Notes to a Documentary Producer on Selling his film
You don't need an agent or a rep, You need to the research you should have done before you started making it: You can do it yourself with a lawyer reviewing the deal before you sign off on it.
1. Which networks are airing similar docs? (Globally)
2. Is there a similar doc out there? Where did it air?
3. Contact the commissioning editors of the strands that air these
similar docs. ITVS, POV, HBO (a long shot), Showtime, etc. Roco (for
OWN), etc.
4. Send them screeners.
5. Wait.
6. Go to markets like Real Screen, Hot Docs, IDFA, Sheffield, AIDC and meet the buyers.
7. Don't make a deal with a company that aggregates for the internet..Make deals directly.
It is possible you won't sell your doc.
Peter Hamilton reports:
http://www.documentarytelevision.com/theatrical-documentary/sundance-film-festival-success-stories-what-are-the-odds-for-documentaries/
A total of 1,694 feature documentaries were submitted to Sundance this year:
843 were from the U.S.
851 were international.
Forty documentaries were selected – a success rate of 2.4%!
There are at least 1700 docs out there and your competing with them for sales.
So it looks bleak.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Funder Road
Published by “International Documentary” Summer 2010
by Mitchell W. Block
I am frequently asked by students and emerging filmmakers about how to fund their first documentary work, and it is evident that there is a disconnect between most of the film training programs and the field. Students and emerging filmmakers generally do not ask this question until they are well into production. This is a mistake. The process of selling a documentary (or fiction) work has remained unchanged since Edison and company first started cranking them out at the turn of the 20th century.
My first rule of production is, get funding before you start. It’s fine to start pre-production and casting without funding—put together your sizzle reel, see how your subjects present themselves on camera and capture material needed for your film. It’s not such a good idea to complete the production unfunded (or unsold) if one looks at the success rate of the 1,644 documentaries submitted to the 2010 Sundance Film Festival. Only a few of those films have found or will find, distribution, and fewer still will ever make back their cost.
1) Begin with the Idea
The idea is everything with a film.
a) Determine if Your Idea Has Already Been Done
This can be as simple as looking on Amazon.com to see if a video or DVD is being offered that is similar to your proposed project. Use search engines, looking by both topic and concept, to see what is out there. Talk with broadcasters, festival programmers, distributors and others to see what has been made. They are all gatekeepers and have seen thousands of works and have a good idea of what is in production as well as what has been produced. For example, when I started researching CARRIER (a 10-part PBS series about life aboard the US Navy aircraft carrier USS Nimitz), I kept finding references to numerous one-hour programs about aircraft carriers and a handful of books. I viewed every work that had been made about the subject, and read all of the books that were available. None of the existing nonfiction media works were character-driven, multi-part series, or even one-offs. They were focused on jets and technology, not people. I needed to be able to know what other works were out there and how my work would be different.
A project that has been done repeatedly is hard to sell. Always try to avoid news-type projects, if you have to raise funds. Ideas that can be produced by shows like 60 Minutes or Frontline or on network news channels (CNN, BBC, Fox) are best avoided because these broadcasters will get their work out well before yours, and the market will be even more difficult to crack when your film is finished. It is terrible to go to a meeting and have a buyer say he already aired a similar show or is making a program similar to yours. Be sure your take on the content is unique. Talk to as many people about your idea as possible. The more enthusiastic the funders or buyers are, the more you know you are on to something.
Do not underestimate foundations, television programmers and distributors as sources of information and as evaluators of your ideas. They pay a great deal of attention to what is in the market, what is coming in and how projects have been received in terms of reviews, ratings and box office.
b) Get the Rights
You cannot pitch a show when you do not have the exclusive rights to shoot, or some aspect of the shoot that makes your approach exclusive. With historical projects that cannot be filmed as they take place, be sure that you have footage to sell the story. What will be on the screen? While Fair Use can work in some cases to allow the use of footage, do not put together a pitch based on Fair Use footage without first talking to a knowledgeable copyright expert. While some networks allow the use of Fair Use footage, others that are owned by a company that includes a studio may insist on works being cleared. Can your work be based on a book (or books) or a newspaper or magazine story? Can some aspect of your work be exclusive? A film dealing with recycling, for example, needs a way to differentiate itself from the dozens of works made about recycling.
Do your homework and be sure that you will have “characters” that are interesting on screen; that you will have access to the process (the race, the show, the rehearsals, the results, etc.); and that you can shoot censor-free, or almost censor-free. Try to not give your subjects the right to approve what is shot and edited.
Be careful if your funding makes it look like you’re making a sponsored film. For example, PBS closely examines the funding to be certain that the funder does not benefit from the project or even “appears to benefit” from a project. The same PBS standards apply to many nonprofit and for-profit sponsors of works aired on PBS. For example, a film funded by the Ford Foundation about a program they are doing in Africa will not likely be aired in PBS’ core schedule because the film could appear to be “commercial” for the foundation.
c) Build a Production Team
If you are doing a first film, you will need footage to show how great the material is and that a film can be made based on your idea, your selection of the character, etc. Nothing, however, can replace an experienced production team with strong skills in producing, directing, camera, sound and editing. While it is great to give emerging filmmakers a start, it is difficult to get a serious financial commitment from any funder for an inexperienced director. Production teams should have at least one senior person who has made a successful film or series.
d) Make the Sizzle Reel Simple
Do not over-produce a trailer. Show characters, story idea and perhaps even some of the story arc. Recently, we pitched a show using a commercial the subject had developed. This 30-second spot summed up the idea of the show. It was dramatic and inventive and it had cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. One of our consultants had found it on YouTube.
Another show was sold to a network based on a 20-minute edit of footage shot with the central character. Another was sold without any footage at all, but with a great original concept. An Inconvenient Truth was sold on the basis of Al Gore’s PowerPoint presentation, although it also helped to have a former Vice President of the United States as the central character.
e) What is the Right Length for a Project?
