Saskia Wilson-Brown

I'm an independent media advocate and producer-at-large, cum strategist. It all depends on the day. I agree with Thomas Jefferson's theories on idea ownership.

How small festivals are the future of meatspace film distribution: Thought 3 of 5

In January, I attended the Slamdance / Sundance extravaganza in Park City, Utah, helping produce the Slamdance, WorkBook Project & Open Video Alliance Filmmaker Summit.  While there, I participated in and listened to a lot of conversations about the shifting role of film festivals, particularly as those shifts apply to a mid to high-level independent festival such as Slamdance. What follows here is the third of 5 thoughts that came to me about the functionality of film festivals (and in no particular discursive order).

3. What festivals should do to better serve their communities.

The motivations that guide independent film festivals vary wildly: Whereas some were founded solely to develop industry in a second-city environment, others take radical stances against the industry altogether, shifting their focus towards serving their local creatives instead. Others, still, strive to function as arts-based businesses, leveraging sponsorships and ticket sales in an attempt at joining the ranks of corporatized culture-hawkers.

It is hard to generally classify the purpose of pre-existing film festivals, then, as their needs and motivations are often so divergent. One can nonetheless begin to make an attempt at creating a sort of style guide outlining some pragmatic ways that festivals can better serve independent filmmakers and artists, their contradictory purposes notwithstanding.

Based on several conversations had with such luminaries as Lance Weiler, Brian Newman, Paul Rachman, Peter Baxter, Lisa Vandever, Roger Mayer and others, here is the beginning of a list of how festivals can better help independent filmmakers.

NB. I see the following 5 points as responsibilities, not suggestions. I believe that arts organizations, due to their very nature of being the cynosure of dialogue and thought, have the responsibility to guide that discussion in the correct, honest direction.

I. Manage Filmmaker Expectation (No dangling carrots)

Too often festivals obliquely play into a system based on false promises and permission-based access. In this, they encourage and fail to manage filmmaker expectations, and inevitably end up with some seriously disappointed filmmakers on their hands.

It is crucial for independent filmmakers to understand how the system actually works, and to understand, also, that there are alternatives. It is therefore crucial for a festival to actually explain what they are to expect – from an industry point of view- from inclusion in the festival.

Action point: Clarify what will and probably won’t happen at the festival with your filmmakers along every step of the way, from the call for submissions to the acceptance letter.

II. Be transparent:

If a filmmaker, however naively assuming that his independent festival of choice has scads of dollars to throw at promoting his screening, throws up his hands and lets the festival do all the work, imagine the shock and dismay he may feel when finds his big premiere empty. Conversely, if a filmmaker is aware that the festival has no marketing budget, he might be inclined to engage in a little marketing of his own, and in so-doing will support the festival’s efforts (with the happy accident of helping ticket sales, to boot).

My point is this: Anyone who’s worked a festival knows that they are damn hard to run, and are often on the verge of collapse. BUT: Most filmmakers and attendees do not realize this. In order to – again – temper expectations and ensure a good experience for all, it is simply a question of a festival engaging in a little transparency in its affairs. Open books and open access (within reason, of course) can be positive for several reasons, most saliently in helping people know what to expect of you- what you are capable of providing as a festival. It also allows a community to help where they see problems or deficiencies.

Action point: Clarify and publish your budgets, be clear about shortcomings and explain how your community (including your filmmakers) can help fill them.

III. Educate:

With transparency in festival affairs and transparency about the reality of what to expect, festivals also have a responsibility to provide their filmmakers with information about alternative solutions for independent film. This can be done simply by shifting the focus away from old-industry panels towards realistic, functional and educational seminars centering both on the ‘art’ side of the filmmaking process and, of course, the business.

There are several areas that are drastically changing with the advent of new(ish) technologies:

  • New fundraising stratagems (crowdsourced)
  • New storytelling techniques (transmedia)
  • New production processes (crowdsourced)
  • New distribution strategies (online, VOD, etc)
  • Open culture

Action Point: Taking a cue from The WorkBook Project’s DIY Days, and Slamdance/WorkBook Project/ Open Video Alliance Filmmaker Summit, create open access educational seminars around the new models in distribution and fundraising. Make the information available online.

