Archives for bstrate

Cutting the middle man

I was on a phone call today with a well-known and liked film industry person who remarked to me “You know we thought that the digital world was going to cut out the middle man, but it’s actually created more than ever.” Worse still, we decided that not only are their more middle men, but they’re doing less actual good for the creators than the previous middle men – at least the old middle men knew how to market your film, for example.

Sad, but true, state of affairs in the film industry. Creative people are creating more brilliant stuff than ever before. The profits accrue to a handful of aggregators in the middle who aren’t adding much value, and the consumer still has a heck of a time getting what they want (when they want it) either.

The more things change…

Internet Censorship Day Nov 16th

If all goes as planned, I’ll be joining many others on Wednesday November 16th for Internet Censorship Day. That is, if I can figure out how to paste code correctly to this site…UPDATE: I couldn’t get the code to work. I stink, but I still support this cause!

What is it? Well, it’s a protest against a bill being considered in the US Congress that would be very detrimental to the future of the web. It’s an attempt to curb piracy, but it could have a much bigger impact, and it could be bad. I could explain it all here, but the campaign site does a good job, and the video below does it even better.

What this video and join the cause:

RICKY on LEACOCK: Kickstarter campaign launches

I’ve been helping filmmaker Jane Weiner launch a Kickstarter campaign for her new film, a work-in-progress called RICKY on LEACOCK on the legendary documentary filmmaker. I’ll be posting a lot of updates here on the campaign – how it’s going, what we’re learning about raising money this way, other ways you can help. I’ve helped many filmmakers with Kickstarter campaigns, but this one is a bit different to me – I’m supporting her with my work and my donation to the campaign, not just because I like Jane and her films, but because I want to be a part of honoring his legacy – to documentary films, but also to the field more broadly and even to the “amateur” filmmakers posting videos online today. I’ll be writing more about this soon, but if you too are a fan of Ricky Leacock, please consider supporting this campaign, by making a donation on Kickstarter or by simply helping us to spread the word. Thanks!

On my way to DocNYC

I’m really excited that this week is the launch of the second annual DocNYC Film Festival. I imagine most of my NYC based readers know about this fest already, but if not, check out their website for the complete line-up. They’ve got some amazing docs this year, and I really commend them for putting together such a spectacular festival.

I’ll be moderating a couple of interesting panels at the festival. On Wed, Nov 2nd, I’ll be moderating “State of Theatrical” at 12:45pm. Panel description from the site: What do recent hits and misses tell us about the theatrical marketplace for docs? Panelists include Matt Cowal of Magnolia Pictures (Page One: A Year Inside the New York Times); Ryan Krivoshey of Cinema Guild (The Interrupters); Emily Russo of Zeitgeist Films (Bill Cunningham New York); and a representative of IFC Films/Sundance Selects (Cave of Forgotten Dreams) discussing their strategies for success.

Then at 2:30pm, I’ll be discussing the “State of Digital” From the fest description: In the rapidly changing world of digital distribution what are the options, opportunities and cautions for independent filmmakers? What’s the difference between transactional, subscription and ad-supported models? Representatives from key players and close watchers of this sector share their insights. Panelists include: Matt Dentler (Cinetic Film Buff); Susan Margolin (New Video/Docurama); Andrew Mer (SnagFilms); Lisa Schwartz (SundanceNOW).

That’s a great line-up of fantastic panelists, and I’m looking forward to learning a bit about the current health of the industry from them. While I’m not moderating the panel, I’m excited to also hear the panel on Branded Content. Given the fact that Thom Powers just announced a new partnership, Launch Pad, with Grey Global and Morgan Spurlock to connect doc makers and brands, that should be a great discussion. I think this is one of the most exciting new developments in the industry. Everyone with an interest in how brands and filmmakers might work together should attend. I’ve written before that we need a lot more conversation about this, as it’s a growing area. I think the team here will do it the right way, and I congratulate them on pulling this together. You can find all the panels at DocNYC here.

I’ve also been lucky enough to see a few of the films in advance, and of those I’ve seen I can highly recommend three. Okay, I could recommend more, but these three are my favorite, plus one retrospective that no one should miss. No lengthy reviews here, but I highly recommend checking out the following three titles:

Lemon – following the story of Lemon Andersen, as he attempts to make a come-back, from three time felon to one man poetry theater phenomenon.

Kumare – Kumare follows a man with followers – but he’s not the shaman they think he is. This one was a huge hit at SXSW, and while it does ride a fine line between ridiculing its subjects and having compassion for them, I think it comes down on the right (latter) side of that line.