The best length is the one the funder wants. A short documentary film for Academy Award consideration cannot be longer than 40 minutes. Television prefers works that will fit into 30-, 60-, 90- and 120-minute slots. Theatrical features generally need to be over 70 minutes. If you finish your film before you sell it to a broadcaster or distributor, it is likely that you will have to fix the length to fit the time slot it will air in. An “hour” is sometimes 44 minutes and sometimes 57. Some hours have no breaks for commercials and others have has many as six. The pacing of a commercial hour on A&E is different from one on HBO or PBS. Logic suggests that it is better not to “finish” a work until you have sold it. With computer-based software, you can make the best film for your portfolio and festivals and then make the version that airs on television and meets all of the network technical specifications. Series are even better, if the material can support a series.
2) The Proposal
Once you have the rights to the idea locked, write up the project. All that is usually needed is few pages about the show. What will the look and feel of the work be? What is special about it? What will the story be? How will you tell it? A proposal needs only a few things:
l A short treatment, focusing on one or more of the following: characters, the event, the narrative arc of the story
l A statement about the nature of your exclusive rights and access to the story
l Description of the team making the show
l Information about archives or footage that will be licensed for the show (if it’s a clip show)
l A summary budget and a detailed budget
l Some letters of support
l Articles, news stories and other printed materials about your show’s content to provide a funder with a sense of how current or important your idea is
l Sample works by team members and perhaps some footage that you’ve already shot
This proposal is the starting point. Get the idea on a single page for setting up meetings and pitching. Try to liven up the type with pictures; still images are a great way to sell your show. Try to have pictures of people who might look like your characters if you don’t yet know who your characters will be.
3) Paying the Bills: Selling the Film
Sorting out how to fund your film begins with locking the idea. The idea’s content, approach and form will further define the markets for the work. Once the length is estimated, then the filmmaker has started on the path to funding, since length helps determine markets.
There are only four ways to fund any work; one or more of these sources funds every film:
l Funding It Yourself. This is the classic independent film model—for example, Andrew Jarecki's first feature, Capturing the Friedmans. While this approach can speed the funding process, it does expose the filmmaker to all of the risks of production if the work can’t be sold to recoup the costs. Funding films with credit cards, second mortgages or your retirement fund is not a good idea.
l From Buyers. Networks, theatrical distributors and others who use works to draw viewers to their sites, sell copies, products or theatrical experiences are the best funders. There are also a dozen international broadcasters that fund documentaries of American as well as non-US-based companies. Ultimately these gatekeepers complete the process of making films, since they provide access to the audience or viewers and are in the business of promoting, marketing and selling films. As stated earlier, they should be the first stop for the filmmaker, not the last. Examples include those funded by studios like Disney/Miramax (Earth), The Weinstein Company (Fahrenheit 9/11) or Lionsgate (The US v John Lennon); specialized entertainment entities like Participant Media (Food, Inc.; An Inconvenient Truth); and networks like HBO (When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts). Of the ten highest-grossing documentaries of all time (according to BoxOfficeMojo.com), only one work, An Inconvenient Truth, was not funded by a studio-distributor. None of the 656 remaining theatrically released films on the BoxOfficeMojo list grossed more than $12 million, and most of these works were acquired, rather than funded.
Sponsors are a different kind of buyer. They fund films in large part to enhance their company profile and image. For example, General Motors supported Ken Burns’ films for over a decade. These sponsors are critical for public television documentaries.
Other examples of corporate-supported work include long- and short-form music videos (paid for by the acts or record label); and giant-screen films for museum and tourist sites, of which IMAX is a leading longtime underwriter. IMAX films are also funded by the museums and sites.
From Investors. There are individuals and investors who feel that funding a film and then selling it makes sense. Private placements, finding investors and selling shares are all methods that can be used to raise funds. Be sure to check with a security or business lawyer to make sure your funding strategy does not violate state or federal security laws and that your deal is properly papered. While this method is both risky for the investors and difficult for the filmmaker––since only a small percentage of documentaries actually make a profit––it nonetheless seems to account for well over half of the over 1,000 documentaries that are submitted annually to Sundance.
This method of making films generates hundreds of workshops and seminars. The deliverable is a business plan, or something similar, and this method sidesteps the problem of getting “No’s” from buyers. Business plans don’t reflect possible failure, only possible success. But be sure to consider the specific strategies of your plan; simply planning to market the film via the festival circuit or your website doesn’t work in the vast majority of cases.
l From the Public Sector. Foundations, sponsors and individuals that want to support a project or filmmaker can do so with grants and donations. Government agencies such as the National Endowment for the Humanities and National Endowment for the Arts fund films, as do many state-level agencies. Thousands of foundations and religious organizations also fund works. Unlike buyers or investors, who generally focus on the bottom line when it comes to documentaries, public sector funding supports the production of works that further intellectual, cultural, political or other objectives of the funders.
PBS, via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), and PBS strands such as POV, ITVS, American Masters, American Experience and Frontline provide funding for documentaries. PBS itself (and PBS member stations) generally requires distribution rights or equity positions as a condition of broadcasting the works.
The “PBS-gets-to-show-the-film” model allows filmmakers to raise grants and other support that includes funding from for-profit entities, and then allows films to be aired. PBS is particular cautious about the nature of the funding and how it appears to relate to the content of the work (for example, an environmental work funded by a coal company would be difficult to clear), but the PBS schedule is heavily supported with films funded from outside of the network. This model works well with PBS when advertising budgets of for-profit corporations can underwrite programs, but filmmakers need to clear the funding sources with PBS prior to accepting funding.
PBS and other broadcasters often show films without paying for them or paying the fair market value of their production costs. Filmmakers should try to get PBS to pay and/or help raise funds for outreach (marketing) and consider retaining video rights as part of this kind of deal. While the CPB-PBS Challenge Fund, ITVS, POV and Independent Lens actually do require an outreach and marketing component as part of their respective support, this component is difficult for independent filmmakers to raise money for, given that they’re already struggling to find funds to cover production costs.
It is fine to mix for-profit support with nonprofit funding. For example, a film funded by a grant or a foundation can be shown and sold to commercial television (or cable) and distributed commercially in DVD. While some filmmakers choose to make their films within nonprofit structures, this complicates the ownership of the project. I do not recommend that the filmmaker own and operate the nonprofit producing the film, either, since this really complicates the filmmaker’s ability to end up owning his/her own film. I generally recommend that filmmakers use a nonprofit conduit to receive funding and pass the funds on to their own business for the actual filmmaking. This allows the filmmaker to keep ownership of the work and directly derive revenue from it.
