The Filmmaker Summit is just two days away - the event is a collective effort of the teams behind the Workbook Project, Open Video Alliance and Slamdance. I've been spending some of my free-time keeping up with the discussions on WBP, many of which dealing with festivals, distribution methods, social media, and DIY culture in general.

There's a long list of tiny steps that have to be taken before For Thousands of Miles is ready to distribute. My goals for this year are highly ambitious - and I know that my chances of reaching those goals on-my-own are remote. Amanda and I have been fortunate enough in the past to bring on people who are not only amazingly talented, but incredibly supportive in their confidence of Pedal.

But there is one area of this project that is very intimidating to me. And for as far as we've come alone with this film... for all the obstacles and dead-ends and set-backs... the one area where I do feel increasingly isolated is: distribution.

I have heard over and over again - the last three years especially - the importance of a distribution plan *before* you even start your film. This is not to say that Amanda and I have zero plans for the release of FToM - we actually have a strict idea of releasing the film for free online (see Nina Paley). But with this model of release comes an overwhelming amount of preparation... preparation that I feel hasn't been done.

For example - On Peter Broderick's website, he goes into some of the key points behind a distribution team, which include: strategy, foreign sales, outreach coordinators, theatrical and semi-theatrical bookers, and print and online publicists. Do all of these points apply to FToM? No. But enough of them do to make it clear Amanda and I must find a way to really lock down our plans, to really fill in the lines between point a and point b of saying "we are releasing our film online for free" and actually making it happen.


I'll end this post with a few questions: How have (experienced filmmakers) / do-you-plan (aspiring filmmakers) on releasing your film? How did / will you form a distribution team? Was / is this team included in your project's budget? If your film, like many 1st time filmmakers, has no real financial foundation - how did you still go about forming a team of people for something global like this? Any advice could really help put my mind at ease and get Amanda and I pointed in a more constructive direction.

Labels: Distribution, Feedback, Filmmaker Summit, Post-Production, Slamdance, Workbook Project

I just finished watching a really inspiring video, twittered by Zak Forsman, of Nina Paley at the Phily DIY Days meet-up, that I mentioned recently, presenting the revenue results for her Creative Commons free-distribution approach. Yep, that's right, she has made money by giving her film away for free.

My favorite part of her presentation was early on when she defined "free" as having more than one meaning: there's the free as in "free beer", and there's the free as in "free speech".

Nina released her animated film, Sita Sings the Blues, five months ago under a Creative Commons Share Alike license. Now this site, has for several years, published under a Creative Commons Noncommercial Share Alike license, and that license applies to all the content we post here; the episodes, the teasers, the production updates, etc (unless specifically said otherwise).

What these licenses mean is pretty simple and straight forward; under both, people are free to share your work - this includes downloading it, making copies, uploading it to a bit-torrent site, etc... any means of sharing are allowed! They are even allowed to make changes to your work - in a film's case, they could re-edit or re-mix scenes - as long as they released that modified work under the same license.

But what you can't do under our project's current license, that you are allowed (and encouraged) to do under Nina's is sell the content. It's not even required that you cut a percentage of the profits with the person who created the work. Although, in most professional cases, that person or organization does share their profit.

She brings up a specific example of this in the video, a Film Festival downloaded her film, put it in their schedule, and sent her a short email afterward saying something along the lines of, "hey, we put your film in our fest'. We'll send you a check in a few weeks". Her film played there, did very well, and she received a check for a few thousand dollars.

That is how film distribution should work! It's not there yet, but people like Nina are working very hard to prove that it is a viable option for both filmmakers and theaters. It's really inspiring and encouraging to see this model working, and working so well, even in it's early stages of approach.

The way in which Nina makes most of her money is through selling "containers", more specifically: DVDs and merchandise. This has been a hard sell for other filmmakers and distributors, a huge majority are still hard-pressed to understand that just because someone can stream or download a film for free, doesn't mean they will not pay for it.

