answer - and especially not one so ridiculously off-base as there being too many films made. These days, potential audiences have a staggering array of media choices that compete with the commercial theatrical release of any film (not just independent films). Major studios have contributed to the crisis by fueling the creation of a celebrity-obsessed, event film-hungry commercial theatrical audience. And their boutique "indie" divisions themselves have further added to the problem by bidding furiously for celebrity-driven mediocrity at festivals and then dumping those films onto an unsuspecting public packaged as visionary "independent" films.

But I suspect that the biggest problem is the studio's (and their boutique's) unwillingness or inability to adapt to a radically changed distribution/marketing landscape. Chris Anderson's "long tail" theory, may be over-hyped, but it is, nonetheless, what is most applicable to independent cinema, these days. It negates the blockbuster mentality and subscribes to the idea of providing a broad spectrum of offerings to the public - a little of many things, rather than a lot of one thing. This demands marketing to niche audiences in a highly specific way, and delivering films to them in any way that best suits that audience - rather than the studio or filmmaker. Perhaps studios and boutique "indies" simply do not have the infrastructure to distribute/market films in this way. If so, then perhaps it is indeed best to leave independent cinema to truly independent filmmakers.

From my perspective, independent cinema is alive and well, both creatively and financially. And it will remain that way as long there are truly independent filmmakers who find the means to create films and the resourcefulness to connect them to an audience.

Los Angeles Film Festival 2008

2008-06-24T08:56:00.000-07:00

Yes, dear filmmaking comrades, another major fest, The Los Angeles Film Festival, is in full swing. And, as usual, I am jumping right into the thick of the action, although I am getting a slow start this year.

The Los Angeles Film Festival, like AFI Fest is a world-class festival but I still count it among a handful of hometown fests (Los Angeles Film Festival, AFI Fest, Dances With Films, Silver Lake/Downtown Film Festival) where I get to schmooze and groove with my local filmmaking community - many of whom I only see once a year at this festival.

But it is already Day 6 of the festival and I'm just getting started. After Opening Night, I headed up to the Owens River Valley to work on an exciting art/film project with artist Lauren Bon (an amazing experience in itself that I you'll hear about in my next blog) and was not back on the festival beat until late Monday.

"Wanted" screened at the fest's Opening Night Gala to generally approving audiences (I missed the screening). Most of the peeps seemed to think that the style and energy of it managed to overcome the commercial studio silliness of it all. By commercial studio silliness I mean the compendium of usual studio filmmaking ills - shallow but self-important story-telling, predictable, exploitive and over-produced filmmaking, etc. But I'd say the general consensus was that it was still a stylishly entertaining popcorn movie.

Since moving to Westwood, the opening night party is always on the street, which I really appreciated in the midst of this brutal heat wave. The party was fun, as usual (although always more subdued than closing night) and it was great to see so many faces from my filmmaking community - some dating back 15 years. I even saw Robert Faust, who founded the fest in its original incarnation as the Los Angeles Independent Film Festival. Obviously, opening with a film like "Wanted" makes it clear why the word "independent" has been removed. Being an indie filmmaker, I was, at first, a bit upset by this change and perceived shift in focus - especially since the fest is produced by an organization called Film Independent. But I have been a part of the fest for awhile now and can clearly see the commitment to indie filmmaking is still very much alive, even if it is no longer the sole focus of the festival. It has become a much broader, more expansive festival and has been enormously successful in that evolution.

With that success, however, comes the usual, if annoying trappings of it, like the special VIP section of the party that offers no meaningful distinction from the other part of the party besides exclusivity, a sort of boring pomposity and slightly shorter food/drink lines.

But, although a parties are an important part of any festival, they are not the soul of a festival. The films are the soul of the festival. And the programmers at Los Angeles Film Festival rock! I'm looking forward to seeing an awesome line-up of films this week.

Here's what I'm planning to see for the remainder of the festival:
- Any shorts program
- Ballast
- Prince of Broadway
- Medicine For Melancholy
- Must Read After My Death
- The Boxer From Shantung
- Finishing Heaven
- I'll Come Running
- The Short Films of George and Mike Kuchar
- Milestones

And there's loads more other stuff I won't be seeing. So, if you're in Los Angeles - get there, see films and experience the true soul of the fest.

STAY AT HOME FILMMAKING - creating films outside the twin filmmaking capitals

2008-06-19T09:22:00.000-07:00

Every year, hundreds, actually thousands, of directors, producers, writers, actors and film craftspeople/technicians flock to L.A. and N.Y. to seek their fame and fortune. Most are hungry to break into the studio big-time. A few are indie filmmakers looking for a scene or community that will support their work and challenge them to take that work to the next level.

There are definite benefits to landing in the center of these two American filmmaking capitals. I'm in Los Angeles and feel I've made the most of what the city has to offer me as an independent filmmaker. But clearly, where indie filmmakers are concerned, L.A. and N.Y.are NOT the center of the universe.

Some of the most interesting indie films I've seen recently take place in geographic, cultural and social landscapes so specific and unfamiliar that they create a character of their own and another level of energy/complexity. Also, the filmmakers aren't doing work that is driven by the financial bottom line that drives studio filmmaking, nor is it informed by their need for the "status" attached to operating in the studio paradigm. Meaning, they aren't just doing derivative work that is an audition piece for a studio gig. I've mentioned two films previously - BALLAST and BLOOD ON THE HIGHWAY - that are vastly divergent in genre, style and aesthetic, but equally unique as well as geographically fresh and specific.

A major reason for filming outside of Los Angeles/New York is cost. Filmmaking is VERY expensive, of course, because it is a compilation of dozens of small costs -for crew, equipment, locations, props, food, gas, trucks, parking etc. and etc. Many of these things are FAR, FAR cheaper in smaller cities, towns and communities. And if you are born and bred in the community in which you are filming, you are bound to get so many perks and so much support that you will even further bring down the cost of the film.

And, to further support my incredibly persuasive argument, more and more states are offering generous rebates/tax incentives to lure production to their neck o' the woods. Michigan has completely lost its mind - offering a whopping 40% rebate on production dollars spent in the state. Massachusetts also has an amazing plan. Basically, a lot of cold places. But warm ones, too, like New Mexico and Louisiana. For a list of states that offer generous support plans for filmmakers (and the rules/regulations around these plans) go to: http://www.afci.org/incentives/north_america.htm.

Yes, you will find more world-class talent and crew concentrated in N.Y. and L.A. than you will probably find anywhere else in America. But as production spreads out across the country, more and more of this kind of talent and skill is cropping up in the most unexpected places. Yes, you will find more filmmaking resources in N.Y. and L.A., but again, those resources are finding their way into communities all over the country. If you've already relocated to NY or LA, you can argue that all of your connections are there/here, but sometimes the enthusiasm that smaller communities still have for filmmaking (as opposed to the rampant cynicism in the filmmaking capitals), will create connections and support of their own.

There are many good practical reasons for making films in smaller cities/towns/communities. But my main reason for making this argument is an aesthetic one. What makes a truly distinctive film? It is the compilation of striking details. It is the introduction of something new to an audience and/or otherwise extraordinary. It is the revealing of a specific history and truth. Location is a major contributor to these things. It contributes profoundly to both the film's visual energy and its thematic perspective. And add to that local talent that carries in them a sense of place and your film will have an authenticity and/or originality that can often be impossible to find in the cradles of commercial cinema.

Indie Film Financing - No Magic Bullet

2008-06-12T07:41:00.000-07:00

Last week-end, Filmmakers Alliance hosted a seminar on indie film financing given by Suzanne Lyons, who did a great job presenting some of the realities of financing a feature film that face emerging filmmakers. I've been through the fund-raising process a few different times for different projects, so much of what she presented was not new information for me. But it was great to hear it coalesced and clarified - and there were many who hadn't heard or experienced any of it at all.