Calvet – Another story of an artist breaking through, but this one is much different. Calvet is now an internationally renowned artist, but he led a tough life including everything from mob bodyguard to heroin and crack addicted nightclub owner. Calvet has now cleaned up his life, but has one task left – to re-connect with his estranged son. While most people will like this for the more sensational parts of the story, I found it fascinating to hear how he discovered his artistic talent and how his art continues to help him move forward.

Last, I highly recommend checking out the Ricky Leacock retrospective and the work in progress screening of Jane Weiner’s “On Being There.” Full disclosure, I’m helping Jane with her soon-to-launch Kickstarter campaign (more on that soon), but I’d recommend this regardless of that connection. Ricky Leacock was a legendary figure in documentary films, and we lost a mentor to many when he passed away last year. Jane’s film is an excellent tribute to him, and while it is a work in progress, it’s worth catching as it’s the last time you’ll ever see the film like this (a completely new version of the film is being completed now). You can also catch a few greats in the Leacock retrospective the fest has put together.

All in all, this is a great week to catch some amazing docs in NYC. The organizers have put together a great event, and it’s still growing and coming into its own, so we can only expect greater things in the future.

Oh, Really Reed

Jeesh, Reed Hastings, you can really f-up a situation can’t you?! WTF man, as if the whole recent Qwikster debacle wasn’t bad enough, you get the opportunity to clean things up a bit in Sunday’s New York Times interview puff piece with you and you utterly screw that up as well.

Ok, fair enough, you suck at what might be the most important part of your job – public relations, but you did make a pretty cool service. I’ve been willing to forgive you, all along, and I’m still betting your stock will rise, against most pundits in the film world, but… you finally lost me today.

Andrew Goldman, the NYT interviewer, comes down pretty hard on you in the interview. He asks some tough questions, and finally gets to the meat of his argument when he points out that not only is your streaming collection woefully inadequate compared to your DVD selection, but that you’ll be losing your Starz deal soon, which includes Disney content such as Toy Story 3. What can cushion the blow (to his son) of losing Buzz Lightyear? he asks. Your response:

“I watch mostly independent films. I’m not in that particular demo. I’ll send you a list”

Oh, Really Reed. That’s your answer?

So, you defend your current crappy situation by appealing to indie film? That’s pretty ironic, isn’t it?

If you love indie film so much, why do you keep cutting the deals you give to indies? It’s an open conversation these days that you’re not renewing scores of indie film deals. It’s an open secret that outside of a few select indie aggregators, you’ve never paid that much for them in the first place.That’s fine, it is a small market, but don’t act like that’s why you don’t know – as the CEO of a publicly traded company whose very popularity hinges on being a repository of just about all films, indie and Hollywood – some better answer to the question. Jeesh. Yeah, I’m Reed Hastings, so f-ng busy watching indie films that I didn’t realize we’d be losing Toy Story 3, and don’t know why anyone would care.

So, do you really love indie film, or was this your publicist’s brilliant strategy for deflecting the criticism? I can almost hear her/him: “If they ask about Starz and Disney, say you watch indies and don’t know about that. No one watches indie films, but they have stellar street cred. It’s almost like pulling out a f-ing puppy, you become criticism/bullet-proof. People love to support indie films in spirit, but no one watches enough of them to actually call your bluff and point out that our indie selection is decreasing as well. It will be brilliant.”

But it’s not.

Luckily for you, your real customers – the majority – care about Real Housewives and other shows they couldn’t figure out how to DVR, so they need them streaming on demand. Your core customers, the ones you built your business on and who watch indies and classics and obscure titles, don’t realize that you’ve shifted your tactics and these titles are slowly disappearing. Your competitors can’t figure out that having 10K crap titles can’t compete with a mixture of good big/small content (and can’t afford to license it). You can be comfortable in your ownership of this space. You don’t need to change anything. You don’t need to listen to your core customers. You don’t need to listen to anyone. You’ll just do whatever you want while people continue to pay up.

Nope, no need to be strategic here. Once you’re the big kid on the block, who is going to disrupt this situation?

Oh, wait. I’ve heard this story before. This might actually get fun pretty soon.

Having an (unintended) impact with a film

There’s often a lot of debate in the world over whether or not film can have an impact in the world. Well, today’s NYT shows the unexpected impact of the film Persepolis (Marjane Satrapi) on the upcoming elections in Tunisia.