The more people that see Sita Sings the Blues... the more festivals it plays in... the more people who watch it online - enjoy it - and suggest it to a few friends... the more word of mouth: the more DVDs Nina sells. It's as simple as that.


The distribution of FToM has always been something I knew would have to be different - it's just not a film that is designed to be played in theaters all across the US. It's not a blockbuster, or a sleeper hit, or fun for the whole family. And I'm okay with that. I'm going to plan according for it, which means I won't be submitting to all the major film fest' with the hopes of being picked up. I'll still submit, but I won't be holding my breath.

FToM is guaranteed to do far, far better with a release approach similar to Nina's. And honestly, whether the film is more or less likely to be successful under this model is besides the point - I want to help push this form of distribution forward. I think it's important.

I think as more and more theaters upgrade their projection equipment to include digital, the more they tap into the internet, the more unavoidable it is to see organizations and companies come forward and help showcase film's with Creative Commons licenses. Most likely using something close to an on-demand / streaming / bit-torrent approach.

And that, to me, sounds like a very, very good thing.

Labels: Creative Commons, Distribution, DIY, FToM, Post-Production

A friend and follower of Pedal sent Amanda and I a link to an upcoming Film Independent workshop. The focus is DIY film distribution, and it's speaker is Jon Reiss, the author of an upcoming book called the DIY Bible.

At first glance, the program sounded really interesting to attend - it pushes hard the idea that using digital distribution and a self-release approach, you can get your film in front of many more people. Rather than waiting around at countless film-fest to be picked up and carried out on the shoulders of some generous big-budget studio.

But the part that I found disappointing was the cost of a ticket: $250. That's for a 3 hour group class. Which... isn't much tiome when attempting to squeeze in even a few possible solutions to digital distribution.

I think Film Independent is an important group, I think they are strong voice in the film community. I think groups, like FI, that focus on the DIY movement are smart and, at best, pushing a progressive (if sometimes disorganized) business plan for the future of film-making... and maybe at worst, just exploiting the buzzword to sell seats.


I'm not writing this with the intention of making enemies at FI - I just feel strongly that the DIY approach is more than a business model or a how-to, it's a community, one that was grown out of the idea of sharing and finding creative ways to release your work.

The DIY Days workshops that are put on through the WBP are free to attend - and they still manage to pull in very high-level and successful filmmakers who have done things their way. The last DIY Days I attended in LA featured: Robert Greenwald, and Ondi Timoner. It was a very educational, and very inspiring day - and it lasted twice as long as the upcoming FI event.

If you want to teach a DIY workshop and you have to charge to $25, $50 a ticket to make ends meet and to see to it that the event actually happens - then fine. I wouldn't think twice about paying that kind of money for a 3 hour class geared towards poor, ambitious, indie-filmmakers. If you have to charge $250... then you're doing it wrong.

I'm not making the point that professionals, authors, experts, hobbyists, etc shouldn't charge to share their process, especially one that took decades of experience to shape. But there is a time and a place... and a line that can be crossed where you go from helping others, to exploiting others to the point of defeating the purpose (of DIY).


Indie filmmakers don't have that kind of money to spend on workshops. And even if they did, in my opinion, they shouldn't be putting it towards group workshops (taught by a person who never had to pay someone else $250 to teach him how to do what he is teaching you how to do). That kind of money can go a long, long way in pushing your project online.


If you are interested in DIY distribution: then you should be able to name 2 or 3 films off the top of your head that took that route. And if you can do that: then you can probably track the steps they took in getting to where they are today (blogs, interviews, meet-ups). And if you can do that: they you should be able to pick and choose what approaches are still relevant, which fit your ideal model, which can be condensed and built upon.

Find people that inspire you - follow filmmakers who take risk, who make mistakes. Ask questions, and remember that finishing your film and releasing it isn't always a straight line. I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this.

Labels: Distribution, DIY, Film Independent, Workbook Project