Unfortunately, however, I did hear a few folks - both those who knew this stuff and those who were just learning it - grumble about the fact that they didn't hear anything that blew the lock off the closet - the closet that holds all of the mystical secrets to film financing success. Well, here's the news, gang: There is NO MAGIC BULLET for indie film financing. If you look at case study after case study, you will see that there are some recurrent, inescapable truths about raising money for films - especially first and/or small films - that define the process. And sadly, there is no secret list of hungry investors. There are no magic words. No "perfect" business plan. No mystical alchemy that guides investors to you and makes them inexplicably hand over their hard-earned profits.

So, I'm just going to list some indie film financing facts. Embrace them and figure out how you can exist within the bounds of these realities or save yourself heartache and go become great at something else. Can't say it anymore plainly than that. Here goes....

- Most first and/or small films are self-funded or funded by friends and family.

- Most films with a budget of over $1 million cannot be self-funded or funded by friends and family. In fact, most cannot even be funded by private equity. That means they must be financed by companies/institutions.

- High net-worth individuals are difficult to meet. And it's even more difficult to make a meaningful connection with them even if you do meet them - unless you have a direct connection to them or through someone close to you. It can be done, but it takes a lot of work, hustle and confidence.

- There are probably many people better than you at fundraising, but none will have your level of passion. Besides those people are as hard to find as actual investors. They exist - lawyers, agents, financial managers, etc. - but they are needles in a very prickly haystack. More often than not, you will simply meet scammers who will promise you the world while chiseling you out of the few pennies you do have to cover their "expenses".

- NO ONE (or no company/institution) - outside of those who love you unconditionally - will give you funding for a film (and allow you to direct it) without a solid script AND at least one very good film you've already made (short or feature).

- If you contact 30 potential private equity investors, whom you did not know previously, count yourself lucky if 1 expresses interest.

- If 10 private equity investors, whom you did not know previously, express interest, count yourself lucky if 1 actually invests.

- Most private equity investors, whom you did not know previously, will not read the script and rarely invest because they like the script or even because they want to make money. They invest because they like the idea and/or have faith in you as a person/filmmaker and/or are looking for a fun, exciting experience.

- Most investors are not idiots, however, and do not want to feel like they are throwing away their money. This is why you need a thorough and realistic business plan that details distribution options that will insure the film reaches the film-going/film-buying public.

- Negative pick-up deals and foreign pre-sale deals are VERY hard to do and are usually only accomplished by producers who are unbelievably tenacious or have pre-existing relationships with buyers.

- Having a "name" in your film does NOT guarantee funding from any source - private, corporate or institutional - unless you have A-list talent. And even then, it can be difficult, depending on the material. And I assume we all know how hard it is to get any kind of "name" to commit to your film without the funds to lock them in or without a personal connection to them.

- There is almost no grant funding for non-documentary features. ITVS is an exception. There may be a few others. But this landscape is, understandably, insanely competitive.

There are many more fun facts like this, but these should do nicely in getting my point across. Yes, there are execptions. But please know that they are extremely rare. I know someone who did one mediocre short and her next film was a huge success starring a major star. I know someone else who managed to get their feature funded by a Small Business Administration loan. The Coen brothers first feature film cost 1 million (many years ago when 1 mil was worth, well...1 mil) and they raised it by barnstorming across the country soliciting doctors and dentists.

So, if these examples are rare and the facts above hold true most of the time, where is the good news for filmmakers who don't have two nickels to rub together and don't have great personal contacts to money, "name" talent, foreign buyers or any other useful vehicle to funding? Simple. It is in your talent and desire. Because here is the one fact that rises above all other facts - the fact that obliterates all other ugly realities:

- Talent and hard work pay off.

Yes, if you simply develop your filmmaking skills/talents and continue to make films as well and as often as you can. If you write, write, write and/or create, create, create. If you hustle your ass off and sniff out opportunities wherever they may exist and do the prep work necessary to make use of those opportunities. If you determine to find support for your work and make that a goal on a daily basis. If you do any or all of that work, funding will find its way to you. I have seen this to be true 100% of the time.

Digital tools and communal support (such as Filmmaker Alliance, but many other groups, too) can allow you to make films for almost no money. Filmmaking is now affordable to almost anyone. No, I take that back. It is indeed affordable to ANYONE with just a modicum of initiative. Your talent and ideas are the gold for which investors and film professionals are constantly mining. Put them on display consistently and they will be found. If you do a short and no one responds. Do another. And another. And another. And if you can afford to do a feature. Do it. And if no one responds, do another. And another. And another.

And if you have the chutzpah, then do the business stuff, too. Find ways to meet investors. Build a meaningful business plan. Meet lawyers, managers and agents and see what they can do for you. Go to film fests and markets and learn how the biz works on that end. Take a page from Joel and Ethan and barnstorm across the country soliciting doctors and dentists.

No matter which of these roads you choose, if you commit yourself to it fully and you take the time to learn the craft of it (yes, filmmaking AND fundraising are both crafts) you will find the money. Or someone will find it for you. Either way, you will have the money you need to make films. And you will have the filmmaking life you want.

There is no magic bullet for unlocking the secret formula for film financing. But there is something better because it is something you already have. Stop looking for the Holy Grail and grab the brass ring that's already in your pocket.

Tension - The Piano Wire of Filmmaking

2008-06-10T08:00:00.000-07:00

I've been tense, lately. I have too much going on in and outside of my head. And this morning, I was reflecting on my state of being and found myself reflecting even deeper on the nature of tension itself. How do we cultivate it inside of us? Why do we create it in the first place and allow ourselves to exist in it so often? Why do we actually seek it out so often, even in our "leisure" activities?

And we do indeed seek it out. Every time we decide to watch a film, in fact. Because while a certain kind of stress and tension may totally suck in our personal lives, - destroying health, wealth, relationships and more - it is absolutely essential to good filmmaking.

What is it that creates the beautiful sound of a piano or a guitar? Tension. Strings pulled very tight (like the back of my neck right now) and then manipulated to create audible vibratory resonance. It's no different with a film, but instead of strings, the properties of cinema are used to create and maintain tension - visual composition, sound, music, performance, editing, etc. Now, these elements can just as easily be used to dissipate tension, but that is the difference between a good film and one that is...well,...not so good.

The dictionary definition of tension is as follows: "The act of being stretched or tightened. Physical, mental or emotional stress or strain..." This definition is applicable to any kind of filmmaking, be it art or entertainment - although I would offer that art is more about being stretched and entertainment is more about being tightened. But all filmmaking creates a kind of stress/strain that radiates energy out to the audience, much as piano wire, struck by keys, radiates sounds.

It has been said that all art aspires to the condition of music. And I think it is the musicality of manipulated tension (and its visceral impact) to which they are referring and why music is such a good analogy for filmmaking. Tension is at play in string instruments, wind instruments and, of course, vocal chords. It is the skillful manipulation of the created tension that gives sounds their musicality. It is the creation and skillful manipulation of tension that gives filmmaking its own musicality.

And this tension is not simply created in the scripted incident that I believe should be called nothing other than PLOT but what many insist on calling STORY. For me STORY is narrative construction, which can often have almost nothing to do with plot and can yield an endless treasure of tension.

Back to the music analogy, of course not all music sounds the same to all listeners. And no film will strike all audience members in exactly the same way. People who prefer hard rock over experimental jazz will find their analog in film. This is why most reviewers and other opinionated jerk-offs drive me crazy. They look at films as a single, homogenous product that has a "right" and "wrong" way of being a film - and rail against films that have no "story" (they mean plot). But there are as many kinds of films - with their own special properties - as there are kinds of music. The unifying and defining element in all films, in terms of quality, should be nothing other than a film's musicality - it's ability to create and manage tension.

