tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2 2006-12-27T00:12:52Z Where the art of indie filmmaking meets the business of making movies. Movable Type 3.33 tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.58 2006-12-21T00:07:52Z 2006-12-27T00:12:52Z

My best wishes to everyone this holiday. Over the next couple of weeks we'll be using this down time to perform some site maintenance, open a few gifts, and drink way too much egg nog. I look forward to talking...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com My best wishes to everyone this holiday. Over the next couple of weeks we'll be using this down time to perform some site maintenance, open a few gifts, and drink way too much egg nog. I look forward to talking to everyone in 2007. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.57 2006-12-17T19:02:24Z 2006-12-18T19:04:47Z

It’s been 18 months since the Digital Cinema Initiative (think “studios”) put forth the digital-cinema standards. A lot has been accomplished in the past year and a half. About ten-percent (10%) of all US screens have been equipped with the...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com It’s been 18 months since the Digital Cinema Initiative (think “studios”) put forth the digital-cinema standards. A lot has been accomplished in the past year and a half. About ten-percent (10%) of all US screens have been equipped with the necessary hardware (hard drive storage, computer server, and projectors). Many more – perhaps a third of all screens – will go digital in the next couple of years. The promise for indie filmmakers is great. Hope is high. Digital cinema should give indie filmmakers a meaningful shot at self-distribution. The initial transfer from digital to film can easily reach $50,000. I can cost an additional $2,500 for a single 35mm film print. That price goes down the more prints you produce. Digital cinema, the thinking goes, should substantially cut costs. Encoding a digital project into the DCI standard is relatively inexpensive. I’ve received quotes from post houses as low as $2,500. You should budget $7,500 for most non-CGI intensive projects. This is in addition to your normal post costs. The cost of delivering the digital cinema package (DCP) to each theater gets a little more complex with options including satellite communications, telephonic-ISDN downloads, and physical delivery of hard drives. Budget $600 per theatre for delivery. Although one company – I can’t mention their name or price for contractual reasons – is substantially cheaper. They also seem to be very together technically. Clearly there are some substantial cost savings by going digital. Not to mention the savings in production costs. (Based upon my personal experience as an indie filmmaker, shooting a digital format instead of film can save 30% on a low budget shoot.) The problem, however, has never really been a technical one. The final DCI specs offered only a surprise or two (such as the use of Jpeg2000 as the compression format). The real problem was: who’s going to pay for all the new gee-whiz hardware. It costs approximately $100,000 to equip a single screen. And this is the problem for indie filmmakers. For a time it looked like the studios might finance the digital rollout. For legal and financial reasons the corporate chieftains that rule the Hollywood studios said, “No.” The theaters were never really interested in footing the bill for converting existing theaters. So the industry looked to vendor financing. The companies installing the new equipment would provide financing. How? These companies would install the new equipment at no cost to the theater, then charge the studios a fee for each digital screen they used. Essentially the vendors would rent their equipment to the studios on a per-screen basis. That makes sense since it is the studios that reap the lion share of the benefit from digital distribution. Unfortunately, this means that indie filmmakers who are seeking independent distribution will also be faced with this per screen charge. This charge will vary from circuit to circuit and vendor to vendor. The charge itself is not unreasonable. Someone has to foot the bill and the vendors are taking the financial risk. Again for legal reasons I can’t be more specific about these charges. The great hope that digital distribution would bring some measure of parity to theatrical distribution has pretty much gone from the digital promise to the big lie. Hopefully, with initiatives like AMC’s Select program, theater owners and technology vendors will provide a little relief for independent filmmakers. Don’t hold your breath. tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.56 2006-12-12T17:53:18Z 2006-12-18T17:59:04Z

