Blog

Ariel Emanuel (William Morris Endeavor Entertainment), interviewed by Julia Boorstin (CNBC), at Web Summit 2.0 2010:

“My job is to figure out if there’s a monetization formula and it might be just driving your audience back to where you are in a traditional sense, but it might be something else. I’m not sure what it is right now. The job I have is to figure out who your audience is, how to keep them there, how to keep the conversation going, how to migrate the conversation into different areas you want to have the conversation.”

(via DP Joseph White)

The colorful moods of Jeopardy's supercomputer, Watson

Designs by artist Joshua Davis were implemented by Automata Studios to create Jeopardy’s Watson supercomputer avatar, powered by IBM. The four-year and $30 million effort came from their advertising agency, Ogilvy & Mather.

The final work has been on the air for the last two nights and concludes tonight, February 16. The technology behind Watson is Adobe Flash technology and the HYPE Framework.

In an interview with Fast Company:

Watson uses a slew of complicated algorithms to parse every “Jeopardy!” clue, gather possible answers, and weight each guess according to how “confident” it is that the guess is correct. Davis visually represents these patterns in 27 possible states that the avatar can be in. Generally, when Watson is confident in its guess, the particles swarm to the top of the globe and glow green; when Watson is not confident, they flow to the bottom and glow orange. And while Alex Trebek is making chitchat at the podium or reading off clues, the avatar pulses a cool IBM blue.

For more about IBM’s Watson, visit the official site.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIKM732oEek

During the first commercial break this last Sunday’s Super Bowl, actor Jeff Lorch caught a lot of attention with the popular Doritos spot, “Pug Attack,” which began as a micro-budget spec in the video contest and ended up winning the top prize as well as critical acclaim.

How did you come to be involved in Pug Attack? What was your experience working with the director?

Jeff Lorch I got involved with Pug Attack because Tess Ortbals (producer) was friends with other students who were shooting a USC Graduate Thesis project I was involved with a few years back, a comedy pilot called COST OF LIVING which ended up winning a Student Emmy for Best Comedy. She remembered my comedy stylings and e-mailed me asking if I’d like to come up and shoot a Doritos spec spot in Ventura County. Her boyfriend, JR Burningham, was shooting it. I’d shot one for the contest two years prior with director Brad Bosley (whose LOVE HURTS Pepsi Max spot aired this year during the Super Bowl, too!).

It was a very easy going set with JR. Once it was time for me to shoot my part at the door, he just said, “OK, just try to call the dog over with a Dorito.” I thought, “hell, there are no ad agency people or clients here, so I have total free reign to do whatever I want to do.” I went off, and JR and the crew loved it. He said keep doing that, so that’s what they got for the commercial.

From meeting you, I completely see you owning your character in “Pug Attack.” Your background includes The Groundlings, UCLA, and daytime soaps. How do those experiences influence your style?

JL As far as my style, I think I’ve always been partial to comedy. When I read something, my mind naturally goes to comedic elements–maybe it’s from being picked on as a kid (ha) since I used to be a total introverted nerd. I loved Groundlings because they teach you to do things “TO A 10!,” so I got to explore my insane side while also keeping a grasp on timing and the comedic elements of sketch. Training at UCLA, along with being a part of Pacific Resident Theatre Company, and scene study class with Cameron Thor have all helped maintain my depth as an actor, so I don’t end up just playing a goofy flippant guy all the time.

I’ve also gotten into writing and shooting. I wrote and shot two shorts last year, one called SURPRISE PARTY and another called FUZZY CONNECTIONS, currently submitting to festivals. I’m currently finishing up a feature length dark comedy script.

You’re no stranger to short-form content, made especially for the web, but also straight-to-broadcast. How do you see web-turned-broadcast or web-turned-theatrical content?

JL I think it’s a tough medium to penetrate beyond being a temporary flash. The short, SURPRISE PARTY, played in a film festival contest at LAEMMLE Sunset 5, and the audience roared with laughter. It’s not quite as effective watching it on YouTube. The factor of the big screen and huge sound creates a medium and an effect that cannot be replicated on a tiny computer video screen. But, that being said, there is definitely room to go viral and make a name for yourself because anyone can access it at any time, and it will spread unbelievably quick when it’s done right. And, if it’s original and good, it can lead to bigger things.