IV. Develop access to new distribution models

In addition to educating filmmakers about new models for film production and distribution, festivals should also provide optional distribution solutions for its filmmakers in new media platforms, VOD and theatrical. These should allow filmmakers to exploit their rights piece-meal, monetize their films and gain new audiences, with the appui of the festival’s curatorial credibility behind them.

This is a hugely lengthy topic to go into, but for examples of festivals that are attempting to do this, take a look at a few examples:

  • Slamdance’s deal with Xbox (which has made money for both Slamdance and the filmmakers)
  • Sundance’s deal with YouTube (which has not made money for the filmmakers, as far as I am aware
  • Tribeca’s recent VOD deal (which is, as far as I am aware, NOT optional for the filmmakers- which if its true, totally sucks)

Action Point: Use your festival’s organization cachet to broker deals for your filmmakers, and offer those deals as optional systems to complement their distribution strategies.

V. Share resources and organize year-round community screenings

Imagine a scenario where the audience winner at Nashville FF is given a 15 city theatrical run through community screening programs run by Nashville FF partner fests.

In line with the previous point, festivals could increasingly work together to further four-wall film exhibition through year-round screenings, and by combining marketing and local resources with other festivals.

In turn, by leveraging partnerships with other arts organizations and venues worldwide, festivals can help their filmmakers reach wider audiences, and also provide them with a de facto theatrical release. Of course, the benefits of partnering reach beyond only helping filmmakers, as these sorts of partnerships can help spread a festival’s brand, vision, and curatorial voice- in turn allowing for higher levels of sponsorship or- better yet- more participants in its next crowdsourced fundraising campaign.

Action Point: Organize year-round screenings in your community. Make friends with your colleagues and organize film exchanges. Share resources and programming.

A Conclusion!

All these points, to me, demonstrate one overarching fact: In order for an independent arts community to thrive, it must take a conscious stand to stop trying to emulate a corporate business methodology of exclusion, competitiveness and opacity.

In copying a system that, really, has little to do with how we as independents actually work, festivals are unwittingly incorporating all the nasty little habits that are anathema to thriving collaboration and creativity: Status-based ranking systems for humans (‘VIP’ passes, for instance), one-way payment systems, the obsession with celebrity attendance, fearful and covetous business practices. In following this approach, of course, we effectively stop innovation and discourage the development of new collaborative systems altogether.

In servicing the arts, a festival services the arts community in all its forms – even those it sees as its competitors. One will never exist without the other.

Next installments:

  • 4 of 5: How festivals can avoid going out of business: An exercise in managing your festival director’s ego.
  • 5 of 5: Who needs branded content and sponsorship, anyways? The no-corporate film festival.

Filed under: diy distribution, film, subverting dominant paradigms, theory , , , , ,

How small festivals are the future of meatspace film distribution: Thought 2 of 5

In January, I attended the Slamdance / Sundance extravaganza in Park City, Utah, helping produce the Slamdance, WorkBook Project & Open Video Alliance Filmmaker Summit.  While there, I participated in and listened to a lot of conversations about the shifting role of film festivals, particularly as those shifts apply to a mid to high level independent festival such as Slamdance. What follows here is the second of 5 thoughts that came to me about the functionality of film festivals (and in no particular discursive order).

2. Money-making should not a successful small festival make. Culture-defining should.

When I was co-directing the Silver Lake Film Festival in Los Angeles with Greg Ptacek and Kate Marciniak, we didn’t invite host any distributors at the screenings. Those that did attend never cut a deal with any of the festival’s filmmakers. I’m pretty sure that the Cucalorus Film Festival in North Carolina has never immediately helped filmmakers pay off their credit card debts.

In these two instances, there is no commerce involved, and no one’s making any money to speak of. Are these festivals then to be seen as failures?

The answer, of course, lies in how one defines the purpose of a cultural event. I believe that if we put aside commercial functionalities for a minute, we see that though the utility (and success) of smaller festivals becomes inherently value-based, it is nonetheless inherently of value.