4) You’ll Sell Your Show on the First Pitch if…
l The whole package makes sense to the funder
l Your idea fits the needs of the network, funder or distribution company
l You’re talking to the right buyer—ie, the decision-maker at the company
l Your project can be produced within budget limits
l Your team has a solid record of achievements
If your show is not selling, it is probably because one or more of these areas needs to be fixed. In my workshop, Documentary Tune-Up, I focus on why a show is not attracting funding. Much of time, the work can’t be sold. It is better to know sooner rather than later. Most documentaries that are not pre-sold never sell, much the same way most screenplays for fictional features are never produced.
Finally, a work-in-progress is worth more than a finished work. Once the work is done, you lose any leverage you ever had when it comes time to price it, unless you have that one-in-a-thousand work that is going to make several million dollars theatrically or win an Oscar. Not a smart bet.
Conclusion:
It has never been easy funding films or selling a finished film. While the financial entry barriers for character- or process- or event-driven documentary production now are really negligible, the difficulty of making compelling selections, getting access and having the skill sets necessary to produce a work is complicated. It takes a lot of talent to make a good film. Just as the advent of the word processor has not created more great books, the prevalence of the low-priced camera and desktop editing has not produced a flood of great films, just a flood of films. Unless a filmmaker wants to approach filmmaking as a hobby rather than as a business, it is imperative to consider the pre-sale of work as a prerequisite for a work being financially successful. Filmmakers need to understand that while the demand for documentaries is increasing, the funding for individual works is not. More channels means more buyers but fewer viewers and smaller acquisition and production budgets to acquire, since the audiences are smaller. It also is relevant that the buyers know they can buy completed works for less because the Sundance statistic shows there is an over-supply. The good news is that there is a shortage of great ideas. These ideas, if properly packaged and presented, will be funded.
by Mitchell W. Block
I am frequently asked by students and emerging filmmakers about how to fund their first documentary work, and it is evident that there is a disconnect between most of the film training programs and the field. Students and emerging filmmakers generally do not ask this question until they are well into production. This is a mistake. The process of selling a documentary (or fiction) work has remained unchanged since Edison and company first started cranking them out at the turn of the 20th century.
My first rule of production is, get funding before you start. It’s fine to start pre-production and casting without funding—put together your sizzle reel, see how your subjects present themselves on camera and capture material needed for your film. It’s not such a good idea to complete the production unfunded (or unsold) if one looks at the success rate of the 1,644 documentaries submitted to the 2010 Sundance Film Festival. Only a few of those films have found or will find, distribution, and fewer still will ever make back their cost.
1) Begin with the Idea
The idea is everything with a film.
a) Determine if Your Idea Has Already Been Done
This can be as simple as looking on Amazon.com to see if a video or DVD is being offered that is similar to your proposed project. Use search engines, looking by both topic and concept, to see what is out there. Talk with broadcasters, festival programmers, distributors and others to see what has been made. They are all gatekeepers and have seen thousands of works and have a good idea of what is in production as well as what has been produced. For example, when I started researching CARRIER (a 10-part PBS series about life aboard the US Navy aircraft carrier USS Nimitz), I kept finding references to numerous one-hour programs about aircraft carriers and a handful of books. I viewed every work that had been made about the subject, and read all of the books that were available. None of the existing nonfiction media works were character-driven, multi-part series, or even one-offs. They were focused on jets and technology, not people. I needed to be able to know what other works were out there and how my work would be different.
A project that has been done repeatedly is hard to sell. Always try to avoid news-type projects, if you have to raise funds. Ideas that can be produced by shows like 60 Minutes or Frontline or on network news channels (CNN, BBC, Fox) are best avoided because these broadcasters will get their work out well before yours, and the market will be even more difficult to crack when your film is finished. It is terrible to go to a meeting and have a buyer say he already aired a similar show or is making a program similar to yours. Be sure your take on the content is unique. Talk to as many people about your idea as possible. The more enthusiastic the funders or buyers are, the more you know you are on to something.
Do not underestimate foundations, television programmers and distributors as sources of information and as evaluators of your ideas. They pay a great deal of attention to what is in the market, what is coming in and how projects have been received in terms of reviews, ratings and box office.
b) Get the Rights
You cannot pitch a show when you do not have the exclusive rights to shoot, or some aspect of the shoot that makes your approach exclusive. With historical projects that cannot be filmed as they take place, be sure that you have footage to sell the story. What will be on the screen? While Fair Use can work in some cases to allow the use of footage, do not put together a pitch based on Fair Use footage without first talking to a knowledgeable copyright expert. While some networks allow the use of Fair Use footage, others that are owned by a company that includes a studio may insist on works being cleared. Can your work be based on a book (or books) or a newspaper or magazine story? Can some aspect of your work be exclusive? A film dealing with recycling, for example, needs a way to differentiate itself from the dozens of works made about recycling.
Do your homework and be sure that you will have “characters” that are interesting on screen; that you will have access to the process (the race, the show, the rehearsals, the results, etc.); and that you can shoot censor-free, or almost censor-free. Try to not give your subjects the right to approve what is shot and edited.
Be careful if your funding makes it look like you’re making a sponsored film. For example, PBS closely examines the funding to be certain that the funder does not benefit from the project or even “appears to benefit” from a project. The same PBS standards apply to many nonprofit and for-profit sponsors of works aired on PBS. For example, a film funded by the Ford Foundation about a program they are doing in Africa will not likely be aired in PBS’ core schedule because the film could appear to be “commercial” for the foundation.
c) Build a Production Team
If you are doing a first film, you will need footage to show how great the material is and that a film can be made based on your idea, your selection of the character, etc. Nothing, however, can replace an experienced production team with strong skills in producing, directing, camera, sound and editing. While it is great to give emerging filmmakers a start, it is difficult to get a serious financial commitment from any funder for an inexperienced director. Production teams should have at least one senior person who has made a successful film or series.
d) Make the Sizzle Reel Simple
Do not over-produce a trailer. Show characters, story idea and perhaps even some of the story arc. Recently, we pitched a show using a commercial the subject had developed. This 30-second spot summed up the idea of the show. It was dramatic and inventive and it had cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. One of our consultants had found it on YouTube.