What was your experience with the grassroots, calculated, and consistent web marketing (e.g. pugattack.com) to gather votes to even become a finalist for the Super Bowl slot?

JL With PUG ATTACK, JR and Tess did an incredible job marketing the contest and employing an email company to create a simple, fun, and effective daily email reminder that made it easy and fast for people to vote, share via facebook, and tweet or email about the spot for the contest. Within a few days it went from 0 views to 10,000 views. Who knows how many actual votes it accumulated by the end! I believe it reached 100,000 views on youtube by the final day of voting in the Doritos Final Five contest. I had family and friends constantly sharing the link on Facebook, and it just launched it!

Because of this video, and its success on Super Bowl Sunday, you’re on the front of CNN.com and top critical acclaim on USA Today and AceMetrix. What do you think about the effect of this spot?

JL I think the effect of this spot just proves once again that we, the consumer or pro-sumer, have the tools to create commercials or short films or full length features that don’t cost too much to do, and that are as or MORE effective than those who have tons of money to do so. It’s all about having a great idea, and having the ability to carry out the vision, sometimes in the simplest way. We all crave watching a really good story, a funny vision, or a door in the face when it’s done right!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpjaOUjUPUc

Director Jordan Vogt-Roberts, whose 25-minute short “Successful Alcoholics” premiered at last year’s festival, completed four bumpers for Sundance 2011, which ended up not getting any play this year. Instead, officials decided to play the Sundance snowflake logo in front of every single film.

It’s commonplace at festivals for these credited, branded bumpers before each program. Some reports suggest these were too edgy. Of the four, “Hollywood Remake” has caught the most buzz online.

[vimeo]http://vimeo.com/18778409[/vimeo]

From Vogt-Robert’s blog [UPDATE: link no longer active] post in December 2010:

Sundance asked me to direct the bumpers that play before the films at the festival this year. Lots of pressure to make sure people don’t get sick of watching these after the 20th time. I’ll post these soon. They’re super effects heavy, and I think they’re pretty great.

The other three, uploaded two weeks ago, are Swag Hags, Spike, and Flight Attendant.

Earlier today, the Sundance 2011 winners were announced.

(via New York Magazine)

IndieGoGo.com is currently popular with filmmakers

Luma

Director: Ashley George
Contribute [link no longer available] towards $5k goal by 5/18/11

Peephole

Director: Heath Daniels
Contribute [link no longer available] towards $14k goal by 2/24/11

“Luma” and “Peephole” are projects from artists in the FWD:labs Collective which are currently seeking funding. Both use IndieGoGo, but that’s just one of many ways to help successfully and quickly fund your low-budget film.

Threshold Pledge Systems

These crowdsourcing / crowdfunding companies also require rewards to be offered for different levels of giving. These are helpful for sharing and bookkeeping, but they come at some expense:

• IndieGoGo
  • Goal does not need to be met
  • Processing Fee: 4% if meet goal, 9% if you don’t
  • Pays you as you receive payment (about 3% of each contribution to PayPal or IndieGoGo’s own credit card processing)
• Kickstarter
  • Processing Fee: 5% plus 3-5% of the total amount going to Amazon Payments [source]
  • requires your goal to be met before you can cash out
  • Doesn’t fund you immediately
  • Tax-deductible options
  • Example Film: “The Highs and Lows of Ryder Martin”
• German-based but English: Inkubato
  • 2 – 12 week windows of opportunity
  • Processing Fee: 7%
• German: StartNext
  • Processing Fee: 9% (4% going into “crowd” projects)

E-commerce Payment Systems

Alternatively, you can use the direct online payment services, all of which accept credit cards:

• Google Checkout
• Processing Fee: For less than $3,000 per month, “2.9% + $0.30” [source]
• Withdraw to Bank: Sync with your bank account (required initial validation period)
• PayPal
• Processing Fee: “2.9% of the total amount sent plus $0.30 USD per transaction” [source]
• Withdraw to Bank: “Transfer it to their local bank account (takes 3-5 days)” [source]
• Tax Deductible: No
• Example Film: “Weak Species”
• Amazon Payments / Amazon WebPay
• Withdraw to Bank: “Withdrawing funds to your bank account usually takes about 5-7 business days, not including weekends or holidays.” … “$10 minimum” [source link no longer available]
• Processing Fee: None [source link no longer available]

Other Options

Finally, there are both traditional and cutting-edge ways to raise money:

• Square
  • Processing Fee: 2.75% + $0.15 if card swiped, 3.5% + $0.15 if card number keyed [source]
  • Withdraw to Bank: “Square will immediately deposit up to $1000/week into your bank account and any remaining balance in 30 days” [source] … Sync with your bank account (required initial validation period)
  • Cool Factor: Both parties receive SMS or email confirmation, plus tips can be included
• Throw Your Own Party
  • Ideas: find an inexpensive/supportive venue, find a beer or drink sponsor, charge a small door fee, invite your friend’s bands, screen other short films, etc.
  • Fees: possibly any expenses for the venue and/or incentives (free/low-cost drinks or entertainers)
  • Example Films: “Strain” and “This Will All Make Perfect Sense Someday”
• Prospectus, Direct Solicitation to Benefactors, and Grants
  • Most common with larger budget independent films
  • Example Film: “Paradise Regained”

Other Opinions on Crowdfunding Your Film

Filmmaker Abe Schwartz recently wrote an article at The Huffington Post, insisting filmmakers ask, “What makes your project worth funding?” He came out of the Los Angeles Film Festival’s event called “Seize the Power: A Marketing and (DIY)stribution Symposium,” and notes how your online efforts need to be real campaigns, not simple pleas for money to be an artist. His feature, “Bad Batch,” is now available on NetFlix.

Filmmaker Lucas McNelly recently used Twitter to raise $12k via Kickstarter for “A Year Without Rent.” McNelly’s tweets were picked up by other filmmakers who rallied right down to the deadline to reach the goal, only crossing the finished line in the last hour. He recaps the process and tips on his blog.

Film Threat has 10 tips as well, including how to make use of updates to inform your current and prospective investors. Regarding persistence, the Girl Scout analogy might be inspiring, especially if you choose to fundraise within a tight deadline.

Web developer Daniel Siders shares 10 useful tips for crowdfunding, which can illuminate new ideas beyond Facebook for getting people’s attention to your project.

Spanner Films has a step-by-step guide for crowdfunding. They value the idea of stages: early adopters get a bigger bonus than those who give later.

Filmmaker Jason Gilmore wrote for Film Courage about 5 crowdfunding tips, such as having perseverance and reaching beyond your Facebook friends. Gilmore recently and successfully used Kickstarter to raise seed money to start Feb4 Productions.

Docs in Progress has a useful post (even from 2007) on ways to procure grant funding for documentaries.

Anything else you have done for your own films or can recommend from being in the business? Comment below. We’ll either update this post with more or make it a collective resource.

Delivering video content to a client always requires sending files and revisions. You export, you transcode, you upload.

In the past, filmmakers would struggle with HTML and Quicktime codes, uploading multiple files and eating up the clock just to share a private link to their work online. Lately, filmmakers tend to use Vimeo or other branded services, which don’t look nearly professional enough as they could for the same price or less.

The cheapest way to deliver the highest quality of media is through a media host like Amazon S3. Many online services use these content delivery networks and/or cloud servers because the upload and download cost is pennies compared to limits and overages billed by normal web hosts. It’s also handy when you grow beyond the free or low-cost account limits of Dropbox and the like, but those services aren’t nearly simple enough for clients to just watch dailies or rough cuts. They want to just press play, whether it’s in Flash for desktop browsing or Quicktime for mobile browsing. Furthermore, services like Dropbox don’t allow annotations and Vimeo doesn’t allow groups of files to display well together.

Now, with FWD:labs, we’ve lessened your pain by making this dead-simple.

Whether you upload your files through FWD:labs or use your own independent Amazon S3 account, the two stay in sync like a domino effect. This allows you to use either an FTP client like Transmit or the web interface here on FWDlabs.com and the file appears in both places. Choose your favorite workflow; we’ve got your back.