A picture is worth a thousand words. And a good movie poster is worth, well, a lot. The poster is on the frontline in the battle for your movie dollar. So how come the posters often suck? In part, because...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com “The Number 23.” His mug is presented in an unusual way. It captures your attention. It doesn’t really speak to the movie’s story or theme and only hints at the genre. The second type of poster is the high-concept poster. A key image or art tells the story and genre. Little text is needed to further explain the concept. This kind of poster is worth a thousand words, literally. “Happy Feet” with its dancing penguin was a pretty good effort. The poster says a lot with almost no text. Will Smith’s new pic, “The Pursuit of Happyness” does a great job of blending both star and story. The poster says the Will Smith stars in a feel-good movie about a man and his son. Then there’s the poster for the upcoming “Fred Claus.” Personally, I think this is a confusing poster. I don’t like the graphic. On first glance I thought it was a mirror with Santa looking at himself. And there’s a lot of text. Tough to digest the text in 15 seconds or less. By way of shameless promotion, here’s our (prototype) movie poster for our upcoming feature, “I’ve Got Santa.” (Let me know what you think.) Before you shoot you next independent movie, do yourself a favor and design the poster. You will be surprised how it helps you to focus on what movie you are actually making. There is a great site for posters. It’s impawards.com – they track most movie posters and hand out year-end awards for the best and worst posters. It’s a great source. One post(er) script: It’s interesting to watch Hollywood promote their wares. Next Friday “The Good Shepherd” opens in theaters, probably in a big way. Big Stars. Adult oriented themes. Intriguing story: the beginning of the CIA. The commercials picture the burly talents of the film’s cast. But what about the director? In what has to be one of the best keep secrets – not even mentioned in the ads or on the poster – is the fact that the director is none other than Robert De Niro. So, why keep it a secret? Bob must be a shy guy.]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.55 2006-12-07T05:29:29Z 2006-12-08T05:34:59Z

Reuters is reporting that producer-director Gary Winick and his power-attorney partner, John Sloss are pulling the plug on their six-year old experiment, InDigEnt. By most accounts the production company was a success. The effort produced numerous standout indie films, such...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com InDigEnt. By most accounts the production company was a success. The effort produced numerous standout indie films, such as Pieces of April and Tadpole. The company also launched a number of careers, including Winick. InDigEnt is largely a victim of Winick’s own success. According to Reuters, Winick spent most of the last 2 ½ years directing the studio pic, "Charlotte's Web." This diverted his attention away from his company, which was an innovator in the early days of video-as-film production. For a read of the full news article click here. ]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.54 2006-12-05T02:16:32Z 2006-12-08T04:55:37Z

Walt Disney Feature Animation is the latest studio entity to trim staff in an effort to cut costs and boost profitability. The animators – 160 or 20% of the WDFA staff – will hit the bricks. According to Variety, no...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com get out this prior post. ]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.53 2006-12-04T04:43:34Z 2006-12-21T18:12:06Z

Boy that’s a weird title. Here’s the long and short of Mark Cuban’s latest film marketing test. And it’s a pretty good one. HDNet Films (a Mark Cuban company; he also owns the Landmark Theatres and Magnolia Pictures) is promoting...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com HDNet Films (a Mark Cuban company; he also owns the Landmark Theatres and Magnolia Pictures) is promoting a small (almost) indie film – The Architects starring Anthony LaPaglia and Isabella Rossellini. If you buy a ticket online to see the film in the theater, you receive a number of extras from the film: deleted scenes, soundtrack, etc. Think of it as getting the DVD extras before the DVD comes out. (It appears that what you actually get is online access to the extras.) It’s a nice way to thank filmgoers for purchasing a ticket online. Hey, I go to the same theater religiously because I occasionally receive a free popcorn or movie ticket, so why not some interesting extras on a film I’m already interested in seeing. The promotion only works for tickets purchase from movietickets.com. ]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.52 2006-12-01T18:09:07Z 2006-12-08T04:42:35Z