Another show was sold to a network based on a 20-minute edit of footage shot with the central character. Another was sold without any footage at all, but with a great original concept. An Inconvenient Truth was sold on the basis of Al Gore’s PowerPoint presentation, although it also helped to have a former Vice President of the United States as the central character.
e) What is the Right Length for a Project?
The best length is the one the funder wants. A short documentary film for Academy Award consideration cannot be longer than 40 minutes. Television prefers works that will fit into 30-, 60-, 90- and 120-minute slots. Theatrical features generally need to be over 70 minutes. If you finish your film before you sell it to a broadcaster or distributor, it is likely that you will have to fix the length to fit the time slot it will air in. An “hour” is sometimes 44 minutes and sometimes 57. Some hours have no breaks for commercials and others have has many as six. The pacing of a commercial hour on A&E is different from one on HBO or PBS. Logic suggests that it is better not to “finish” a work until you have sold it. With computer-based software, you can make the best film for your portfolio and festivals and then make the version that airs on television and meets all of the network technical specifications. Series are even better, if the material can support a series.
2) The Proposal
Once you have the rights to the idea locked, write up the project. All that is usually needed is few pages about the show. What will the look and feel of the work be? What is special about it? What will the story be? How will you tell it? A proposal needs only a few things:
l A short treatment, focusing on one or more of the following: characters, the event, the narrative arc of the story
l A statement about the nature of your exclusive rights and access to the story
l Description of the team making the show
l Information about archives or footage that will be licensed for the show (if it’s a clip show)
l A summary budget and a detailed budget
l Some letters of support
l Articles, news stories and other printed materials about your show’s content to provide a funder with a sense of how current or important your idea is
l Sample works by team members and perhaps some footage that you’ve already shot
This proposal is the starting point. Get the idea on a single page for setting up meetings and pitching. Try to liven up the type with pictures; still images are a great way to sell your show. Try to have pictures of people who might look like your characters if you don’t yet know who your characters will be.
3) Paying the Bills: Selling the Film
Sorting out how to fund your film begins with locking the idea. The idea’s content, approach and form will further define the markets for the work. Once the length is estimated, then the filmmaker has started on the path to funding, since length helps determine markets.
There are only four ways to fund any work; one or more of these sources funds every film:
l Funding It Yourself. This is the classic independent film model—for example, Andrew Jarecki's first feature, Capturing the Friedmans. While this approach can speed the funding process, it does expose the filmmaker to all of the risks of production if the work can’t be sold to recoup the costs. Funding films with credit cards, second mortgages or your retirement fund is not a good idea.
l From Buyers. Networks, theatrical distributors and others who use works to draw viewers to their sites, sell copies, products or theatrical experiences are the best funders. There are also a dozen international broadcasters that fund documentaries of American as well as non-US-based companies. Ultimately these gatekeepers complete the process of making films, since they provide access to the audience or viewers and are in the business of promoting, marketing and selling films. As stated earlier, they should be the first stop for the filmmaker, not the last. Examples include those funded by studios like Disney/Miramax (Earth), The Weinstein Company (Fahrenheit 9/11) or Lionsgate (The US v John Lennon); specialized entertainment entities like Participant Media (Food, Inc.; An Inconvenient Truth); and networks like HBO (When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts). Of the ten highest-grossing documentaries of all time (according to BoxOfficeMojo.com), only one work, An Inconvenient Truth, was not funded by a studio-distributor. None of the 656 remaining theatrically released films on the BoxOfficeMojo list grossed more than $12 million, and most of these works were acquired, rather than funded.
Sponsors are a different kind of buyer. They fund films in large part to enhance their company profile and image. For example, General Motors supported Ken Burns’ films for over a decade. These sponsors are critical for public television documentaries.
Other examples of corporate-supported work include long- and short-form music videos (paid for by the acts or record label); and giant-screen films for museum and tourist sites, of which IMAX is a leading longtime underwriter. IMAX films are also funded by the museums and sites.
From Investors. There are individuals and investors who feel that funding a film and then selling it makes sense. Private placements, finding investors and selling shares are all methods that can be used to raise funds. Be sure to check with a security or business lawyer to make sure your funding strategy does not violate state or federal security laws and that your deal is properly papered. While this method is both risky for the investors and difficult for the filmmaker––since only a small percentage of documentaries actually make a profit––it nonetheless seems to account for well over half of the over 1,000 documentaries that are submitted annually to Sundance.
This method of making films generates hundreds of workshops and seminars. The deliverable is a business plan, or something similar, and this method sidesteps the problem of getting “No’s” from buyers. Business plans don’t reflect possible failure, only possible success. But be sure to consider the specific strategies of your plan; simply planning to market the film via the festival circuit or your website doesn’t work in the vast majority of cases.
l From the Public Sector. Foundations, sponsors and individuals that want to support a project or filmmaker can do so with grants and donations. Government agencies such as the National Endowment for the Humanities and National Endowment for the Arts fund films, as do many state-level agencies. Thousands of foundations and religious organizations also fund works. Unlike buyers or investors, who generally focus on the bottom line when it comes to documentaries, public sector funding supports the production of works that further intellectual, cultural, political or other objectives of the funders.
PBS, via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), and PBS strands such as POV, ITVS, American Masters, American Experience and Frontline provide funding for documentaries. PBS itself (and PBS member stations) generally requires distribution rights or equity positions as a condition of broadcasting the works.
The “PBS-gets-to-show-the-film” model allows filmmakers to raise grants and other support that includes funding from for-profit entities, and then allows films to be aired. PBS is particular cautious about the nature of the funding and how it appears to relate to the content of the work (for example, an environmental work funded by a coal company would be difficult to clear), but the PBS schedule is heavily supported with films funded from outside of the network. This model works well with PBS when advertising budgets of for-profit corporations can underwrite programs, but filmmakers need to clear the funding sources with PBS prior to accepting funding.