Of course, the "music" of a Stan Brakhage may be lost on a Tarkovsky devotee, just as Tarkovsky's "music" may be lost on someone who's tastes gravitate to Merchant and Ivory...or David Fincher...or Brett Ratner, for that matter. Tension manifests itself in different people for a variety of different reasons - for some, financial issues push their buttons, for others it's romantic issues, for still others it may be threatened violence and for some, practically ANYTHING creates tension. Filmmakers should stop putting pressure on themselves to create/manage tension that can speak to all types of audiences. They simply need to understand the type of film they are choosing to make and milk tension from that experience for all it's worth.

Of course, none of this answers why we are so obsessed with tension. Perhaps its because mystery is tension and our lives - our existence and eventual obsolescence - is a complete mystery that we are constantly attempting to solve - or at least understand...or, perhaps, simply from which to be distracted.

I could use a little distraction about now - artistic/entertainment tension to distract from life tension that I create to avoid existential tension. Sheesh. But what would I be without tension? At peace, maybe. But probably just depressed.

Free Independent Film Financing Seminar (in Los Angeles)

2008-05-29T14:02:00.000-07:00

Independent Film Financing 101
Sunday, June 8th at 5:45 p.m.
at Filmmakers Alliance
1030 W. Hillcrest Blvd.
Inglewood, CA 90301

Independent Producer Suzanne Lyons will present perhaps the most valuable single seminar for emerging filmmakers looking to raise financing for their feature films. She will paint a comprehensive, REALISTIC picture of the independent film financing landscape, answering such important questions as:

- What are the typical sources of film financing for emerging filmmakers?
- How do filmmakers find private equity investors and what is the best way to approach them?
- What is the importance of a business plan and what should it include?
- How do filmmakers set up a proper and legal entity for soliciting and receiving film investments?
- Are there people or producers (because they are rarely the same thing) or maybe even agents and lawyers that will raise money for an emerging filmmaker? How do you find them? What kind of deal do you make with them?
- Is it possible for emerging filmmakers to get funding from established production companies or sales agents?

If you are planning a feature and can't (or don't want to) pay for it with your life savings or credit cards and don't have big studios lining up to finance your film, then you MUST attend this seminar.

Suzanne Lyons co-founded Snowfall Films, Inc. and WindChill Films, Inc, and in just seven years has produced or executive produced eight movies. Suzanne has worked with wonderful talent over the years, including Brenda Blethyn, Christopher Walken, Naomi Watts, Alfred Molina, James Caan, Dean Cain, Jennifer Tilly, Jon Lovitz, Asia Argento, Winona Ryder, Peter Fonda, Adrian Paul and more. Her budgets have ranged from the SAG ultra low $200,000 to $7.5 million. Her films have won a gamut of awards and festivals from the prestigious British BAFTA award, a premier at the Directors Fortnight at the Cannes Film Festival, best picture at Shockerfest and acceptance into the Toronto, Berlin and Montreal Film Festivals. Her films have been distributed by Miramax, Screengems and Lionsgate.

What’s next on her slate for WindChill Films is a project called MOST LIKELY TO… and for Snowfall Films Suzanne will be producing her suspense thriller A.K.A. scheduled to shoot in Germany this fall, a Mark Smith thriller HARDCOURT and an animated Christmas special OMARR THE CAMEL.

Suzanne is also co-founder of the Flash Forward Institute and has led hundreds of industry seminars in both the US and Canada to well over 15,000 participants. She is currently leading a workshop on Low Budget Filmmaking and the next workshop is scheduled for this fall on the weekend of October 18th.

To contact Suzanne regarding information on the fall Workshop please call the Snowfall Films’ office: 818-558-5917

Acting Coaches and Classes

2008-05-20T09:23:00.000-07:00

I ain't no damn actor, that's for sure. I don't even like actors, for the most part. Although I admit to finding them consistently entertaining, their all-consuming self-absorption eventually becomes maddening and wearisome even with the most well-adjusted of them.

On a creative level, however, I am constantly in awe of them - amazed by what they do and how they do it. And deeply appreciative of what they bring to a film. So, when I cross paths with a truly talented actor, I treat them like the creative treasures that they are (just as I would a brilliant writer, d.p., editor, etc.). And when I meet actors with all the right raw materials, I am eager to hook them up with acting coaches and/or classes that will help refine their gifts and bring out the best of their raw talent.

I know there are many people who don't believe in acting classes and some who feel, in fact, that they interfere with their own organic process. If those people are brilliant, I agree with them. If not, they are morons. I personally believe, since great acting roles are few and far between for most actors, almost any opportunity for an actor to explore their art/craft is a good one. However, I do agree that there are some acting schools that can do far more damage than good to both an actor's art and their personal mental/emotional health.

But even among acting school proponents, there are many divergent schools of thought around acting - each with their own solar system of acting schools. Of course I have my own specific ideas about acting and they articulated and taught beautifully by two of my favorite acting coaches/classes -given by Shawn Nelson and Deb Lemen.

SHAWN NELSON

DEB LEMEN

One of the things I love most about these two is not just what they do for actors, but also what they can do for filmmakers. Both of them work with filmmakers and help them understand what constitutes great acting and how to best bring it out of their actors. They also help filmmakers understand the actor's various processes and dilemmas so that they can COMMUNICATE effectively. Yes, communication is key in working with all of the members of your creative team. But communicating with actors takes a special kind of understanding, insight and skill because what and how you communicate with them can dramatically impact their performance. And although you can mostly hide it when any other crew member isn't bringing their "A" game, it's very tough to hide with actors.

Yes, I took their classes. And yes, I confirmed for myself why I am not an actor and why I would never want to be an actor. It also further put me in awe of what actors are capable of doing and and helped to build a bridge of understanding as to why they are such freaks on a personal level. I am constantly astonished by the seemingly endless emotional well from which actors are able to draw their performances. And in the hands of strong coaches/classes such as Shawn and Deb, they can bring deeply nuanced new levels of complexity, impact and intelligence to even the most minor of roles.

Spring Cleaning at FA...and beyond...

2008-05-08T08:58:00.001-07:00

A couple of weeks ago, we did some Spring Cleaning here at FA. And it feels really good. Stuff we've dragged around for years got moved out - sold, given away, donated to charity or simply thrown out. The psychic/spiritual lifting of burdensome, and even oppressive, energy has naturally lead to embracing this Spring Cleaning as an appropriate metaphor for so much else that needs to happen in my life and mind.

It's amazing what we've been able to dig out of the nooks and crannies of our office. Equally amazing that it ever made it to this office at all given the number of times we've moved. But of course, so much of the stuff has ties to memories that have lead me to the nooks and crannies of my own mind. And in there is definitely a lot of junk there - along with some threads of gold that need to be spun into something creatively fulfilling.

However, it is not as easy to remove the junk from your brain as it is the junk in our office. Once it's is gone from the office, it is gone, never to be seen again. But mental/emotional baggage just goes underground and pops up at the most annoying times and informs your life in, sometimes, the most inconvenient ways.

FA JUNK

JACQUES' BRAIN

Nonetheless, buried thoughts and obsessions are some of the best things to mine for story ideas and character detail. The things that lodge in your brain and refuse to leave can torture you personally, but enrich you creatively. And perhaps, that creative process may purge you of this otherwise useless psychological garbage dump. At the very least, it may allow us to shed light on these obsessive thoughts, habits and perceptions and maybe shift the balance of power around them. Meaning, rather than guiding our actions, they are servicing our creativity.

Or not. I've seen some creative types who simply spin deeper into their obsessions when they externalize them creatively. Their filmmaking then becomes fetishistic - which can be really compelling to a point. But real art is not fetishism. Real art, to my mind, has a level of observation, clarity and (for lack of a better word) truth that makes fetishistic creativity seem like passing fancy.