Screenings of the film on a Tunisian television station have fueled a debate over religion vs freedom of speech, and many people expect it will lead to a victory for the more mainstream, but still conservative, Islamist party in the country. As the NYT puts it today:

“The episode began when a relatively small group of ultraconservative Islamists attacked the television station that had broadcast the 2007 film, about a Muslim girl growing up in post-revolutionary Iran, because of a scene in which she rails at God. He is depicted as she imagines him, violating an Islamic injunction against personifying him”

Public disapproval of the film has been strong enough to shape the debate over where the country is headed. As the article goes on to explain, it’s not that the film discusses other liberal values – people didn’t feel offended by shows depicting “racy scenes from French films or of couples kissing in public that might not fit with traditional Islam.” They were specifically offended by what they considered the blasphemous act of depicting visions of God. 

There seems to be much debate over whether the broadcaster purposefully showed the film to ignite tensions and stir debate over religious vs secular values, but according to the article, this has become a lightning rod issue in Tunisia.

Some consider the debate to be quite telling: “Some individual liberals observed with wry satisfaction that the film told the story of a supposedly liberal revolution that turned oppressive after Islamists took power in Tehran — bolstering the liberal argument that Tunisia’s moderate Islamists should not be trusted, either.”

I don’t know enough about politics in the region – or even religion in the region – to have much say in this debate, but I’m fascinated with how this little film can still have so much impact globally. Shows the power of the moving image – even if its not always in ways we expect.

What I’d Change in Indie Film

Over at IndieWire, Ted Hope and Christine Vachon have been asking some questions about indie film leading up to their Masterclass. One of them is “if you could change one truly changeable thing about the film industry, what would that be?” I can’t wait to see all of the ideas, there’s already a few good ones in the comments, and they’ll be announcing the winner soon.

These are a few of my ideas for changing the film industry. I don’t submit them to actually win a trip to VacHope land (you can win a free ticket to their masterclass), but just to join/add to the conversation. Sure, they might not be truly changeable things, and I don’t have the money to make them happen, but they should be done:

1. I’d take 1/3 of all grant funding in indie film and re-designate it as funds for creative producers taking creative risks, to develop their next film. No proposal would be required, all nominations would be made by the crowd and grants would be decided by a panel of writers and/or directors.

2. I’d start a large fund for the support of artistically interesting narrative films that don’t fit any particular agenda. It’s too hard to get funding for a non-social-issue-doc right now.

3. I’d invest in IndieWire, specifically for them to reimagine what IndieWire should be today, given the state of the field and of current technology, allowing them the freedom not to worry about the current state of the market (advertising whims, Oscar campaigns, etc) and just focus on what the industry needs. Hint: We need more info that no one wants reported.

4. I’d start a large funding program for independent distributor’s marketing expenses – specifically, to increase their marketing and try some new things. All of this money might be wasted, or we might learn something about the value of good marketing.

5. I’d give grants to independent exhibitors to create a new, online social ticketing system that takes advantage of all the possibilities we see on the horizon for the next three years.

6. I’d invest in anything that the following people could agree on doing together (in alpha order): Chad Burris, Karin Chien, Mynette Louie, Scott Macaulay, Will Packer, Mike Ryan and Jess Search. They’d get $1M for two years start-up of anything that any 4 out of 7 of them agreed upon.

7. I’d offer a $5 Million dollar grant to any of the major film festivals in the world, with one condition – they get rid of their premiere policies entirely for at least three years.

8. I’d give every Black and Latin American female director who ever had a film accepted into any film festival a grant to make her second film. Too few of them get the chance, and it hasn’t been for lack of talent.

9. I’d pay a big lobbying firm to get Congress to pass three laws – 1) that the right of first sale applies to digital goods; 2) that all film companies must publicly and freely report all sales from all formats, not just box office results; and that we have real net neutrality on all devices, yep, wireless too.

10. I’d fine anyone who makes lists of things that need to be changed in indie film in order to fund all of these ideas.

One from the arts – Jillian Mayer

Thanks to Artpapers Magazine, I’ve just discovered a new visual artist to follow – Jillian Mayer. I’m definitely a bit late to this game, but noticed that no one I follow/read has said much about her, and her work rocks.

Jillian is making some great art. It’s cool and popular too, but it still makes a statement. Check her work out. I’ll be following this artist, and am willing to bet she gets known in the film world before too long.

Three of my favorites:

I am Your Grandma:

Scenic Jogging:

Scenic Jogging by Jillian Mayer from Jillian Mayer on Vimeo.