PBS and other broadcasters often show films without paying for them or paying the fair market value of their production costs. Filmmakers should try to get PBS to pay and/or help raise funds for outreach (marketing) and consider retaining video rights as part of this kind of deal. While the CPB-PBS Challenge Fund, ITVS, POV and Independent Lens actually do require an outreach and marketing component as part of their respective support, this component is difficult for independent filmmakers to raise money for, given that they’re already struggling to find funds to cover production costs.
It is fine to mix for-profit support with nonprofit funding. For example, a film funded by a grant or a foundation can be shown and sold to commercial television (or cable) and distributed commercially in DVD. While some filmmakers choose to make their films within nonprofit structures, this complicates the ownership of the project. I do not recommend that the filmmaker own and operate the nonprofit producing the film, either, since this really complicates the filmmaker’s ability to end up owning his/her own film. I generally recommend that filmmakers use a nonprofit conduit to receive funding and pass the funds on to their own business for the actual filmmaking. This allows the filmmaker to keep ownership of the work and directly derive revenue from it.
4) You’ll Sell Your Show on the First Pitch if…
l The whole package makes sense to the funder
l Your idea fits the needs of the network, funder or distribution company
l You’re talking to the right buyer—ie, the decision-maker at the company
l Your project can be produced within budget limits
l Your team has a solid record of achievements
If your show is not selling, it is probably because one or more of these areas needs to be fixed. In my workshop, Documentary Tune-Up, I focus on why a show is not attracting funding. Much of time, the work can’t be sold. It is better to know sooner rather than later. Most documentaries that are not pre-sold never sell, much the same way most screenplays for fictional features are never produced.
Finally, a work-in-progress is worth more than a finished work. Once the work is done, you lose any leverage you ever had when it comes time to price it, unless you have that one-in-a-thousand work that is going to make several million dollars theatrically or win an Oscar. Not a smart bet.
Conclusion:
It has never been easy funding films or selling a finished film. While the financial entry barriers for character- or process- or event-driven documentary production now are really negligible, the difficulty of making compelling selections, getting access and having the skill sets necessary to produce a work is complicated. It takes a lot of talent to make a good film. Just as the advent of the word processor has not created more great books, the prevalence of the low-priced camera and desktop editing has not produced a flood of great films, just a flood of films. Unless a filmmaker wants to approach filmmaking as a hobby rather than as a business, it is imperative to consider the pre-sale of work as a prerequisite for a work being financially successful. Filmmakers need to understand that while the demand for documentaries is increasing, the funding for individual works is not. More channels means more buyers but fewer viewers and smaller acquisition and production budgets to acquire, since the audiences are smaller. It also is relevant that the buyers know they can buy completed works for less because the Sundance statistic shows there is an over-supply. The good news is that there is a shortage of great ideas. These ideas, if properly packaged and presented, will be funded.
Visual Point of View Looking At Kubrick
I love movies that have a great look. Documentaries can too.
I recently saw this post about Stanley Kubrick's visual style and was blown away.
Think about how your documentaries would benefit from have a consistent visual look.
Take a look at Kubrick's "One Point Perspective."
It is amazing.
http://vimeo.com/48425421
I recently saw this post about Stanley Kubrick's visual style and was blown away.
Think about how your documentaries would benefit from have a consistent visual look.
Take a look at Kubrick's "One Point Perspective."
It is amazing.
http://vimeo.com/48425421
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
iTunes and Shorts International Royalty Report… What’s the deal?
Reprinted by Permission of the author.
Note: This article demonstrates the problem with having agents and other middlemen and then using a distributor to share streaming and other revenue..
Mitchell Block
by on December 2, 2011 in Distribution, Gone Fishing
iTunes and Shorts International Royalty Report… What’s the deal?
news and informations automotive,business,crime,health,life,politics,science,technology,travelautomotive,business,crime,health,life,politics,science,technology,travel
I thought I would share the recent sales report I got from iTunes via Network Ireland for my short Gone Fishing. The report landed on my desk around the same time as VFX expert Russ Wharton emailed me from his iPhone commenting that Gone Fishing is still charting VERY highly on iTunes shorts – when he took this frame grab we were at 14. I have occasionally checked in and we are usually toward the top of the charts, which is great news.
So how do the figures correspond?
Well this figures are for woldwide sales for one year, ending 30th June 2011 (reported to me late November).
Total sales = £1,480 from which iTunes take a 30% cut.
Then Shorts International take a 20% programming fee.
From that balance Shorts International take a 50% commission.
From that balance, Network Ireland (my sales agents who are really great I have to say) take a 30% fee.
The remaining balance then comes to me. So from that £1,480, I get £290.26.
I did a lovely chart to make the point even clearer.
I have no problem with Apple, I think 30% is fair.
I have no problem with Network Ireland, I think 30% is fair.
But Shorts International taking a 20% programming fee (what is that?) and then a 50% cut is rather unfair.
Apple will not deal with Network Ireland, they only distribute shorts through Shorts International. So it seems I do have a problem with Apple after all.
Why won’t Apple even consider opening up their platform for creative people to sell their work? They are soooo happy to sell us the tools. They own the best distribution tool right now. But they won’t even entertain the conversation.
I you want to read the whole royalty report, you can download it here…see below
If you want to know how I made Gne Fishing, there is a full two day workshop online here…
www.GoneFishingSeminar.com
And you can buy the DVD, BluRay or watch online here…
www.BuyGoneFishing.com
Onwards and upwards!
Chris Jones, Film Maker and Author
www.livingspiritgroup.com
www.ProductionOffice.org
e: mail@livingspirit.com
Sample Royalty Report:
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Poster Girl Brings Home Award Professor Wins IDA Award
Published December 6, 2011
USC School of Cinematic Arts News
http://youtu.be/KJqfp76hOaA (Link to Trailer)
“I was delighted that our film was selected,” said Block. “It’s the first film for the director. It’s the second time I’ve mentored a first time filmmaker to an Oscar or a nomination. It’s always gratifying.”
Block decided to produce the controversial subject after seeing a cut of Nesson’s first documentary about PTSD, which included some footage of Murray.