Bear Sterns is one of the biggest brokerage houses in America (yes, the same guys that sold you that hot Internet stock at the top of the market). They’re still selling stock and they would like to sell you stock...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com this presentation entitled: Why Aggregation & Context and Not (Necessarily) Content are King in Entertainment (What’s with that title? These guys are pretty sharp, but they sure can’t write ad copy to save their souls.) It’s a fast little slide show with an interesting take on the YouTube-type content that is permeating the web. Analyst Spencer Wang illustrates (in his opinion) how the “aggregators” – the companies like Goggle that are pulling together millions of video clips and other content – are more important than the actual producers of the content. As an indie filmmaker you shouldn’t be too concerned about this debate. It’s largely academic. However, slide number 12 graphically represents the concept of the “long-tail.” It’s a view that has become the current Internet zeitgeist. In short, the “long tail” is the aggregate demand for millions of pieces of content that can be served on the Internet, but could probably not be economically served by a brick and mortar store. For example, the Internet can easily store a billion video and music clips and they can be sold one at a time. There is very little demand for these clips individually, which makes it difficult for a physical store to stock that same inventory. However, in the aggregate, there is a significant demand. Spencer’s slide is worth a thousand words (or in this case, 88 words to be exact). You don’t have to be an economist to be a successful independent filmmaker, but being able to throw around terms like “Economy of Scarcity” and “demand curve” will make you look pretty smart at the next IFP cocktail hour. ]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.51 2006-12-01T04:33:37Z 2006-12-08T04:38:28Z

A couple of days ago I wrote about an interesting trend that is showing up in the capital of art house theaters – San Francisco – and spreading around the country thanks to the new evangelist of art house cinema,...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com Scott Kirsner’s Cinematech. He had lunch with Gary Meyer – the OG of art house theaters. Gary co-founded Landmark Theatres, now runs The Balboa in ‘Frisco and is behind the Telluride Film Festival. Gary makes an interesting point about the impact of the Netflix queue on art house films. And probably more mainstream fare as well. Essentially, Gary posits that the advances in technology that make it possible to add a movie to your Netflix or Blockbuster online queue is taking away the urgency to see that movie in the theater. It’s an interesting argument. Certainly the technology has shaped how we access films and other media. The introduction of video (VHS in the 70’s and DVD in the 90’s) and the multiplexing of cable in the 80’s have given consumers more choices how they access entertainment. As a result of the introduction of television and its video/cable cousins movie going, once a twice-weekly habit for many Americans, has been cut to a third of its 1950’s high watermark. Perhaps ten years from now we’ll be talking about the Netflix-effect. Take a read of Scott’s post for more of Gary Meyer’s thoughts on indie film.]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.50 2006-11-29T17:29:17Z 2006-12-08T04:32:42Z

Uber-TV-guy Shelly Palmer has written one of the best overviews of digital television I’ve read. It’s presented as a primer on how to buy a digital television. I used it recently to guide me in the purchase of a 42...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com Shelly Palmer has written one of the best overviews of digital television I’ve read. It’s presented as a primer on how to buy a digital television. I used it recently to guide me in the purchase of a 42 inch plasma display for professional use. Anyway, Shelly took great pains to produce what I think is a great overview on the various elements of digital television technology. It’s worth a read and a bookmark.]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.49 2006-11-27T11:23:43Z 2006-12-08T04:29:03Z

The San Francisco Chronicle has an interesting story on the changing state of art house cinema in that city – a city long considered by many to be the capital of art house theaters. The Bay area is home to...

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com San Francisco Chronicle has an interesting story on the changing state of art house cinema in that city – a city long considered by many to be the capital of art house theaters. The Bay area is home to the venerable Embarcadero in the Financial District and the Clay on Filmore. Both houses captured filmgoers seeking independent films and foreign films. Much of the landscape was dominated by indie circuit Landmark Theaters. Now off-beat films, subtitled movies, and small indie flicks are just as likely to play at the Metreon or the Century Centre. The Metreon, one of the most successful multiplexes in the country, is owned by AMC. It boasts 15 screens, plus an IMAX with million dollar grosses each week. The Century Centre is a nine-screen theater owned by circuit operator Cinemark with 2,700 screens worldwide. The important take away here is that the “art house” business is quickly moving into the mainstream. AMC is probably the biggest advocate of the new art house religion. It is promising to push independent films and other niche fare into more of its multiplexes across the country. Purists (okay, let’s call them by their real name: film snobs) feel that it is near impossible for a multiplex to build a business in niche films if those films play on screens next to the latest Hollywood megapic. Boy, if that isn’t snobbery, I don’t know what is. Most art house cinemas are located in urban theaters – many of them once abandoned by the large circuits with the push to suburbia and multiplexes. There is a sizeable audience for independent films among residents who live on the edge of urban centers and in the ‘burbs. In the past these audiences traveled to the city or more often chose to watch their indie films on video. A growing audience for niche films, combined with the expansion of digital delivery to theaters, is paving a way for independent filmmakers and producers. I don’t care if my films play at the art house theater with the pedigree or the new megaplex built next to the sheep farm. I’m going where the audience is.]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.48 2006-11-25T18:04:18Z 2006-11-27T18:08:18Z