Next, we added a layer of metadata (e.g. adding a friendly filename, annotations below the video, etc.), so your presentation to the client is all the more clear and professional. Instead of seeing “file.m4v” like you would in FTP, you can rename the display title to “Final Motion Graphics – 1/11/2011.”

Finally, each client area can have it’s own design. Pro accounts here are already white-label, but each folder can have a different look. Maybe you’re teaching a class, or collaborating with another artist, or want to use the client’s logo on their page, it’s all possible with FWD:labs’ web app for filmmakers.

This year has a theme of control. Whether it’s interacting with the film or audience, or taking the reins to screen or promote your film, 2010 paved a new course for creativity. With budgets and rates suffering from the tail of the recession, the challenges led to new opportunities, where many members of the FWD:labs collective — several of which guest authored posts this year — took it up a notch.

Of the 27 posts this year, here is a selection of favorite subjects covered on this blog.

10. Creative Fundraising for a Recession-Plagued Film
    Director Reynier Molenaar shares his experiences prior to making Strain, which now has a trailer online
9. Create It For Yourself
   Director Jaraad Virani four-walled his own festival with two fellow filmmakers, which led to thousands packing into the screening
8. [Dailies] Creative Videos for the Corporate Web
   Often cited in our productions, these examples show off story videos that work for small businesses to stand out from the pack
7. The Times vs. Wikileaks and the Convergence of War and Gaming
   Guest contributor Eamon Kircher-Allen discusses the first leak, where a video feed and a video game look all too familiar
6. Making the Hit Web Series “INST MSGS”
   Show creator Justin Simien shares what it takes to get your show picked up by Revision3 and turned into a popular event
5. Writing Interactive Film for the iPad
   Writer/director Tim Immordino works on a cutting-edge project with Tool of North America, where touching the device evolves the story
4. Getting Ridley Scott’s Attention with a Unicorn
   Director Keegan Wilcox did his own promotion — and he ended up winning first place, awarded by Sir Ridley himself
3. Amazon Studios Experiment
   Screenwriter Barrington Smith-Seetachitt tries an 18-month hold on her work with this new platform; she continues to post on her blog about the progress she observes
2. Old Spice and Old School
   Ex-national news editor for ADWEEK and FWD:labs advisory board member, Jack Feuer shows how a lot of buzz pales in comparison to an ol’ fashioned coupon
1. Building Relationships with Online Audiences
   Our interview with The Department of the 4th Dimension founder Matt Checkowski tells an inspiring take of the Intelligentsia coffee videos, which led to numerous follow-up projects

Other favorites not make the list? Browse the archive and comment below.

Also, what would you like to see more?

Finally, check out our 10 best posts of 2009 and 2008.

My main thought is this: there is no such thing as the “perfect” film. And you certainly aren’t going to make one. What I’ve observed in many of my fellow aspiring filmmakers is that they wait. They wait for the perfect script. They wait for the perfect time. They wait for the perfect circumstances. None of these exist, except maybe in our imagination. This is why so many young filmmakers allow their expensive cameras to collect dust on a shelf; they never seem to be able to create that “perfect” short or feature film, so they’d rather not shoot anything at all. This is a mistake.

Ask any veteran filmmaker and they’ll most likely agree: there is no end to the learning process. It’s easy to forget this. We’re so afraid to make mistakes that we don’t make anything at all. I speak from experience. For three years while I was toiling away at an insufferable 9 to 5 job, I made no films. Any ambition, inspiration and motivation I once had seemed non-existent. I might as well have been a robot.

It’s a banal truism, but technology has changed everything. In the past three months I’ve shot over 10 short films with my Canon Rebel T2i. I mention this partly to brag but mostly to prove a point: nothing can stop you from creating except yourself. I don’t wait anymore. When I have an idea, I start writing it and I immediately begin pulling resources to make it happen: meeting with friends, actors, musicians, posting Facebook status messages asking for any help I can get.