Professor Block, Sara Nesson and Robynn Murray at the 2011 Academy Awards
“[Nesson] was asking me to help on another documentary she was doing about post-traumatic stress where Robynn was one of many characters,” said Block. “When I watched the rough cut, I asked her about her footage with Robynn and I asked her to string it out for me. When you think about it from a teaching point of view, we basically made a short film out of material that had been discarded.”
As a filmmaker, Block has marketed and distributed films that have won twenty-five Oscars, have been nominated for seventy-one and is personally nominated for Poster Girl.
“Here you have this amazing observational material,” continued Block. “I think it’s a very convincing story. My background is in fiction. It’s about story and story arc. So few student films get there. You realize that, when you’re telling stories, it’s incredibly important to pick material that has emotional and intellectual content.”
For more information on Poster Girl, please visit http://www.postergirlthemovie.com/
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Tips on Securing Broadcast on National Public Television
Filmmaker and station relations consultant Jennifer Owensby Sanza shares the advice she gathered from mentors and firsthand experience about how to secure public television broadcast.
March 21st, 2011 | Jennifer Owensby Sanza
Getting my first documentary, The Teachings of Jon, broadcast nationally on public television felt like walking through a minefield, blindfolded. As a recipient of a completion funds grant from Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), I was fortunate to have the best mentors to guide me through the process. Now when I work with other filmmakers, I’ve noticed that some of the mistakes I made are quite common, and easily remedied. Here are some important tips to help you avoid major pitfalls on your way to a national public television broadcast.
Get the Most out of Your Rejections.
Rejections are never fun. And after you’ve spent all of your money and years of your life making your film, it’s easy to take every one personally. Your friends will tell you “it isn’t personal.” Fact is, it’s totally personal. Yes, your film could be rejected simply because one person on a panel had an issue with it. So face the truth, if you’re a documentary filmmaker, you need to get used to rejections and learn how to make the most of them. Ask the person rejecting you if they would be so kind as to explain why. And then listen, and write everything down. Don’t defend yourself. Just listen and thank her or him. Decision-makers can provide some of the most helpful feedback to improve your chances of a national PBS broadcast. I always advise producers to submit their program to ITVS even though it would be a miracle for a program to be accepted on a first try. You can trust that folks at ITVS know what PBS wants and they offer extremely helpful feedback from inside the system.
Be Mindful with Film Credits.
As a PBS fan and filmmaker, if you’re like me, you dream of one day hearing the all too familiar voice saying, “Funding for this program was provided by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.” And by all means, if you have that, allow me to bow. If you’re like the most of us however, you’re so grateful for any support that anyone offers along the way that you’ll give an executive producer credit just to say thank you! STOP RIGHT THERE! However desperate you are, don’t extend credits lightly. Many producers don’t realize that credits have specific meaning, and if you imply in any way that an organization or foundation had any editorial say so in your documentary, then you unknowingly put your film in the “infomercial” category. And that will disqualify your film from PBS broadcast. It’s very simple, but many producers make this mistake. Unless you are offered a whole lot of money, leave organizations in the “thank you” credits!
When One Door Closes, Go to the Next One.
Other cable channels may be known for producing some pretty good documentaries, but only public television has the potential to reach 99 percent of homes in the country. And let’s face it, having your documentary air on PBS’s national schedule or in an award-winning series such as POV or Independent Lens is the top of the heap. After pouring your heart into making your dream film, a pass from those programs can be really discouraging. Many producers don’t realize that within the PBS world there’s also APT (American Public Television) and NETA (National Educational Telecommunications Association). After being rejected by POV and Independent Lens, I took my film to APT, and they loved it. The rejection turned out to be a blessing in disguise. The Teachings of Jon is a great family film and through APT, my film was actually carried by more stations than it would have been on POV, and it aired during family-friendly timeslots (POV usually airs at 10 pm). So even if The Teachings of Jon had been accepted on POV, it wouldn’t have been the best way to reach the audience for my particular film.
Everyone Has an Ego.
After investing years of our lives and all of our resources into our films, we artists and filmmakers sometimes forget that the “suits” have egos too. Remember that whether they are part of a selection committee for a series or a festival, or a programmer from a major PBS station—these gatekeepers decide how many people see your work. And it took them just as long as you to work up to their important position. Present your film in the best possible way. Spend the extra $250 to get your DVD screeners professionally made so that they play well and look great. The point is not to annoy the one you are trying to impress with a homemade DVD that stops every four minutes. If you are Ken Burns or Michael Moore, feel free to write on your DVD with a sharpie. Everyone else should stick with a four-color print cover, including your contact info. It’s about making an impression for less, not making less of an impression. And, if and when they reject you, don’t cuss them out and tell others they are stupid for rejecting your film. Instead, use your inside voice. You’d be surprised how many producers don’t get this one!
Ye Must Please The Gods.
To a filmmaker, whoever is in the position to decide who sees your film is God. So if you want the best shot at getting your film aired nationally on public television, then you have to make the Gods an offer they can’t refuse. In other words, give them a program that is easy to schedule. Make sure it meets PBS standards. Familiarize yourself with the PBS guidelines in the PBS Red Book, a Guide to Program Packaging and Delivery for PBS. It’s best if you inform yourself of these guidelines before you start. I am so grateful that a producer told me before I began filming that the sound was more important than picture. You can cut away from a bad picture. But if you have bad sound, you’re screwed from the get go. And please, don’t think or even imagine that because your one-off documentary is so good that all the PBS programmers will be willing to create a new special timeslot just for you. It’s not going to happen. If you have a one-off and not a series, you give them what is easiest to program, a PBS hour, 56:46. Period. (Yes, they will accept an exceptional 86:46 program; it’s not out of the question. However, if you can cut it down to a PBS hour, that’s easiest for them to schedule.)
Do Things in the Right Order.
Because PBS has the highest technical broadcast standards, you want to make sure to save your final color and sound mix until the very end and hire someone who is familiar with the PBS Red Book specs. Many producers end up paying extra in post because they thought they’d save money having all the colorization and sound tracks done in the final edit at their local post house, only to find out it didn’t meet PBS specs and had to be redone.