Google’s purchase of YouTube has created a lot of hand wringing in executive suites. You would think that the studio bosses must have stepped through the looking glass. After all if the power players in Hollywood are staying up late wondering if they’ve missed the boat, then surely something is afoot?

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com Google’s purchase of YouTube has created a lot of hand wringing in executive suites. You would think that the studio bosses must have stepped through the looking glass. After all if the power players in Hollywood are staying up late wondering if they’ve missed the boat, then surely something is afoot? Guess again. The new media boat hasn’t even left the dock. And if the bosses are up late, it’s probably to attend a premier of another movie staring Hugh Jackman. The entertainment business is about one thing – content. It always has been and probably always will be. Sure, User Generated Content (UGS) is the latest new-media buzzword. Content generated by 14 year olds in their bedrooms or on the playground. Forty year old men dancing like its 1999. A cell phone video of a politician making an idiot out of himself. You get the idea. And evidently YouTube must have a couple billion dollars worth of UGC…right? Maybe. But check this out. Thirty days ago CBS – the old media company – started uploading short clips onto Google-YouTube. CBS is now the single largest provider of content to YouTube. And the most popular. The eye-web is averaging a million views a day on its YouTube content. Thirty million views in the last month! Now that’s content! What’s the play for independent filmmakers and producers? Generate content – think of it as high quality UGC if it makes you happy. But generate content. Then generate an audience for your content. Use the same outlets available to the big guys – MySpace, YouTube, LiveJournal, etc. It can be cheap and effective. You and I are not going to get a million hits, but we don’t need a million hits to be successful. You can build a nice distribution model around 25,000 hits. Who will dominate the new media? Very likely the same big players that dominated the old media. Who is the biggest online vendor? Amazon, Orbitz, or some other buy-it-here-dot com? No. It’s Wal-Mart. And where is the big professional money placing its bets? Yes, Google is up a gazillion percent over the last five years and they paid $1.65 billion for YouTube. But a group of Wall Streeters just paid $26 billion for a group of radio stations from Clear Channel Communications. Old media is still drawing the big bucks. As independent filmmakers and producers we’re neither old money nor new media elites. But we’re quicker and more agile. We’re grittier and closer to the game. We don’t have to run our content through a committee or get approval from the MPAA ratings board. (Did you know the ratings board also dictates the look of a trailer? It can’t be too edgy or too graphic? Think you might find an edge here?) It is about content…creating it, generating buzz, and distributing it. As we wrap up the end of the year, look to 2007 as the year you use the new media to do what was nearly impossible a decade ago – build a market for your high quality UGC. tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.47 2006-11-20T18:49:43Z 2006-11-20T19:11:44Z

Penguins and the new Bond did battle in domestic theaters over the weekend. Both films did about $40 million at home. Internationally, however, it was a much different story. And it’s a story the indie filmmakers and producers rarely discuss.