Here are some points, then, on the value and purpose of film festivals, above and beyond commerce:

  • To curate, provide imprimatur and thus help shape culture;
  • To create access to independent voices and new stories within specific, underserved geographic communities;
  • To educate filmmakers;
  • To grow independent film communities and foster creative collaboration;
  • To help create de facto four-wall releases for filmmakers through festival-run programs and partnerships above and beyond the event itself;
  • To assist with DIY distribution by offering access to distribution tools through festival-run partnerships with emerging content platforms

These last two functionalities are becoming more important as filmmakers and festivals realize that the old system – the permission-based system – is falling apart. So, to reitirate: Festivals should increasingly focus on helping filmmakers sustain and exhibit their work through various non-traditional methods such as digital distribution deals (see Slamdance’s recent deal with Microsoft Xbox), DIY distribution education, and, of course, festival run four-wall programs and partnerships that allow greater visibility for the participating films.

From experience I know that acknowledging an alienation from the mainstream film industry implies owning up to a radical shift away from ‘the system’, and has big repercussions for festivals and filmmakers alike. Silver Lake FF, for instance, with all its focus on working outside the system was unable to harness the sponsorships that festivals so drastically need for survival, and died a fiery financial death in 2007 (the results of which I am feeling to this day).

With that all said, it still feels successful in that it spoke to several of the points I believe to the inherent in a fruitful arts organization- points that have nothing at all to do with (immediate) economic exchange. The organization focused- largely- on what we thought should be the primary goals: Empowering a community and its artists through coherent promotion; leveraging its name to garner publicity and opportunity for our participants; facilitating radness in general– Art for art’s sake, as it were. The efforts were mostly spent on promoting and advocating for micro-communities through programming decisions, and fostering creativity and creative collaboration in our neighborhood and beyond. Mainly, though, Silver Lake FF focused on curating a very cool and forward-thinking festival (under the benevolent expertise of programming director Roger Mayer, as well as a plethora of special guest curators), the results of which are still bearing fruit in the continued existence of some of its former programs in the form of special screenings and ongoing collaborative output.

So do these artsy, community-driven, low-budget, no-commerce festivals like the still-thriving Cucalorus, Nevada City or Slamdance still have value? My conclusion would be that yes, they do. These festivals’ value (and purpose) lies in providing an imprimatur – an edge – for its filmmakers, and a strong platform for community-empowerment. This value, to me, supercedes the worth of some crappy distribution deal.

At the end of the day, sometimes being part of something amazing and cultural is worth more than being paid a grand to have your documentary air once or twice on TV.

** NB: Kate Marciniak, one of the co-directors at SLFF, makes this note: “[We] slogged many long and arduous hours for SLFF’s festivals trying to reel in distributors to attend and trying to get films with name stars to entice them. It was not through a lack of our wanting or trying [that they didn't attend].” So, I guess the rebellious stance was assigned post-fest, by me. I still think it’s cooler without the distributors. ;)

I will address the inevitable next question (the ‘how the hell do we avoid the Silver Lake debacle and sustain our arts organizations?’ question) in subsequent posts.

Next installments:

  • 3 of 5: What festivals should do to better serve their communities: An exercise in managing filmmaker expectations.
  • 4 of 5: How festivals can avoid going out of business: An exercise in managing your festival director’s ego.
  • 5 of 5: Who needs branded content and sponsorship, anyways? The no-corporate film festival.


Filed under: diy distribution, film, subverting dominant paradigms, theory , , , , , , , ,

How small festivals are the future of meatspace film distribution: Thought 1 of 5

In January, I attended the Slamdance / Sundance extravaganza in Park City, Utah, helping produce the Slamdance, WorkBook Project & Open Video Alliance Filmmaker Summit.  While there, I participated in and listened to a lot of conversations about the shifting role of film festivals, particularly as those shifts apply to a mid to high level independent festival such as Slamdance. What follows here is the first of 5 thoughts that came to me about the functionality of film festivals (and in no particular discursive order).

1. For small festivals, the ‘shifting’ purpose of film festivals is actually not shifting at all.

People seem to concur that the primary purpose of film festivals is (was?) akin to that of an art gallery: To sell art.