Either way, better to dig into the nooks and crannies of your brain and make use of what's there even if you insist on keeping it and/or fetishizing it. How do we do this? Through simple observation and awareness - which is not so simple for some people. They are plagued with so much self-loathing and self-judgement that they cannot even begin to look at themselves lest they generate all kinds of hateful opinions about what they see. Don't get me wrong, creatives are often as self-loathing as they come, but rather than simply sit with that energy, we are driven to explore it and, often, integrate it into our work - as well as the things that we believe generate that self-loathing.

I, for one, find I have so many odd neuroses and strange thoughts that I most certainly would have been straight-jacketed years ago if I hadn't found a way to make those things a compelling element of my dinner conversations....and, of course, my filmmaking.

In the end, Spring Cleaning literally and metaphorically is less about purging all your junk than it is about simply throwing open all the closets, cabinets, hidden drawers and trap doors and taking stock of what's there. If you occasionally do that with your mind, you will find, like we did at the FA Office, there is much of value hidden away there. The things that once weighed you down psychologically, can lift you up creatively.

The Courage and Ego To Be Bad

2008-05-06T09:58:00.000-07:00

On Monday, FA is hosting another screening at the Echo Park Film Center. We love the people, purpose and programs of the Center and do 4 to 5 screenings a year there. Often, we show select FA films and other inspired and inspiring works from LA-area filmmakers.

But this Monday, we are offering up a different kind of inspiration. We are calling it "FA's First and Worst". It is a selection of films made during FA's first few years in existence. And believe me, much of this work is excruciatingly bad.

So, what is to be gained by exposing an audience to such abysmal cinema besides self-mocking hilarity? Perhaps nothing. Self-mocking hilarity is pretty fun all by itself. But what I also hope the screening will do is inspire other filmmakers.

Inspire? Where is the inspiration in films that are poorly shot, poorly acted, poorly written, poorly sound-recorded and in all other ways a poor excuse for filmmaking? Well, first of all, they were made when so many potential films simply are not. Of course, there is a strong argument to be made that this is not a good thing. But I argue that any film made is a good thing. Every filmmaker needs to start somewhere. Every filmmaker needs to explore their craft and artistry. And, as I've said elsewhere, in that exploration, they need to be willing to fail. And to actually fail. Often. There is no reward without risk. And there is no risk without failure (unless you are absurdly lucky). Failure, for lack of a better word, is a necessary part of the evolutionary process. The problem isn't in the making of bad films. It is in the showing of them. Which is why we don't often show these films and why we are making no bones about the "quality" of this screening.

The other reason we are showing the films is as a measuring stick of, not just FA's, but each filmmaker's individual growth. A few of us have become fairly accomplished filmmakers - but you might not guess it possible from the work we'll have on display. But how do some filmmakers evolve (while others do not)? How do they find their creative voice and develop the filmmaking skill to make that voice sing?

By having the courage to be bad...and/or the ego. Yes, I say courage. Because it demands exactly that to face the blank page or a surly film crew armed with an idea that is rarely flawless. But where courage fails, ego steps in. Dreams of glory or an over-inflated self-importance can also push us forward, allowing us to take the necessary risks in our own creative evolution. To risk failure.

But that is only half of the equation. The other half is being able to eventually look at the filmic creation you've realized with the cold, objectivity of an IRS accountant (minus the self-loathing bitterness, perhaps, although that is often hard to escape). And from that, learn and grow. This may take some time as the fearless ego that may have helped push you forward, now becomes an emotionally fragile, but psychologically combative resistance fighter - protecting the fantasy you have of your work from the reality of it. Using the ego to push you forward sometimes feels like borrowing money from the mob. It gets you through your immediate difficulty, then presents inextricable difficulties of its own down the road.

But ego is a reality in our process. Let's face it, ALL creative beings have a monstrous ego of some sort. Yes, there can be raw, artistic courage in us, but there is usually a healthy dose of ego, as well. Therefore, managing that ego is key to creative growth. Luckily, you can use one kind of ego against another. Meaning the kind of ego that fuels creative ambition will eventually steamroll over the fragile ego that wants everyone to like your work and , therefore, holds you a prisoner from your creative development.

But the desire to do great work can also be a "calling" that is much more than ego and even something more than courage. I won't even try to explain it other than to say I believe it is what separates truly visionary filmmakers from merely competent ones. But even filmmakers who have been "called" to do great work must go through the evolutionary process. Have you seen any of Scorcese's or Coppola's very first student shorts? Or stuff they did with friends even before that? At some point, the simple desire to make any kind of film and the ego that begged for people to like it was supplanted by something stronger - part ego, part calling - that drove them toward the type of work that distinguishes them as truly great filmmakers.

Now, of course, there are filmmakers who never challenge their own work and continue to make bad films. Luckily, If they are bad enough, they have genius of their own. And there are filmmakers who simply do not have the raw materials and/or artistic perspective to be great filmmakers, and all of their creative ambition will never make them more than competent filmmakers. But is that so bad? All of us will eventually reach the peak of our own potential if we keep making films and, in the process, risk failure, risk making bad films.

But filmmakers don't need to show these films to anyone other than those who will love them unconditionally.

But we do. And we will wear our incompetence like a badge of courage...and hopefully filmmakers will take inspiration from it....and much hilarity.

What is a Filmmakers Alliance Film?

2008-04-29T09:38:00.000-07:00

People often ask what constitutes a Filmmakers Alliance (FA) film. The short answer is any film that is made by an FA member is an FA film. But clearly, people have seen a preference at work when we make selections for events like VisionFest or a public screening at Echo Park Film Center. So, to clarify our preferences and priorities, here's the 5 key elements the film must demonstrate for it to be considered an ideal FA film:

1. FA Film Status
Literally, the film must have been made by an FA member while they were members of Filmmakers Alliance.

2. A Personal POV and/or an Original Voice
Is this a film that could have only been made by this filmmaker? Does this film reflect an aesthetic approach, ideas and/or a view of the world that are unique to this filmmaker? Does this film explore an issue or comment on the world or an aspect of life as the filmmaker sees it and experiences it?

Original voice is the sum of many unique literary, visual, aesthetic choices or interpretations the filmmaker utilizes to express their PERSONAL POV. Original voice can also be the bold interpretation or reinterpretation of what has come before. Does the filmmaker have a unique way of expressing her/his ideas through an innovative use of genre or tone? Does the film have a unique visual style, sound design, etc. that effectively underscore and communicate the thematic elements?

3. Respect for the Craft of Filmmaking
Does this film demonstrate a level of accomplishment in the craft of filmmaking and some level of mastery of film language in the areas of production design, lighting, camera, continuity, sound design, acting, pacing, editing, signifiers, metaphor, dialogue, tonal consistency, etc.?

4. Appreciation for the Art of Filmmaking
Does the film work on many levels – visual, aural, spiritual, intellectual and/or as entertainment? Does the filmmaker appear to have an awareness and understanding of what has come before as far as the history and language of cinema?

5. Respect for the Collaborative Energy of Filmmaking
Was the pre-production, production, and post-production process positive and inclusive? Does the filmmaker graciously acknowledge and honor the contributions of others?

Now, I recognize that all of this sounds like we are only interested in SERIOUS ART. Yes, we are indeed very much interested in creatively ambitious cinema, but even broad comedies and genre films can be made according to these guidelines. In fact they SHOULD be made according to these guidelines if you want to do something singular and therefore memorable. If you are going to lay your heart, soul and ego on the line (not to mention your bank account) to make films, why not aspire to to the highest level of your own creative potential. A failed "Annie Hall" will always be 10 times more interesting and compelling than a thousand successful "American Pie"s. And, there may be a thousand of them before the studios are done. It's FA's goal to provide some small counterbalance to that sad fact....

OUR FILMMAKER'S AND WRITER'S RETREAT

2008-04-25T09:56:00.000-07:00

My former wife, Diane Gaidry, conceived of the project "Red, White and Blue" - an homage to Krystof Kieslowski's decalogue that put together 10 FA filmmakers who each would create a tangentially-connected short elliptically addressing one of the American Bill of Rights. Brilliant, timely idea for which, sadly, we still have yet to find the financing. I am one of the filmmakers, and in developing the project, Diane conceived of a creative retreat, where the participating filmmakers would work on their individual projects, share ideas, watch/discuss films and bond socially in a quiet, but intensely focused setting. We did a few of them and they were all terrifically productive and inspiring. Fun, too.