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com summaries of the event, if you haven’t already). Industry players spoke to a packed house at the Hammer Museum. What was painfully lacking however was anything dealing with foreign distribution. In fact, the one or two questions asked by audience members that dealt with international issues were met with some version of “that’s outside the scope of these discussions.” In other words, we don’t know the difference between the Baltic States and the Balkan territory. International distribution is a complex issue. Most true indie films – films without a studio deal – simply dump foreign territories into the lap of a foreign sales agent who shops the film at international markets. Or worse, the film hires a producer’s rep, who in turn dumps the foreign territories into the lap of a foreign sales agent. Anything the foreign sales agent brings in goes through the producer’s rep and the rep takes his or her 15 percent. Of course the sales agent also takes a fee – twenty to thirty percent plus expenses. Not managed properly, the indie film can get buried very quickly in fees and costs that reduce the net foreign take to little more than lunch money. My first film, Last Stand, was rep’d by a very reputable attorney. We received several offers from reputable distributors. We turned them down because it didn’t take a math whiz to figure out that the only ones getting fat were the reps, agents, and distributors. How important is distribution to indie filmmakers? Recently David Lynch bought back the domestic rights to his new film, Inland Empire. (The rights were held by StudioCanal, a major French company.) David Lynch and his producer are self-distributing the project in the US. In a business where it is critical to make every dollar count, Lynch is taking on distribution in the US because he understands the advice that Elliott Ness received, follow the money. In the world of indie films, the money trail can be difficult to follow as it weaves its way through foreign territories. Ignore foreign distribution at your own peril. I’d like to hear about your experiences with distribution, domestic and foreign. Link to Variety story (requires paid subsciption). Alternative source: BoxOfficeMojo. ]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.46 2006-11-17T17:09:21Z 2006-11-17T17:15:46Z

The battle for the living room is about to heat up, and just in time for Christmas. Microsoft is offering movie downloads via its XBox Live system. A direct competition to Apple's iTunes and iTV. So what does it mean for independent producers and filmmakers?

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com movie downloads via its XBox Live system. Initial terms, if reports are correct, will allow users to download a movie to their XBox system and hold on to the file for 2-weeks, but users must complete their viewing within 24 hours of first launching the file. The movie (and television programs, too) will play on the attached television. Apple’s iTunes system will offer a similar service next year. With a video downloaded from iTunes users will be able to view the video on their TV via the Apple iTV player to be sold in 2007. So what does it mean for independent producers and filmmakers? If you own a catalog of, say, 500 films, you will be happy to see this latest techno-twist unfold. The promised land of computer and television convergence (the battle for the living room) has been underway for more than a decade. (Remember WebTV?) The new service from XBox and iTunes will potentially mean more eyeballs watching movies. That translates into more value for your library of 500 films. Okay, most of us indie filmmakers don’t yet own a catalog of B-movies staring TV actors on their summer hiatus. Don’t look for Microsoft to embrace indie films anytime soon. They, like all the service providers, will be in search of the mass market. That’s the low hanging fruit. The long-tail theory will only kick in for these aggregators after they have picked the low hanging fruit clean. Indie films with their niche markets are not low hanging fruit. It needs to be repeated. In the effort to sell your project, don’t be sidetracked by Google Video, You Tube, VOD, streaming movies, etc. These are all delivery channels. The real question is how do I generate interest in my project? How do I build my audience? It’s very much, build it and they will come. Build an audience for your project and the distributors – be they studios, DVD distributors, or Microsoft – will come calling for your project. The importance of marketing cannot be overstated, even for an indie film. Perhaps, particularly for an indie film. It’s always surprising how many independent producers give little or no thought to marketing.]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.45 2006-11-15T17:20:55Z 2006-11-16T17:32:32Z

Blockbuster Video has signed an exclusive deal with The Weinstein Company. But when is an exclusive not an exclusive? And why did the Weinsteins smack down independent video stores that supported them for twenty years? Also...Check out this article on Soderbergh’s The Good German.