How My Best Friend Died:

The State of Indie Film in Graphs

I recently discovered Google Insights for Search. You can see how search for any term, or set of terms has changed. Wow, what fun can be had. Here’s some Friday fun for you.

Here’s Google trends for search on the term Independent Film. Not looking good:

Here it is for Documentary Film:

Here’s Indie vs Documentary:

Here’s Music Documentary:

Here’s a comparison of a few, including foreign film and French Films:

Note that if you type “social issue documentary” or any close variant, there’s not enough data to pull it up at all. But here’s some interesting insight – look how the trendy word “transmedia” fares vs Indie Film. Why…it’s just about as unpopular now!

What does this all mean? I’m obviously no scientist, but I think it’s fun to play around with, and I’ll let you make your own conclusions.

Transmedia Activism and Docs at the NYFF

NYFF

Looks like I’ll be joining a panel at the New York Film Fest this Saturday night at 7pm to speak about transmedia activism and documentary films. If you are in town and interested in the subject, please stop by and say hello (while asking a question in the Q&A perhaps). The event is in the Elinor Bunin Munroe Film Center Amphitheater at 144 West 65th St, which is a good space for this type of event (seriously, it’s great for a conversation).

Here’s the description from the festival (more panelists TBA):

Session 2 of “Beyond the Screen: The Immersive Media Forum.”

Through the last century documentaries have played a pivotal role informing the public on issues of social and global justice and have served as calls to action, mobilizing citizens and leaders.  As filmmakers and advocacy groups meet on the fluid platforms of the web, a new form of activism has emerged, dubbed “Transmedia Activism.” This panel will discuss this emergence, and the role traditional documentaries and web savvy advocacy groups will play moving forward.

Beyond the Screen: The Immersive Storytelling Forum
Contemporary technologies have always had a profound effect on the way we tell stories.  Just as the printing press paved the way for the novel and television gave us the sitcom, so to the computer is changing the face of entertainment.  This is by no means a new idea – critics, creators, and audiences have been talking about the fact that the digital age is altering the traditional role of the storyteller and audience for some time.  What we hope to do at the Beyond The Screen is to move the conversation along, if only by asking one very simple question: “How?”

It’s a new age for telling stories and with it comes a new set of rules, a new critical vocabulary, as well as new models for doing business.  From video games with ever more realistic graphics and complex narratives to immersive worlds built atop our own that permit audiences to physically explore story in three living dimensions, a change is taking place.  Audiences are transitioning from simple consumers of entertainment into dynamic participants in their media of choice.  Beyond the Screen is a series of panels, presentations, and special events that seeks to draw together the makers driving these changes – the writers, producers, story architects, and designers in the fields of transmedia and video games – for a discussion of the state of the art as well as an exploration of the roll film has played in effected these emerging modes of storytelling…and how these emerging fields have effected the relatively new art of film.  Designed to be accessible to both active producers of transmedia and those just discovering the form (or forms as the case may be) for the first time, BEYOND THE SCREEN aims to change the way you think about storytelling – from how story is told to who is telling it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

My Personal Kickstarter Policy

I’ve supported many projects on KickStarter, and I’m a big fan of it and other crowdfunding sites. I’ve shared my thoughts on it a few times here. I also will often blog, Tweet about or otherwise share links to projects I think are worthy of support. I’ve never personally supported a project where I didn’t somehow know the person(s) involved. Maybe we weren’t friends, but I’d met them at some conference or film festival, or had at least seen them pitch their project somewhere else.

I know many people support projects by people unknown to them, even people they’ve never heard of. I think this is a valid practice, but it’s not for me. My wife, on the other hand, has only supported one project and it wasn’t someone she knew at all, she just liked the thing this person was trying to do, but she had no account so I made the donation on her behalf.

Sometimes I support projects that are or have been clients of mine, or where I have some business relationship with the person, or have had something like this in the past. I try to always disclose this, but usually in a blog post, not on Twitter due to the 140 character limit.

I get asked to spread the word about projects all the time. Increasingly, I get asked by people I’ve never met, to support films by people I’ve not only never met, but whose films I’ve never seen. I understand the impulse – when spreading the word about a project, this is what people think you have to do. Cold calling. But I don’t think it’s the proper way to fundraise. If you want me to support your project, I’m simply not the kind of person who responds to a Tweet and then Retweets it to my (small amount of) followers. Plenty of people find someone who knows me and asks them to make an introduction. I’m not that hard to find this way. There’s a slim chance I might respond to a random email or Facebook introduction – with some explanation of why I might care about your project, but I’ll never just auto-retweet to help you out. Sorry.