Festivals have been acting as the gatekeepers to commercial distribution, and the standard path for a filmmaker would be simple: Make a film; get into a fest; get the film acquired for distribution (of course, if all went well).

Though this is a relevant deduction for festivals like Sundance, which were indeed functional gateways for the film system, I would argue that for the smaller festivals catering to independent or local film (and for the indie filmmakers whose work was typically programmed there) this was never a relevant model in the first place. The reason for that is simple: Distributors tended not to attend those festivals.

This commercial raison d’etre, then, has only ever been an apt assigned purpose for the bigger festivals. Further to that, this fact was sort of inherently understood by the film community: Not many filmmakers ever submitted their film, for instance, to the Tulsa Overground Film Festival, Nevada City Film Festival or Cucalorus with the intention of selling to HBO.

I think we’re assigning and bemoaning this dwindling commercial purpose to small festivals retro-actively in light of a perceived dearth of distribution deals – a dearth which, again, is only really relevant to festivals that were the hosting space for sales in the first place, and entirely irrelevant to the continued purpose of the small festivals who saw no such activity in their meeting rooms. Most annoyingly perhaps, small festivals gamely play along, trotting out their one or two success stories as bait for a system that never functioned for them or their filmmakers in the first place.

With the advent of digital media and the burgeoning (but hopeful) success stories around online/DIY distribution strategies, the purpose of the festival as a sales agent becomes even more obviously questionable. But more on that later when I publish my second thought: ‘Culture-defining, not money-making’. Probably fairly obviously from the rather literal title, it is about what I see as the ‘new’ purpose of film festivals.

For now, I leave you with a recent tweet from Ted Hope: David Brown’s Secret To His Success: “I never lived beyond my means, & therefore, I never had to be a slave to Hollywood.”

Filed under: diy distribution, film, theory , , ,

Tickets online: Ultra Fabulous Beyond Drag

Buy your Ultra Fabulous Beyond Drag tickets right here, right now.

All you have to do is click this link and you can show up to the screening (& panel!) on December 2nd at Los Angeles’ Downtown Independent Theatre and sashay straight by all the suckers in line, all breezy-like. Preferably with a slight smirk.

More information is of course available online at: http://beyonddrag.com/ and again the link to the tickets is http://www.brownpapertickets.com/producerevent/89066

Filed under: GO, film , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Marketing Your Video Online

Picture 1A semi-updated version of my introductory primer for learning how to market your film or video online… Download the PDF here.

If you have any questions, suggestions, addendums, please email me at saskia@saskiawilsonbrown.com.

Filed under: diy distribution, film, video ,

100,000 eyeballs to your film, in 3 days flat.

VodoAn important new weapon in the arsenal for filmmakers who are bucking the system and choosing to self-distribute, VODO is incredibly subversive. Its success, after all, is predicated on human generosity, not to mention the radical (and counter-intuitive) act of letting your film loose in the P2P world… Believe me, it’s probably there already.

With all that said, the benefits are tangible: In its first few days of existence, this new brainchild of filmmaker Jamie King has already proven to be very effective.

So what is VODO? Simply put, it’s an additional distribution option for filmmakers, one that utilizes and consolidates existing file-sharing systems -- as they put it: ‘a distribution system for the post-copyright age’.

What VODO proposes is that P2P filesharing services (such as The Pirate Bay) can be utilized by filmmakers to reach an unprecedented amount of potential viewers. What makes VODO’s service special is its use of the ‘Distribution Coalition (DISCO)’–  a coalition of the P2P/filesharing sites. VODO acts as a pipeline of content, populating the various P2P services with the films it represents. This, in turn, allows filmmakers to get their content released in the P2P universe in a cohesive way, with the chance of an income through crowd-sourced donations. The purpose, then, of  VODO is to harness the filesharing world and distribute content in it in a way that benefits filmmakers (and, eventually, creators of all stripes).

What this means – in layman’s terms – is that if your film gets selected for VODO, it will get a cohesive release across across a wide selection of filesharing sites and services, complete with an actionable donation capability which will allow people who watch your film to support you with money.