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com Blockbuster. Long counted down for the count by industry analysts, Blockbuster Video has signed an exclusive deal with The Weinstein Company. For the next four years Blockbuster will be the sole authorized video rental outlet for all DVD product coming from TWC. In other words, eat this Netflix. The Bobby bio-pic, for example, will be available to rent only from Blockbuster. Fortunately for DVD fans, there’s a big loophole in the deal. Blockbuster does not get exclusive rights to retail sales. (TWC would have committed financial suicide had they given that plum away.) So, you will be able to purchase the Bobby DVD at Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Sam’s Club, Costco, etc. And you will be able to rent it at the local video store in your neighborhood. How’s that? I thought it was a Blockbuster exclusive? Your independent video rental store will not be denied. For years the independents have purchased additional product at Sam’s Club or Costco and put it out for rental. So, when Bobby hits the shelves of Blockbuster – the exclusive rental chain – and the shelves of Sam’s Club all on the same day, the indie video store will run down to Sam’s pickup forty copies and put them out for rental. It’s all perfectly legal under court rulings dating back thirty years. For TWC it’s probably a smart deal, since it no doubt is an output deal requiring Blockbuster to pickup all TWC product, not just cherry-pick the A-titles. For Blockbuster the public will be snookered into believing it really is an exclusive deal and generate more traffic for the beleaguered rentailer. What really sucks is the slap in the face for the independent stores. For nearly twenty years the independent stores supported the artier fare that the Weinsteins were distributing when the likes of Blockbuster and Wal-mart wouldn’t carry such niche titles. I guess the Weinsteins don’t believe in dancing with the one that brought you. What would Bobby think? The second, much quicker item, is a simple link to a very good article written by the New York Times about Steven Soderbergh’s The Good German. If you’re into production, take a read. Very insightful. (Why did such a talented helmsman like Soderbergh make such a wretched piece of video like Bubble?) Note: To access the article you will to subscribe to the NYTimes online, but it’s free. ]]> tag:www.directorsltd.com,2006:/indieprod//2.44 2006-11-14T03:16:41Z 2006-11-16T03:20:45Z

It’s little recognized outside of LA circles, but it is an industry truth, the studios don’t make money with the production. They never have. The studios only make money when a movie (or DVD) sells. Their money comes from distribution. They take their twenty to thirty-five percent distribution fee, plus expenses, off the top. And they would prefer that someone else, say a New York hedge fund, put up the dough for production. So how does this help us indie-folks?

Lyle http://www.DirectorsLtd.com Variety, studio chief Harry Sloan said, “…next year is likely to see MGM go into production with new installments of the first three.” Sloan is a very smart guy and a business-cool dude. He has restructured the studio to tackle the uncertain industry as well as the new realities at MGM (a company heavy with debt). They are cutting development and production. One thousand of the 1,400 staffers have been jettisoned. Production investment has shrunk from $700 million a year to just $100 million. They are focusing on distribution. It’s little recognized outside of LA circles, but it is an industry truth, the studios don’t make money with the production. They never have. The studios only make money when a movie (or DVD) sells. Their money comes from distribution. They take their twenty to thirty-five percent distribution fee, plus expenses, off the top. And they would prefer that someone else, say a New York hedge fund, put up the dough for production. So how does this help us indie-folks? MGM is pursuing a plan that is tent pole-centric. The latest Bond pic, a new Pink Panther (written by Steve Martin), another "Thomas Crown" starring Pierce Brosnan, and even a couple of Hobbit movies from Peter Jackson. These are the type of $100 million-plus pics that the lion is pursuing with its own coin, and outside partners (such as the Weinstein Company). Sloan is shooting to generate $500 million in free cash flow, up from the $100 million coming in prior to Sony-Comcast taking over ownership of MGM. Their distribution machine will need all the product it can get. It will build a release slate around these mega-flicks, but the smaller meat and potato films that will fill its distribution pipeline will come from other companies. Indie filmmakers with new and interesting voices or producers with commercial fare that falls outside the studio mega-tent will find distribution. Why? Because the studios need the product. The more the studios move to a distribution-first business model, the more they will need product from independent sources. And what about audiences? With American audiences becoming more ethnically and socially diverse and film watching on the rise around the world (whether in the local bijou or at home), do you really think that audiences will be satiated with another Pink Panther or the latest American Pie VII? The homogenization of film distribution is taking place at the exact time that the world is experiencing an inspiring and hopeful awakening of global diversity. Forget Islamic terrorists. Yes, they want to destroy democracy and capitalism. But they will lose. The real untold story is that “Hollywood” films are being made in places like Morocco, South Africa, and Eastern Europe. Asian films are finding a place on screens in America’s heartland. The major theater chains are now opening up screens to “art house” films. What makes a movie an indie film? An art house film? A studio pic? A foreign movie? In a global movement to reinvent motion picture story telling these questions are becoming increasingly irrelevant. Make an interesting story, well told, that appeals to a particular niche. Will you become rich? Probably not. Will you make a living and live to make another movie? Probably. ]]>