It’s not easy. It never is. That’s where part of the joy lies — the constant, unexpected challenges. Does this mean that I settle for less than what I expect? No. I still spend a good amount of time rewriting scripts, re-thinking shot lists, and worrying about whether or not it’ll all actually work. But I don’t expect to make masterpieces. In fact, as unrealistically high as my standards are, I often expect the worst. Somehow, my little short films end up being decent or maybe even pretty good. So far, at least. My goal is to entertain an audience but my number one priority at this point is to learn, and hopefully improve, with each experience.

Don’t try to make the perfect film. You don’t have to blow anyone away with the next Citizen Kane. You know what your “rosebud” is; take a ride and see what happens. As James Cameron once said, “Pick up a camera. Shoot something. No matter how small, no matter how cheesy, no matter whether your friends and your sister star in it. Put your name on it as director. Now you’re a director. Everything after that you’re just negotiating your budget and your fee.” Grab a camera, a few friends and just shoot something. The irony is, there’s perfection in that itself.

(Originally published at The Right Time is Now.)

“Fourteen Actors Acting” is a web feature for today’s New York Times Magazine, including the talents of Javier Bardem, Natalie Portman, and James Franco. Each “screen test” embodies a classic acting type.

Directed by fashion photographer Solve Sundsbo. Music by Owen Pallet. Production by Spring Studios.

The video accompanies stills that appear in the magazine and online. Also check out the behind-the-scenes blog post.

• Shooting a DSLR in an remote-controlled helicopter? Aside from the grippage and camera support, the smaller the CMOS sensor, the better. One case where a Canon 7D trumps 5D. It also helps with the weight issue. (via D.I.T. CJ Roy)
• Mixing framerates? Conform the minority framerate using Cinema Tools and you’re good to go. (via broadcast creative Jeremy Troy)
• Ever dealing with a mess of a codec called AVCHD? Use Handbrake to get it into shape, be it M4V or other.
• Who designs ICG Magazine? Wes Driver, their art director, does consistently fantastic work. I wish American Cinematographer followed suit. (See page layout above.)
• Shooting in, say, a Ferrari 911? Use some modern technology: ARRI PAX and Rosco LitePad. “Rosco on the ceiling of the car for fill and PAX for your key off center front 3/4.” (via gaffer Jeff Stewart)
• Power outage in your kitchen? No problem. 25ft stinger to a lunchbox for the fridge, toaster, etc. and I’m good to go ’til handyman sets circuit.
• Formatting your new 1tb external hard drive from NTFS to Mac OS Extended? In Leopard, select Applications > Utilities > Disk Utility > select the drive > select Partion > Select 1 partition and Mac OS Extended (for non-booting storage of media) (via editor Ken Stone)

Got something to add or a whole new tip entirely? Post it in the comments below.

[vimeo]http://vimeo.com/17535548[/vimeo]

After their acclaim with “Salesman Pete and The Amazing Stone,” just in time for the holiday is “Meet Buck,” another graduate student film from a group of French filmmakers, the Bouyer brothers. Both works make quite a compelling sales pitch for all of them to land jobs out of school, if not on more of this style. “Insane aesthetic and fantastic animation. Great job…. you talented #@$&ers,” notes animator David Badgerow.

“Meet Buck” Synopsis
Buck is an ordinary guy. Well…if you except the “deer head” thing. And today, Buck is gonna spend this cool Sunday afternoon with his girlfriend who’s so happy to see him (she’s pretty much always happy). But when Buck find out that her father is not the sympathic and tolerant guy he expected, the Sunday afternoon turns really bad.

Check out their rigging demo for more about how the salesmen were made, plus their blog.

Project page on Amazon Studio

The Amazon Studios experience continues. As of last night there 395 projects, and today before 5pm–less than 48 hours after launch–there were over 500. It gives you an idea of how many people see themselves as potential filmmakers and either don’t read or understand the terms of the contract, or are desperate enough for a chance that there are willing to give away an 18 month option to their work.

Yesterday a new project appeared, and within five hours accrued over 2000 “downloads” thrusting it into the limelight of the first page and various sidebars populated with the “most popular” projects. I surmise this is someone with a huge number of friends… or a bot. (There seems to be no limit to the amount of times you can download from the same IP address.) My sense is that at this point, several entrants have experienced similar seeming contests and are using the usual strategy of recruiting as many “reviews,” as possible, as well as encouraging positive comments.