If You Want National, Don’t Go Local.
Many producers make the mistake of rushing to their local PBS station, begging them to air their program. STOP RIGHT THERE! Yes, it is important to find out if you have the support of your local station—you may want to partner with them as a presenting station down the road. But don’t air the program anywhere until you have exhausted EVERY national opportunity first (and there are several). Airing locally may disqualify your program for national broadcast.
Never Underestimate the Importance of a Good Hook.
I worked with a producer on her wonderful film, The Dhamma Brothers, about bringing an ancient Buddhist meditation practice into the Alabama maximum-security prison with transformational results. It won awards at just about every festival it showed, the audience loved it, critics loved it, even programmers loved it. And yet, there is no special “Effective Prison Reform Month.” With no “month” dedicated to the subject matter of your film or no particular “hook,” programmers may have a difficult time scheduling it. The result is the momentum of an entire national rollout can get lost. So, if there is any special month dedicated to the subject matter of your film or a special anniversary, try to coordinate your airdate schedule to that month. And remember, plan on six to nine months from the time of acceptance to broadcast.
As an example, if you are to offer your documentary to public television through APT in their November offer, you won’t air until April of the following year, at the earliest. When my mentors asked me what my distribution plan was, I just looked at them cockeyed. Now I understand the importance of knowing how to maximize your broadcast opportunity. My motto, when you have no money, is get creative and take advantage of every free opportunity. With careful planning you can set yourself up in the best possible way by keeping the timing in mind as you work toward your goal of airing nationally on public television to the widest audience possible.
Most of all, don’t give up too early! You didn’t work hard for all these years making your dream come true just to give up after one measly rejection from someone who obviously doesn’t get how great you or your film is. If you have produced a well-made documentary, with tech specs of PBS quality picture and sound, about a socially relevant subject told in an interesting way, in the perfect time length of 56:46, I can guarantee you will increase your chances tremendously for national broadcast on public television.
Click here to learn about the difference between CPB, PBS, and NPR.
Editor's Note: We're aware of the legislation introduced on March 3rd, and passed by the House on March 17th, to eliminate federal funding of public radio and television. If you have news or opinions, please share them here or on The Independent's Facebook fan page
Sunday, November 7, 2010
The New Golden Age of Documentaries
This article published in the Guardian discusses how the new technologies are making production of docs more artistically interesting. Despite the huge number of docs being
produced, it still does mean we're getting many "great" ones.
I think this article is excellent in terms of discussing this growth of production.
A link to the original article follows:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/nov/07/documentary-digital-revolution-sean-ohagan
produced, it still does mean we're getting many "great" ones.
I think this article is excellent in terms of discussing this growth of production.
A link to the original article follows:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/nov/07/documentary-digital-revolution-sean-ohagan
Camera, laptop, action: the new golden age of documentary
From Kevin MacDonald's examination of the YouTube phenomenon to a cab ride with Osama bin Laden's former bodyguard, cheap technology is allowing film-makers to stretch the form as never before
British documentary maker Lucy Walker: 'People are looking for bigger truths about the way we live'. Photograph: Lucy Walker
"
In the past week, the festival has screened 120 new documentaries – including shorts as well as feature-length films – from 26 countries. As well as fly-on-the wall documentaries about well-known figures, such as the American comedian Joan Rivers and the English playwright Alan Bennett, there were music documentaries about subjects as diverse as Elgar and Heaven 17, and biographical documentaries about the beat poet William Burroughs, the Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu and a taxi driver who once worked as Osama Bin Laden's bodyguard.
This year, the festival also focused on low-budget films about everyday life and politics in the Middle East, made as Currimbhoy puts it "by people who really needed to tell their stories and can suddenly afford to do it on film". He seems genuinely excited, even by the films that have arrived on his desk unsolicited and not made it on to the festival programme.
"There is definitely a new energy out there. We are living in a moment when film-makers, and young film-makers in particular, are increasingly turning towards documentary as a way to make sense of the world they live in. They are more alert about, and suspicious of, the mainstream media and eager for a form that talks to them about real events in a real way, even if that form is often rough or even low-key. It's a very exciting and ground-breaking time for the documentary."
This view is echoed by the young British director Lucy Walker, whose latest film, Waste Land, opened to rave reviews across America two weeks ago (the film is out here in March). It tracks the artist Vik Muniz as he travels from Brooklyn to his native Brazil to undertake an unlikely creative collaboration with the "catadores" – garbage pickers – who scavenge a living on the world's biggest garbage dump in Rio. It is a film, says Walker, about "the transformative power of art" and one that utilises the grammar of fictional film-making to tell a real-life story that is as uplifting and redemptive as any fictional feelgood movie.
"I really do think we are living in a golden age of documentary film-making," says Walker, over the phone from Los Angeles, where she is currently on a frantic promotional schedule. "There is a frustration with traditional media and a hunger for documentaries that have the stamp of integrity. The week it opened, my film was number one at the box office in terms of what they call 'per-screen average attendance'. Of all the movies playing in America, a Portuguese-language documentary about the lives of people living on a garbage dump in South America had the highest per-screen average across America. That tells me that people are looking for bigger truths about the way we live now, truths they are not getting from Hollywood or the traditional media."
To a degree, this has always been the case, but today, with the coming of affordable high-end digital camera and laptop technology, it is possible to prep, shoot and edit your own film in a fraction of the time – and the budget – it would take to make a traditional film. In many ways, cheap technology has energised film-making for a fast-forward generation who have little time for the slowness of traditional script-based film-making. "I've been in development hell for four years for a fiction film that never got made," says Walker, bullishly. "I don't have that kind of time to waste. I want to get on and make films that I think need to be made."
The availability of cheap digital cameras and software has also meant that, for every campaigning film like Walker's more hard-hitting nuclear weapons documentary, Countdown to Zero (released in March next year), or Charles Ferguson's Inside Job, a riveting, clear-headed exposé of the ruthless financial tsars behind the 2008 global financial meltdown (due next February), there are a host of smaller, stranger documentaries being made, many of which seem to push the boundaries of the form almost to breaking point.