So, my ask to you is that you go support this new tool for independent filmmakers today. Here are several ways you can help:

If you doubt the reach of filesharing, note that VODO launched a few days ago (on the 14th of October, specifically) with the documentary US NOW, and, at the time of writing, has already obtained 100,000 downloads for filmmaker Ivo Gormley.

That, my friends, is a hell of a lot of downloads.

Filed under: diy distribution, film, friends doing cool things, subverting dominant paradigms, theory, video , , , , ,

Save the date: Weds Dec 2nd

Ultra Fabulous, Beyond Drag: Part Deux
Curated by Austin Young & Saskia Wilson-Brown
December 2nd 2009, 7:45 PM
Downtown Independent Theatre in Los Angeles

Squeaky Blonde, by Austin Young

Squeaky Blonde, by Austin Young

Curated by Austin Young and developed by Saskia Wilson-Brown, Ultra Fabulous: Beyond Drag was first screened at the LA Gay and Lesbian Center in 2007 as part of the fiercely independent Silver Lake Film Festival (so punk rock indie, indeed, that the festival died in a blaze of rancour and debt…  But that’s another story).

This new follow-up program – the part deux – presents a comprehensive look at the new developments in transsexual/transgender/tranimal culture through short films by and about the performers working in this space.

International in scope, with a healthy dose of the LA/NY/SF  scene(s), Ultra Fabulous, Beyond Drag: Part Deux goes way beyond the anticipated boas, glitter and whip-smart sass. Indeed, it aims to showcase a new genre — a genre we are (predictably) dubbing ‘Transploitation’ — born of, and predicated on the instant accessibility of internet culture, the do-it-yourself ethos of home publishing, and, yes, the narcissism inherent to self-reflection and ‘otherness’.  All this, through the best new performance video and short film work by established filmmakers, avant-garde performers and digital video sensations.

“Ultra-Fabulous: Beyond Drag is a tribute to the ‘other’ among us.”
–Buzznet, 2007

“Viewed collectively, [the films in Ultra Fabulous Beyond Drag] make a solid case for the continued relevance of an art form that is as diverse in its roster of artists as it is festive— and challenging— in its entertainment value.”
–Frontiers Magazine, 2007

An evening hosted by Jer Ber Jones, featuring the work of: Mathu Anderson & Andrew Schneider with RuPaul; Willam Belli; Jer Ber Jones; Lawrence Elbert with Jackie Beat, Selene Luna and Nadya Ginsburg; Mike Karma; Kurt Koehler with Chicos Angels; Clay Weiner; Calpernia Addams; Matthew Snead with Taylor Mac; Zackary Drucker; Austin Young; Karis; Fredrik S. Hana; Scott Boswell with Peaches Christ; Peter Pizzi with Ben McCoy; And more…

Critical Panel: ‘Gender Identity and Transploitation in Contemporary Media’
Featuring Zackary Drucker, Calpernia Addams , Buck Angel, Moderated by Jackie Beat

And finally: A Buzznet segment on the May 2007 edition, hosted by a slightly hoarse but no less fierce Clint Catalyst.

PS. You can see more videos (including one featuring a very tired me) on Buzznet, here!

Filed under: GO, art & design, film , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

DIY Days Philly: ‘Changes in Creative Collaboration’ panel

The Changes in Creative Collaboration panel I sat on (with SABI PICTURES, TOM QUINN, EUGENE MARTIN, ARIN CRUMLEY, HUNTER WEEKS, ZEKE ZELKER, moderated by SCOTT MACAULAY) is now online and ready for watching on diydays.com.

Saskia Wilson-Brown & Hunter Weeks

Filed under: diy distribution, film, saskia's on a panel, theory, video , , , , , , , , , , ,

New from Carluccio: ‘Cease & Desist’

From super-talented New York filmmaker John Carluccio comes a new 17 minute short doc about branding, addiction, sneaker culture and legal infringement. All “explored when artist/designer Ari Saal Forman mashers up the lively Newport cigarette brand into a cool Nike-like sneaker.”

Filed under: film, friends doing cool things, video , , , , , ,