So, even though "Red White and Blue" has stalled, there are still plenty of other projects that we all have in various stages of development/completion. So, we decided to continue the retreats. But they would be built along the idea that each of us woudl be doing our "own thing" without any connection to the others - our own projects in our own way. But all else would be the same - a beautiful, serene, fairly remote location. A big house that would fit us all. Community meals and a strict creative schedule - but with some time for play. Of course, all of the participating filmmakers would chip in for the cost of it - roughly $220 per person for a three-night retreat with everything (lodging, food, booze, firewood, toilet paper, etc.) included.

OUR LOVELY CABIN WITH A TABLE BIG ENOUGH TO FIT ALL OF OUR EGOS AND DRAMAS

So, we did one just this past week-end. And I can't help but take the time to talk about what a great experience it is and sort of break down why this sort of thing is so nourishing for certain kinds of filmmakers - or any creative beings. I say certain kinds because there are many creative-types who do not thrive in a group environment. They rail against it. The do not need nor want community involvement in the creative process and feel such energy is a threat to their own methodology. I can understand that. The creative process should invite risks and failures. It can also dig deep into highly vulnerable personal spaces. It can excite the sensitivity of our egos in ways we never expected. It's easy to see how laying this all out - sometimes prematurely - in a group dynamic can be very unpleasant.

But personally, I thrive on it. Even in the very earliest stages of a project. Part of it is bravery (my own little self-congratulatory opinion) and part of it is insecurity. I am indeed fearless about laying it all out there and letting people see the blemishes and turds that are part of the creative process. But that fearlessness comes in part, from a sense that I don't have what it takes to do it alone. And when I say I don't have it, I don't mean talent and ideas - although I'm happy to suck those out of anyone who'll let me. I'm talking about objectivity. Sometimes, I get so bonded with my own creations or I am so obsessed with a particular image or thematic that it's almost impossible for me to let it go...to see that it is simply not working.

CAIN DEVORE LETS SEAN HOOD KNOW PRECISELY WHY HE THINKS HIS SCRIPT IS BETTER THAN SEAN'S

I also like how communal reactions and ideas stimulate my own. I've been given some ideas that are admittedly horrible ideas (even by the person giving them) that have spurred all kinds of great new things for me. I have had the entire room tell me how bad an idea is in a way that confirmed for me just the opposite - how good the idea is. Because they are reacting exactly how I need them to react so that I know that the film is on the right path of the journey I am taking them on.

And, finally, it is always inspiring and stimulating to learn from others' work and from my own reactions to it. Reading and reacting to other work always challenges or clarifies things for me in my own work or in regard to general filmmaking aesthetics. Why did you make this or that choice with the character? How are you choosing to explicate this or that theme? Why was I not compelled by this script 30 pages into it, yet when I finished it, felt completely satisfied - even deeply moved? Asking these kind of questions of myself and the filmmaker almost always leads me to a greater understanding of what makes a film work.

So, here's how it went - just in case you want to create your own. Pretty simple:

- Gather up eight to twelve talented, articulate, creatively ambitious filmmakers who have the time and money to do this, but who also have a project they are actively working on and, on which, they need support. This is the toughest part by far, obviously, for most of you. But thankfully, not for us in our little FA family.

- A week-end usually works best, depending on people's lives and jobs, but it typically needs to be two full days and two half days. Meaning, participants come in Friday afternoon and leave Monday morning. If necessary for their jobs, people can come in late Friday and leave late Sunday night. Can feel a bit rushed, but it works.

- Find a place in a beautiful, serene setting that is big enough to house all of you comfortably. We went to Big Bear this time, but in the past, had also gone to the Central Coast Wine Country and other places. We found the cabins and made the reservations online. Remember, unless you all have big bucks, you may need to share rooms. Ours had 5 bedrooms with twin and bunk beds. Worked out nice. You also need a good-sized living room to meet and discuss.

- We invited people to submit whatever they were working on which could include short and feature-length scripts, partial feature length scripts, treatments, proposals and film rough cuts. It really can be anything that needs work and can benefit from a communal feedback process.

- All of the projects need to be reviewed by all of the participants prior to the retreat. That means participants need to submit copies of their projects to all of the other participants no later than one week prior to the retreat. They must be ready to give their feedback on each project in a clear, constructive way.

- Someone will have to pay for the cabin pretty far in advance to secure it, but make sure you collect from the participants at least 2 weeks in advance and let them know there are no refunds otherwise whoever paid initially will be stuck with the extra cost. Also, if they want to replace themselves, they have to do it with your approval. The dynamic of the participants is crucial.

- Not all of the participants will pay the same. You can create a bit of resentment that way since some of the rooms will be shared, some won't. For unshared rooms and/or master bedrooms, you will charge a bit more per person. I let people pick their rooms on a first-come/first-serve basis. But nothing is 100% confirmed until they pay for it.

- Also, bundled into the single price of the week-end are all food, booze and supply costs as well as cleaning fees or any other charges. Refundable deposits should be handled by you alone and will come back to you alone. All costs in addition to the lodgings cost came to about $35-$40 per person for the whole retreat (that's for us at Big Bear outside of L.A. and shopping mostly at Trader Joe's). So again, total costs were about $220 a person - some more, some slightly less.

- Find people who will volunteer to cook. If you want good food, people have to be passionate about making it. Luckily, I like to cook, but I was with several others who also like to cook and cook well, so I wasn't the only one doing it. In fact, I did very little of the cooking, actually.

- Get food preferences/restrictions. Then, along with those who've agreed to cook, develop a menu for the week-end based on two big meals (breakfast and dinner) and a light lunch. You also need plenty of snack materials and some dessert. Don't forget the beverages - alcoholic and non-alcoholic. And LOTS of water. Also, condiments and seasonings, toilet paper, firewood (if there's a fireplace), etc., etc.

- Shop in the morning before the retreat, if possible. A day before, if not.

- Simple house rule: Those who don't cook, clean. And all clean together on the last day before loading out.

- Develop an agenda for the week-end. And stick to it as much as humanly possible. What worked for us was the following:

Friday Night
Prior to 6:00 p.m. - Settling in/Writing/Cooking
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. - Dinner and clean-up
8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. - Each filmmaker introduces their project and gives some background/insight into it. They also discuss their goals for the retreat and why they chose to participate.
10:00 to bedtime - Hang out, writing, party, whatever...

Saturday and Sunday
Wake-up until 10:00 a.m. - Private time/Writing/Breakfast
10:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. - Feedback meetings for 1/4 of the projects
1:00 p.m. until 2:00 p.m. - Break-time/Lunch
2:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. - Feedback meetings for 1/4 of the projects
5:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. - Rest/Writing/Cooking
8:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m. - Dinner and clean-up
10:00 p.m. until bedtime - Writing, movie watching, chatting, games, night hike, hot-tubbing, partying, whatever....

Monday
Wake-up until 9:00 a.m. - Private time/Writing/Breakfast
9:00 a.m. until 11:00 a.m. - Group clean-up and check-out

DRUNKEN POST WRITING AGENDA SCRAWLED OUT AT 4 A.M. (names were distorted to protect the guilty)

- Always remember the rules of good feedback: Be clear and specific. Be positive before negative. Be constructive and not merely judgmental. Offer solutions and not merely point out problems. Be respectful and sensitive to the goals of the filmmaker. Be brutally honest (again, but respectfully so). Do not interrupt other people's feedback. And, if you do, (because it happens when people are speaking passionately and ideas are flowing) make sure apologize/acknowledge and return to them when you are finished.