In Exit Though the Gift Shop, released earlier this year, Banksy, the world's most famous street artist and arch art-prankster of our time, plays havoc with notions of authorial "reliability" and takes the audience on an entertainingly self-referential rollercoaster ride that says more about the baroque pointlessness of contemporary youth culture than it perhaps intended.
One of the most ground-breaking documentaries of the year, though, is also one of the most complex, formally and emotionally. The Arbor (released last month) is a film about the short and brutal life of dramatist Andrea Dunbar (writer of the 1986 film, Rita, Sue and Bob Too), who died from alcoholism at the age of 29. Director Clio Barnard restages short extracts from Dunbar's work using actors on the estate in Bradford where Dunbar grew up. The director also uses actors to lip-synch to recorded testimony from Dunbar's friends, family and grownup children. This has proved problematic as well as distracting to some reviewers although, as the Guardian's film critic, Peter Bradshaw, noted, the end result is a kind of "hyper-real intensification of the pain in Dunbar's work and in her life". All human life, it seems, can now be reassembled, and sometimes even creatively reinvented, by contemporary documentary directors.
Many recent documentary films also denote a generational shift in both style and subject matter away from the political and outward-looking, towards the emotional and solipsistic. One could argue that Catfish (out here next month), currently the most talked about documentary of the year in the US, is one such film. It is a documentary for – and about – the Facebook generation and it was made possible, says co-director Henry Joost, "by technology that is available to anyone. You can now buy a consumer-level digital camera for $400 [£246] or less that shoots in HD [high definition] and that still looks pretty good when blown up on a cinema screen. This really is an anyone-can-do-it moment for film-making."
Catfish chronicles the odd relationship between a young, hip and handsome New York photographer, Nev Schulman, and Abby, an eight-year-old who initially sends him an unsolicited painting of one of his published photographs. She lives, she says, in rural Michigan with her mother and her sister, a horse-riding, guitar-playing beauty who flirts with Nev shamelessly via phone texts and email. It all seems too good to be true and it is, though in ways that are surprising and, at times, affecting.
Made in a seamless vérité style by Nev's brother, Ariel Schulman, and his friend, Joost, two young men who seem to chronicle every waking hour of their lives on camera, Catfish is essentially a film about narcissism and self-delusion in the social networking age. There is a sting in this particular tale – and one that would be giving too much away to talk about here. Depending on where you are coming from, however, this unlikely twist is either redemptive or exploitative. You may come away, as I did, feeling both charmed and manipulated, wondering if real life could ever be as unreal as this. Are we seeing a film that unfolded alongside the events it portrays, or a retouched version of the same. And, more pertinently, how retouched?
"It really was an unbelievable perfect storm of circumstances and events that led to this film being made," insists Joost. "We're a little compulsive, systematic. We are all making home movies all the time. It's kind of like fishing. Then, suddenly, we found a story right under our noses. Our friend, who's sitting right in our office, was the story. We just followed it to see where it led. I really do feel that my life as a film-maker – all the dumb jobs, the commercial work, the videos – all led up to this moment."
Catfish may indeed herald an age when the quotidian can become prime subject matter for documentarists – this has already happened with photography. With one or two exceptions, everyone in the film seems to live lives that are so mediated by the grammar of reality television and docudrama that they behave as if they are somehow both utterly knowing and wilfully naive. Like Banksy's film, Catfish may ultimately say more about the emotional shallowness of the culture it betrays than its makers intended.
"There is a sense that the grand narratives are gone and that people are now living in an age of uncertainty, and documentary increasingly reflects that," says the film-maker, Adam Curtis, who has made two ground-breaking documentary series for the BBC: The Century of the Self and The Power of Nightmares, each of which illustrated in their different ways how ideologies of power work on the collective imagination. "Traditionally, documentaries were part of a progressive tradition, a progressive machine. They provoked us or inspired us to do something. I would contend that, when politicians turned into managers, that system did not work any more and even big budget, well-meaning, measured documentaries, like Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, leave us perplexed and helpless rather than angry and politically energised. At the other extreme, you have films like Catfish that noodle about with the intimacy of feelings. Here, people know the grammar of feelings, they know how to act on camera and how to emote formally, while real feelings, which are of course messy and complicated, are hidden."
Back in 1935, the pioneering British documentary film-maker, Paul Rotha, declared: "Above all, documentary must reflect the problems and realities of the present." Rotha was a socially conscious director who believed, like many of his contemporaries, that the role of the documentary film-maker was to help change the world for the better. One wonders what he would have made of The Arbor, Catfish, or Exit Through the Gift Shop, all of which undoubtedly "reflect the problems and realities of the present", but in ways that Rotha could not have envisaged. In doing so, they don't set out to change the world but rather to question the nature or reality, truth and, indeed, documentary itself.
"The form is certainly being stretched more than ever," says the director Kevin MacDonald, who has made feature films (The Last King of Scotland), documentaries (One Day in September) and merged the two (Touching the Void). "But documentary is a generous basket that can hold a lot of different things. If you think about it, journalism, letter-writing, memoir, satire – they all qualify as non-fiction, so why can't the same loose rules apply to documentary?"
To this end, MacDonald is currently working on the first feature-length documentary made entirely of user-generated content shot in a single day and then uploaded on to YouTube. Called Life In A Day, the impressionistic film is currently being edited down by MacDonald from 5,000 hours of footage from 190 countries. It will premiere as a three-hour documentary at next year's Sundance festival. "It's amateur film-making on a grand scale," says MacDonald. "But, because the participants are often showing such incredibly intimate things that you could not get in a traditional documentary unless you spent months filming, it is also ground-breaking in ways that we did not expect."
In the end, says MacDonald, it all comes down to great storytelling. "The irony is that, when I make a documentary, I always feel like I am taking all this real material and trying to tell a story almost as if it was a fictional narrative. When I make a fictional film, I do the opposite."
Documentary, as MacDonald reminds us, is essentially structured reality. "The only real breaking point," he adds, "is when documentary actually becomes fiction, but more often than not, as many great documentaries testify, real life does often turn out to be a hell of a lot stranger than anything you could make up."
That is perhaps the reason why its boundaries are currently being stretched – to keep up with the increasing unreality of the real world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)