Tech tools like Gathr need more visibility and filmmakers need to get good at using them. Filmmakers don’t need distributors, they need marketing. By giving a cut of revenue to affinity partners to promote the film - you recreate the value of a distributor by finding an delivery to an audience yourself
It is really important that precise day by day case studies are written about successful self-distribution efforts, like the one in Peter Brodericks bulletin 48. Consultants like me love to work with them.
I attended a screening of Ballast at IFC, where Lance did a Q&A. It was a great film that has stuck with me, and he came across as a humble guy who poured his life into making it. I think the issue you're highlighting really started around the time Ballast was released, and 17 years later, it’s only gotten worse. The question is: how do we restore value to creative releases that aren’t driven by platform algorithms, which use certain films as marketing bait or vehicles to boost other revenue streams. A film like Ballast doesn’t fit into the pre-set marketing models designed for success, and the resources required to connect a film like that with an audience just aren’t seen as viable. But that’s not even the most disappointing part. The real issue is that people don’t know—or don’t care to know—that they have a choice if they’re willing to seek it out, and it's not up to the platform to teach them. It’s too risky. Platforms know their subscribers’ attention spans and will always follow the path of measured behavior. We’re living in a world where global streaming platforms reward those who produce IP derivatives that fit neatly into their distribution strategy buckets, marginalizing anything that threatens existing business models—films like Ballast. Sometimes there’s an exception, but only if you’re willing to give up your rights to profit from your own sweat equity. Lance is a hero in my book for not taking the rip of deal he was being offered. I hope he's reading this too.
With only theatrical and streaming income available for recoupment very few independent films can recoup . The film business has ceased to be a business . The 110 year old structure of film is crumbling and a new system needs to be created that fits 21st C technology . Dreambird aims to do that .
Ted Hope has written about this quite a bit. The importance of us filmmakers building our communities and finding our true fans is likely the way to our Field of Dreams. Looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with. When will your platform launch?
Dreambird is closing its investment now and we plan to be fully functional in about 10 months. We will provide for production , distribution and consumption . A full service economy .
Kendall, it's true there is a vast budget range in regards to "indie" film, but I think the point is that even with a $5-$10 million production, the distribution system is broken, so these discussions still apply. But obviously, if you have a $100,000 movie, it's a lot easier to recoup.
One thing I noticed is how foreign sales really drove financing of indies in the past but now not so much. Kind of a bummer. personally, I thought that model worked really well.
Tech tools like Gathr need more visibility and filmmakers need to get good at using them. Filmmakers don’t need distributors, they need marketing. By giving a cut of revenue to affinity partners to promote the film - you recreate the value of a distributor by finding an delivery to an audience yourself
First time learning of Gathr. Thanks Jeffrey.
Do you have any additional reading suggestions or resources for indie film marketing?
It is really important that precise day by day case studies are written about successful self-distribution efforts, like the one in Peter Brodericks bulletin 48. Consultants like me love to work with them.
https://www.sundance.org/case-studies/creative-distribution/columbus/
Didn't I write this?
you did!
Really enjoyed this piece. Thank you.
Thank you Anthony,
I attended a screening of Ballast at IFC, where Lance did a Q&A. It was a great film that has stuck with me, and he came across as a humble guy who poured his life into making it. I think the issue you're highlighting really started around the time Ballast was released, and 17 years later, it’s only gotten worse. The question is: how do we restore value to creative releases that aren’t driven by platform algorithms, which use certain films as marketing bait or vehicles to boost other revenue streams. A film like Ballast doesn’t fit into the pre-set marketing models designed for success, and the resources required to connect a film like that with an audience just aren’t seen as viable. But that’s not even the most disappointing part. The real issue is that people don’t know—or don’t care to know—that they have a choice if they’re willing to seek it out, and it's not up to the platform to teach them. It’s too risky. Platforms know their subscribers’ attention spans and will always follow the path of measured behavior. We’re living in a world where global streaming platforms reward those who produce IP derivatives that fit neatly into their distribution strategy buckets, marginalizing anything that threatens existing business models—films like Ballast. Sometimes there’s an exception, but only if you’re willing to give up your rights to profit from your own sweat equity. Lance is a hero in my book for not taking the rip of deal he was being offered. I hope he's reading this too.
With only theatrical and streaming income available for recoupment very few independent films can recoup . The film business has ceased to be a business . The 110 year old structure of film is crumbling and a new system needs to be created that fits 21st C technology . Dreambird aims to do that .
Ted Hope has written about this quite a bit. The importance of us filmmakers building our communities and finding our true fans is likely the way to our Field of Dreams. Looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with. When will your platform launch?
Dreambird is closing its investment now and we plan to be fully functional in about 10 months. We will provide for production , distribution and consumption . A full service economy .
when you talk about an indeed, what budget range are you talking about? i feel liked there is different definitions of indie film.
Kendall, it's true there is a vast budget range in regards to "indie" film, but I think the point is that even with a $5-$10 million production, the distribution system is broken, so these discussions still apply. But obviously, if you have a $100,000 movie, it's a lot easier to recoup.
One thing I noticed is how foreign sales really drove financing of indies in the past but now not so much. Kind of a bummer. personally, I thought that model worked really well.