- Take copious notes. And/OR use an audio recorder. One of our participants had one built into his computer and created audio files for each project's feedback and then those files were given to the filmmaker. It was great.

And that, pretty much is that. Sounds simple, but it is amazing what goes on in those feedback sessions and in the subsequent discussions it creates throughout the retreat. And, with the right people of course, it is fun as hell....worth exponentially more than the price of admission. And the inspiration and ideas that emerged, at least for this filmmaker were (and are)...priceless.

NAB 2008

2008-04-24T16:39:00.000-07:00

So, Amanda and I trotted off the the annual geek-gathering in Vegas called the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) Show, which has become (or always was) a media technology convention showing off the latest in media creation and delivery technology.

Some pretty cool stuff that is out there now or about to come down the runway. But why were these independent filmmakers there? Well, for a few reasons. Mostly, because Filmmakers Alliance has a handful of key, meaningful sponsors and they are all there at NAB. So, we need to check in with them. We are also launching our Global Initiative (turning FA into a global org via the web instead of the strictly L.A.-based org that it is now) and need the support of even more sponsors.

Secondly, most filmmakers are also geeks or have a geek inside them that wants to see all the cool stuff out there - and learn a little bit about how to use it. It's also useful to know, as an artist, what kind of colors I can add to my palette and what kind of brushes/new brushstrokes can I add to my work. And, also, what are the new ways I can bring my work to audiences. Truly, this stuff is very meaningful on a creative level....if a bit dry and boring sometimes.

AMANDA LOOKING THOROUGHLY OVERWHELMED ON THE EXHIBITS FLOOR (lots of men and too many "fart pockets")

Lastly, there is a filmmaking community tucked in with all the anxious businessmen and zealous geekosaureses. They flock here for the reasons mentioned above and we love connecting with them. A number of our FA cronies also show up, so it feels like a nice party and another opportunity to extend our filmmaking community.

Oh, and lets not forget it's in Vegas. Which, of course, pushes my buttons in terms of my love-hate with Vegas. Hate because I just think so much of it, and so much of who goes there, is flat-out disgusting. Some of the worse, most fucked-up human impulses find unbridled expression in Vegas. And the Vegas big-shots know it and thrive on it. "Sin City", "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas", etc. But despite that, I love it because I almost always have a blast. Granted, I know the tricks to keeping it fun. No more than twice a year (if that). No more than a couple of days at a time. Never gamble more than I can afford to lose. Never go to Vegas clubs (unless it is privately rented specifically for an event I have been invited to). Always mingle in non-Casino stuff like shows, bowling, hikes, dinners, etc.

CineVegas is an exception to these rules and is such a great festival because it has organized all of the Las Vegas vices into controlled activity built around a film festival. It's all of the fun without the sleaze and guilt. Well, maybe some sleaze. But just enough so that it easily washes off. And lots of good films. I highly recommend it.

Anyway, back to NAB. Two highlights: meeting up with one of our main sponsors - CANON USA and hanging out in the RED camera show booth.

We checked in with our CANON USA family. Tim Smith is now our main connect there (it had been the wonderful Mike Zorich for years). But there is also Greg Salmon and Cindy Baer (who is married to the brilliant D.P. Matthew Iriving - whom she often drags to the show) and many, many more. And we love Tim Smith. For what is essentially a corporate sales guy, he seems nothing like a corporate sales guy. He really understands filmmaking and filmmakers - understands and cares about them. Sometimes, listening to him talk, I feel like urging him to toss in the suit and tie and jump behind that camera. But I'm selfishly happy he's where he is because his and CANON's support for us means a lot.

Anyway, they've donated some HDV cameras to us for our members and to rent out cheaply to others, but are always checking to see if our needs are being met. They seem to be always looking to improve and address the demands of filmmakers. So, Tim arranged a meeting between us and CANON's Japanese engineers. They peppered us with creative and technical questions to get some idea of what filmmakers need and want. Apparently, they've had many meetings like this and seem to be really listening. We'll see what it births. It was fun, though, to get a small window into Japanese corporate culture and the strange, but endearing formality of it all. Well, it's endearing when you are only brushing up against it. Curious how Tim feels about it, being exposed to it on a regular basis.

CANON'S TIM SMITH, FILMMAKER DAWN WESTLAKE AND...SOME OTHER DUDE

Next, we spent time in the RED camera show booth. It was crowded and definitely attracted the more "hip" geekosaureses. Our friend Michael Cioni and his Plaster City Post crew were there en masse. Michael has quickly become a RED camera authority and has worked out some elegant post work-flow solutions for the camera. So, he was hosting demonstrations and answering questions on behalf of RED. We stopped in to say "hi" and he gave us a private tour. And I gotta say, any camera manufacturer searching for a way to address filmmaker's needs just has to look no further than this camera and tell themselves - I have to do this or better. We've used the camera on a few projects so far, and it is just awesome - for any price, let alone the relatively cheap one that it is now. And what they've got coming is only better, including a 5k camera, a small 3k camera and, essentially, a 2k drive/deck for tapeless projection for under $1000 dollars. Good stuff.

THE RED CAMERA EXHIBIT BOOTH

But while hanging out there, a guy came up and chatted with us very casually. I asked him if he was a "RED guy" and he kinda laughed and we continued talking about FA and the implementation of the RED camera in various kinds of projects. I asked who does marketing, as they would be good sponsors for us. He laughed again. Finally, I asked for his card. Turned out he was Jim Jannard, the founder of the RED camera and former founder-CEO of the Oakley eyewear and apparel company. I was immediately struck by his manner. He was easily the most down-to-earth and easy-going billionaire I ever chatted with. And I'm not just saying that because he is the only billionaire I ever chatted with. He also flirted a bit with Amanda, who had the good sense to ignore her hastily made and arbitrary rule of never flirting with billionaires. Amanda is a good gauge of character. If they respond to Amanda, they're usually good peeps. Most impressively, he seemed to really care about his camera and its impact on filmmakers. I should send him a follow-up email. Ya think?

JIM JANNARD'S BIZ CARD - A HEFTY, THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORK OF ART

Oh, two more highlights to add, actually. Winning $50 at craps playing on a table I had all to myself and bowling a 160 average when I was drunk off of my ass. Ah, the filmmaker's life....

AFI Dallas 2008

2008-04-22T16:55:00.000-07:00

One of the perks of being around so long is that you attain a certain level of status by attrition (the survivor, the fixture, the dude that just won't give up and go away) and therefore you get invited to a lot of events as a juror, panelist, correspondent, industry expert, etc. And you eat it up for all the free booze, movies and meals it is worth.

You also get to meet a lot of people. And two of the lovelier people I have met over the years are Filmmaker-Producer-Festival Head Michael Cain and his beautiful wife Melina. Michael was tabbed as the CEO/Artistic Director of the new AFI Dallas when it launched two years ago after doing the Deep Ellum Film Festival for many years. And Melina provides the perfect compliment/partner - both in spirit and in roll-up-yer-sleeves work.

Anyway, they graciously invited me to the fest this year as a short film juror (along with filmmaker Harry Kellerman). Of course, I immediately agreed. Especially since I'd never been to Dallas. My only regret is that the trip would conflict with my annual sojourn to Ashland, Oregon for the Ashland Independent Film Festival. It is, itself, a great festival and I am honored to be a part of its family. But I had other objectives to address in the trip to Dallas, including drumming up financial support for FA's Global Initiative (and 5 Minute Film School).

My expectations were high because I've been part of the AFI Fest in Los Angeles and I'm very impressed with the quality of that festival. Also, with Michael and Melina involved, I knew, at the very least, it would be an enjoyable experience. The actual experience, however, exceeded my expectations.