Yesterday night also marked first trickle of reviews. Like Amazon product reviews, reader reviews at Amazon Studio have a star rating system. A reviewer chooses between one and five stars in five categories (premise, structure, characters, dialogue, emotion) and an average of these is displayed as a “recommendation.” As of 5pm, most reviews are positive, and, while some are certainly random, I have noticed (since I know a few other players) that five-star reviews often emerge from a writer’s hometown, from people who share a surname with the writer, etc. Please don’t think I note this as a criticism of these writers–believe me, I’m not going to turn down positive reviews from anyone. (Seriously, leave me one now, I’ll take it.) But I think it is worthy of noting as part understanding if and how the site is working thus far as a method of vetting creative projects. My current feeling is that, moving into only the second full day, politicking is still a primary means of moving the players around on the board.

So the question is, at some point will a critical mass of non-partisan commentators emerge that will act as an equalizer, and at that point, will the site perform its function?

I don’t have the answer to this, but I do have one data point–in the form of another exciting development from last night. I received my first review! And it was not from my hometown or from a family member. It was from a total stranger in Quebec (Martin). Nor did he give me a five star review–far from it.

My reviewer’s spelling and punctuation leave something to be desired, and I don’t agree with much he said, BUT, I don’t see him championing any other script, and he hasn’t written a script himself, so my main point here is that I believe he actually wrote this, out of the goodness of his heart, with no agenda.

So… is this the guy the site needs more of? He is a passionate reader and willing to give his opinions, and that seems like one criteria. But is he an example of someone working at the level needed to vet creative product? How do we know whether to trust his opinion or not?

Within the Amazon community proper, a reviewer gets a good reputation (as I understand it) by reviewing products. Other people, who have either tried the product themselves or decide whether to try the product based upon the reviews, and rate a review in terms of helpfulness. Amazon Studio has set up something similar here, except that, as far as I can tell, the only person to rate a reader’s review is the writer himself. That could be problematic, as writers are known to be incredibly subjective about their own work.

“Hey, this Fred guy doesn’t like my writing (which is GREAT, by the way) so I don’t like Fred! I’m going to give him a low rating.” Or, “Yeah–my mom’s friend is absolutely right. This is better than Star Wars! Five stars!”

How to solve for this? My first thought is that other readers should ALSO be able to rate a person’s review. Maybe that person should be required to also write a review of the project in question to show they have read it and can judge–or maybe not. In actual development I’m sure execs feel they can determine good and helpful coverage without having read the script themselves–that’s why they want coverage! Right now the reviews are ostensibly “notes” for the writer, but they are also functioning as “recommendations” for other people as to whether they should bother to read or not…

So for both writers and our crowd-source development team, what constitutes a “helpful” review? Should it summarize the story or themes? Should it try to outline the structure? Should it speculate on whether the reader friends would go see it in a movie theater? I’m not really sure, but I bet some folks would have opinions.

Some possible advantages of review reviews and parameters for reviews is that they might:

1. Encourage honesty. If you are going to be a repeat reviewer, you know you’ll be held accountable for your reviews
2. Start the process of sifting through and elevating the trust level in the stronger critics, building legitimacy.
3. Grow the “intelligence of the crowd” by starting to highlight competent reviewers, thus modeling good “critical thinking” among the “newbies” in the crowd. (This last works alongside with another suggestion I submitted to Amazon, about maybe bringing in some professional “guest reviewers” for the same reason–not to take over, but to educate the crowd and model some critique-writing behavior.

PS. I know I’m discussing a lot of mechanics–the “how” of it. This doesn’t mean I haven’t also been thinking about the “why” and “should” questions that I think need to be asked–it’s just that right now, the mechanics are in flux, and changing quickly and I’m interested in recording that. Then I will definitely have some thoughts about what constitutes art, etc. In the meantime, John August posted today, starting to cover some of those bases.

(Originally published on barrington99.blogspot.com.)