From the quality of programming by Sarah Harris and James Faust to the quality of the actual screening presentations to the quality of lodgings at the W Dallas to the gracious Lexus-driving chauffers to the tightly planned/run events to the the army of committed, supportive volunteers, every aspect of the festival was top-notch as well as warm and supportive. Of course, that all comes from the top down, and as I said, Michael and Melina are great peeps. The peeps who oversee all the AFI film fests as well as directly manage AFI Los Angeles - Christian Gaines, Shaz Bennett and Rose Kuo - all rock, as well.

AFI DALLAS PROGRAMMER JAMES FAUST

Didn't get to see much of Dallas, beyond the official festival venues, but I did meet a few local filmmakers, Blair Rowan, Chris Gardner, Barak Epstein (makers of "Blood on the Highway"), their female lead Robin Gierhart and another local filmmaker Adam Donaghey. I pretty much hung with Blair, Chris and Adam throughout the fest and they were a drunken hoot - smart, fun and funny, but still responsible. Meaning, they were able to show up for work each morning after repeated nights of festival debauchery. They also had me laughing my ass off even when we weren't drinking. Bonding with these talented locals was definitely the highlight of the fest for me.

Blair Rowan, Me, Robin Gierhart and Chris Gardner
at "Blood On The Highway" after-party

So, of course, I had to see their film and I wasn't disappointed. It was all the hilarious mayhem that I'd hoped for - with raunchy dialogue so over-the-top as to be virtuosic. Hopefully, it will make it to AFI in Los Angeles and we can celebrate it with a raucous party. Check out the trailer for the movie HERE.

Finally, another of the best things about the fest was getting to watch 48 short films and discussing them with fellow juror Harry Kellerman. He's a smart, talented guy and a lot of fun so we were able to engage in some really thoughtful and inspiring conversations about the films....and not without a lot of humor. The programming was great, so the films almost always had some compelling elements to feed our discussions. In the end, the two that grabbed us the most both had, by sheer coincidence, a Dallas connection. Local filmmaker David Lowery's film "A Catalog of Anticipations" was an affecting, breathtaking fable to which we gave a Special Jury Prize. And we gave the Best Short Award to NY filmmaker, but Dallas native John Magary's "The Second Line" - a thoughtful, nuanced slice of post-Katrina that was a smart microcosm and metaphor for the kind of cultural and economic alienation that plagues too much of our otherwise robust country. It was truly a pleasure to meet, hang and discuss films with Harry and it all turned out to be among the best juror experiences I've ever had.

DALLAS IN MINIATURE AT THE TARGET FILMMAKER LOUNGE

I was impressed with the sophistication of the parts of Dallas I got to see. Saw a bit of old Seattle in the creative energy brewing there. Definitely great stuff going on so I look forward to heading back - if just to swap jokes with my new Blood On The Highway family. But I very much look forward to returning to the festival. Curious about how it will evolve and how much better it can get, because it is pretty damn good right now.

More Distribution Support

2008-04-22T07:26:00.000-07:00

Do you want distribution for your independent film?

Ever wonder why such bad movies get financed and distributed while talented filmmakers and projects get passed on again and again?

Would you like to know how to develop a distribution strategy, get your movie distributed to multiple outlets, and start making a living as a filmmaker?

If you're interested in making a movie that gets distribution, the good news is that help is on the way! FILM DISTRIBUTION KIT is a comprehensive educational program dedicated to film distribution and the marketplace. Created by Stacey Parks, a former foreign sales agent and author of The Insiders Guide to Independent Film Distribution (Focal Press), the FILM DISTRIBUTION KIT will show you how, with a few little-known distribution secrets, you can take control of your filmmaking career.

Not only will your work gain audience recognition worldwide, but you will be able to sell your films for a profit and make a real career out of filmmaking. Get yours here with the Filmmakers Alliance special discount: http://www.FilmSpecific.com/KitPromo

ALSO....

Join the hundreds of other members of Film Specific who are getting distribution for their films, programs, and other content...and making profits in the process.

Film Specific will give you access to actual Distributors and other independent film Experts, plus Buyers Lists and other resources aimed at connecting YOU with worldwide independent film distributors. Whether you are going after Traditional Distribution, Self-Distribution, or both - you'll get the ongoing support you need as we hold your hand through the entire process. Go ahead...put the odds in your favor!

Subscribe to Film Specific before Sunday, April 27th and get our special ONE YEAR BIRTHDAY bonuses! Just go here to see all we have to offer you: http://www.filmspecific.com/public/10.cfm

Breadwinning vs. Filmmaking - Resolving the battle with a short film

2008-04-10T08:29:00.000-07:00

My friend and creative Collaborator Sean Hood got back behind the camera to film his short "Zacariah" (formerly "Sounds Through A Wall"). The short script was a winner of the Los Angeles Short Filmmaking Grant administered through us over at Filmmakers Alliance (FA) and became a sort of "family" project as it was produced by FA founding member Cain DeVore and FA Vice-Prez Amanda Sweikow.

Sean Hood contemplates his film

Sean has been doing a lot of professional screenwriting (as in paid) over the past several years and that is what keeps him in silk suits and shiny cars. But he is an artist/filmmaker first and foremost, and the urge to make a film never stops burning within him. However, life and work priorities kept him away from actually making a film over the last 10 years other than a sketchbook he and I did together back in 2003.

I bring this up because it is easy to find yourself in this situation and it is one you must vigilantly guard against or challenge yourself to change. I myself have not shot a feature in 8 years (although I finished the film not too long ago) and have not made a short in almost 3 years. Unacceptable, even if understandable. I spent the first of the last three years touring with the short to numerous festivals, the second year distributing the feature and the last year recovering from personal crises and trying to stabilize my crazy life (and co-producing 3 films). So, on one level, I can forgive myself.

But, like Sean, the desire to make a film never stops burning within me. And making a film these days - especially a short film - is so accessible, there's really no excuse short of some catastrophic mental or physical disablement to stop us from doing what is most essential to our nature. And, in fact, ignoring that crucial part of ourselves does far more harm than good to our psyche - no matter how financially stable we are able to make ourselves during those long non-filmmaking periods.

Sean had finally reached a point where he was determined to make his film by any means necessary. In addition to the money and resources he got through the LASF Grant, he had planned all kinds of fundraisers and solicited support from all he knew. For a short film, there are all kinds of ways to raise money. And Sean was exploring them all when providence lent a hand and a nice financial windfall showed up unexpectedly, allowing him to throw the production into high gear. Keep in mind, there are many ways to raise money for a short film (fundraising events, garage sales, personal donations, corporate grants, just plain begging for it, etc.) and there are all kinds of films that can be made that don't demand many financial resources. In other words, there is nothing to stop you financially.

The next step for Sean was to surround himself with a support crew that would contribute to the film in a way that allowed him to focus on guiding its creative vision. And in Cain and Amanda (and many others) he did a great job. But this is due, in no small part, to the support and guidance he has historically given to our filmmaking community. He's been there for us, so we naturally wanted to be there for him.

The rest almost automatically falls into place. Sean shot his short on the fancy new RED camera, but it wouldn't have mattered if he was shooting on a 1990 Hi-8 Video camera. He was making a film. He was in his element. He was answering the call of his essential self and didn't let anything stand in his way this time.

The mythical RED camera

In my case, what challenges me is not the means, it's the meaning. Sean had his script, which he'd been developing for awhile prior to winning the Grant. I, however, have been struggling to wrap my arms around a concept that works for me on all the levels on which I would want a film to work. In other words, it is not enough for me to devise a clever or even a moving story. It is not enough to create amazing visuals, sound design or some other dazzling filmic component. It isn't even enough for me to make a film that has something meaningful to convey. The film I make must work simultaneously on all of those levels and more. It should be compelling narratively, arresting artistically and rich thematically and metaphorically. In other words, the film should realize as much of the poetic and visceral potential of cinema as is possible.

Now, I know this is a tall order and, in some ways, just another barrier I create to stop myself from making a film. I simply need to get over it. All of us can only make the film we are capable of making at the moment. And it will lead us wherever it leads us. I have ideas. They may not organically work on all the levels my "dream project" might work on, but they will allow me to investigate enough creative issues to be worthwile. Watching Sean on set was inspiring and motivating. It was like he'd been making films every month for the last ten years. He was focused and assured. He was doing what he was meant to be doing. And it was NOT about the resultant film. It was about the process of doing...of learning...of growing...of creating.

Time for me to experience my own process.

A Week In The LIfe Of This Filmmaker

2008-03-18T08:11:00.000-07:00

March 6th through Sunday, March 16th, 2008

All right, so it's longer than a week. You should know by now that I rarely follow the rules - especially the ones I set for myself. In any case, I felt the need to reach back to Thursday to include HD Expo. Also, it was simply a busy 11 filmmaking days and I wanted to get it all in. What I'm highlighting are activities/events/moments beyond my usual routine of doing various and sundry FA activities, fund-raising (for FA, 5 Minute Film School and film projects), correspondence with filmmakers, development of projects, finishing of other projects and hanging out with my dog, Yatahey.

Thursday - Manned our table at HD Expo. It is essentially a small, but organized, professionally-run trade show at the Beverly Hils Hilton dealing with all things HD. Companies setup small booths to demonstrate their HD wares to the filmmaking public. And, by filmmaking, I use that in the broadest sense to include corporate video clients, game-showers, reality-show producers, etc. It's like a mini, focused NAB. We had a lot attention at our booth but it was mostly from an over-abundance of FA volunteers. Still, enough people drifted by to fill out a few pages of our sign-up sheet. Tough to know, however, who will really bring something to FA. Will they bring vibrancy to our filmmaking community? Will they bring a professional work ethic? Will they bring creative vision? Or will they simply bring a grip truck full of neurotic tics, needy questions and never-to-be-fulfilled fantasies?.....Only time will tell.

I like checking out the new technology, but discussions of workflow and codec make my head swim. I like to know what is possible and that's about it. Fact is, there has been accessible technology to make great-looking films for quite awhile, now. They're just making it better and cheaper. As I often say, in the end, it's not the technology but the ideas that will distinguish us as filmmakers.

Friday - Did a lot, but can hardly remember it in the face of a very strange phone call I got from a former FA member-turned escort-turned porn actress-turned screenwriter (ala stripper-turned-screenwriter and flavor-of-the-month Diablo Cody). She needs help with her script and wanted me to hook her up with my pal Sean Hood, who she remembers to be a talented writer (and she's right). Before I could respond, she was offering me all kinds of XXX action if I engineer the hook-up with Sean. She assured me that as a porn performer she's tested regularly and offered a web address so that I could see her in all her glory. What?! This sorta thing doesn't happen often and kinda throws one for a loop. I begged off her generous offer, of course, but couldn't help thinking about what an extreme example this was of the numerous daily intersections of sex and commerce that exist in the film industry.

Saturday - Hammered out a proposal for one of our FA sponsors. Actually, it is a follow-up to the original proposal with details about the size of our community and the amount of anticipated exposure they'll receive through FA and 5 Minute Film School. If you ever find yourself in a position to solicit sponsorship or even investorship, it is NEVER enough to just have a good idea. You have to clearly express how this good idea will benefit your intended contributor's goals/interests. To do that, you have to have clarity about what those goals and interests are. And you also have to be specific about how you will achieve those goals and interests. Earnest promises are empty without a clear plan of accomplishment.

Sunday - Got up early to open up the FA office for a young filmmaker from Palo Alto who is casting his new film here in L.A. And when I say young, I mean young. He's a sophomore in high school and came with his Dad. But he's clearly a very smart kid and serious about his work. With a kid that young, you don't expect the work to be too deep or complex (that will evolve), but you hope for originality. For a kid that young to be making films at the level he is making them is pretty amazing, but the ambition that drives the effort and the one that drives originality are very different.

Monday - A great screening at our Echo Park Film Center - our friends and partners in collective/community filmmaking. It is such a great space and has such great energy that it almost doesn't matter what we show there for it to be a great night. But the work, as always, was compellingly eclectic. And the discussions afterward were very inspiring and invigorating. We show mostly FA films, but also present films we like by L.A.-based filmmakers. This time, we showed Ari Gold's short from 2000 "Helicopter". Great film. Curious to see his first feature, "Adventures in Power" which just screened at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival.

Tuesday - I have a friend who's a very accomplished, talented artist who wants to do an archive piece of her current exhibition. But she wants to do it in a very expressive, subjective fashion so that it communicates the true energy of exhibition. Because, sadly, filmmakers are often involved with so much that has nothing to do with true creativity, a project like this is very exciting. So, I'm helping out and rounded up a handful of D.P.s for her to meet with. As I thought, they all responded the same way I did - with excitment and enthusiasm.

Wednesday - Went to Van Nuys, where the production office is for "The Revenant", the feature we are producing in April (keeps getting moved back, but this should be firm now that we are fully cast). Had to have a roll-up-your-sleeves discussion about the script and budget with the director/writer/producer, Kerry. He comically/cynically called it an intervention. He's a funny guy, but not entirely joking - or wrong. But when someone has such a clear and grand vision - a vision you truly want to support - you are ultimately faced with the realities attached to realizing that vision with the resources we have available. Kerry has been great about it all, but it's still a tough place for all involved because a true creative being does not want to compromise one bit on their vision. And as a supportive producer, you don't want them to compromise at all. But you want to make sure you can make the film. So, this is where the rubber meets the road. Where the dreams MUST become reality - real numbers, real deals, real days, real locations, real resources, etc. Kerry decides to look at cutting some things, but doesn't feel too good about it. I don't blame him, but I don't see another choice unless some last minute funding shows up.

Thursday - Had dinner with Paul Bales, formerly head of SAGIndie, now working with The Asylum. He's a great guy - among the "industry" people with whom I've worked that I really like and respect. The Asylum is a Roger Corman-esque studio that cranks out straight-to-video films with staggeringly low budgets. I thought we had it down at FA, but how they do it is nothing short of magic. Some of the titles are hilarious as the latest trend is to ride in the wake of high profile studio films with no-budget fare - sorta like they do in porn - with titles like "War of the Worlds 2: The Next Wave". But could be a great place for an up-n'-comer to cut their teeth on a feature. Maybe slip in some really creative stuff. Look what it did for the numerous Corman-ites.

Friday - Big call with a partner/investor in our for-profit company, FA Productions. He's unafraid to risk his own money, but we need far more than he can handle. So, he's busy trying to round up a big chunk of money for a slate of films/projects. But right now, we are facing one of the worst economic crises we've faced in a long time, about which I would be completely oblivious if not for hearing it from his perspective. In the short term, it makes investors a bit panicky and, therefore, conservative. But we're hoping that it all actually works in our favor as media is a bit recession-proof. In fact, it is where people go when they are completely bummed out by economic woes.

Saturday - Filmmaking-wise, tried not to do a damn thing. Needed a day to clear my head and do nothing. Almost succeeded. Still answered a bunch of work emails and further sketched out a new short.

Sunday - Our sponsors, Canon, did another HD Camera Training at the FA office. This was the first one I attended. And although I was busy managing it and doing other work, I checked in often and enjoyed listening to all that the camera can do. From my slightly removed perspective, I couldn't help but appreciate how far cameras have come and what amazing tools they've become - in a way that is more difficult for me to do at trade shows, where I am just blitzed by information overload. I still tune out when it comes to really techy stuff, but I did get an idea of what's capable. And it's plenty. From a camera perspective, no excuses not to be making a film.

I was heartened to see a good turnout for the training. It's good for us that people understand how to use their filmmaking tools. But the sense of community a nice turnout creates it is even more important. It was a fitting end to a dynamic 11 days and filled me with a sense of gratitude for, and appreciation of, the filmmaking life I've worked hard to create, but I am, nonetheless, fortunate to lead.