I’ve helped many people run successful Kickstarter campaigns. We target and reach out to people who don’t know us, but we always contextualize the ask – “Hey Mister Blogger about topic this film covers, we think you might care about this because of X,Y and Z. If you agree, we’d love your support by way of spreading the word. If not, sorry to bother you, and we won’t contact you again.” Works much better than “Hey @bloggerpants show me some love.” What works even better? “Hey Jill, we met at DIYDays and had a nice chat in the hall. I noticed you know Ms. Famous Blogger, and I wonder if you could make an intro so I can explain this film I’m working on, and why I think she’d like to help spread the word.”

I also don’t think the few people who read/follow me would appreciate me turning on the firehose. Part of the reason I follow people and respond to their requests is because they curate what they promote. I do the same – I’m not spreading the word about something unless I know the people involved somehow, know their work and/or it’s something I’m passionate about. IMHO, this is how fundraising works generally, in both the old and new fashioned worlds, and more people need to realize the old quality/quantity argument applies here as well.

Why do I bother to write this up now? Because I can’t respond individually to everyone who asks me for help. As crowdfunding gets more popular, I am getting such requests often, sometimes several in a day. I’m sure people with more followers than me are getting deluged with requests as well. I’m sure each of these projects is worthy, and some might be 100 times better than what I’ve supported. But I support the person as much as the project, and now you know why I’m not tweeting about more projects.

I don’t automatically follow people who follow me online either, but that’s a whole ‘nother post.

Now…back to making my list of people to contact for my next Kickstarter campaign!

Enhanced by Zemanta

(No title)

There’s another great Helen Hill retrospective screening down in Atlanta, as part of a new micro-cinema there. The Contraband Cinema will be screening The Florestine Collection, finished by her husband Paul Gailiunas, as well as films by a few other folks.

I’ve been a big fan of Helen’s work, and am so glad Paul took on the task of finishing her last film. As the ContrabandCinema website explains:

“Employing ingenious and resourceful DIY methods, documented in her book Recipes for Disaster, Helen Hill created films and taught filmmaking at the academic and community level. She was much loved in the experimental animation community and continued to work until 2007 when she was killed in New Orleans during a home invasion. She is survived by her husband Paul Gailiunas, their son, two cats and a potbellied pig. There are several awards dedicated to the memory of Helen.”

If you live in/near Atlanta, be sure to check it out.

(No title)

I met Ben Kalina when doing a consultation in Philadelphia. He’s asked me to help him a bit with an upcoming Kickstarter campaign, but I wanted to share info on his film now. Ben’s new film, Shored Up is shaping up to be a pretty timely look at beach erosion, given the recent events caused by Hurricane Irene. Check out his trailer here, visit the film’s website and follow him on Twitter. He was also a recent guest on Democracy Now, and that’s worth watching if you care about what’s happening on barrier islands due to beach erosion (which also affects the surf, you know, which people come for). All around, a great project.

How not to show a film

image

On Labor Day, my wife and I decided to finally go see Senna at a movie theater. We were just about to go see it at the Landmark Sunshine Theater, when we realized we could stay nearer to our hood and see it at the Film Society of Lincoln Center, saving a trek and supporting an awesome organization closer to us. I’d been there before for a panel presentation, but hadn’t seen a film in the new Elinor Bunin Munroe Film Center (yes, of course, we’ve been to their other theaters over the years).

How surprised we were when we entered the theater and realized we weren’t getting seated in either of the two new, supposedly amazing theaters, but in the Amphitheater – which is basically a little room with glass walls and six or so rows of bench style seating with a gigantic tv screen in front. This is where I’d been to a panel, and the room works fine for such an event, but… we were here for a movie. What the FSLC likes to call a film. What they were, in essence, built to celebrate as an art form.

Senna is no ordinary documentary. It is (supposedly) a tour de force doc about a powerful sportsman in a sport that kinda demands the big screen (Formula 1 racing), big noise, treatment. Not something I wanted to watch from the comfort of my living room, or someone else’s for that matter. (oh, and btw, yes, I watch many films on my laptop, etc, but by choice, and at a different price point, and not at a temple to film, and…).

We reluctantly took our seats, it was about half full, which isn’t bad for a Holiday evening. But, due to a big design flaw, my wife’s feet couldn’t touch the floor. So, not only is this not stadium seating, but it’s not even standard theater seating, or standard…anything seating. She rested her feet on her bike helmet and we began debating our options – see this in a less than ideal space (to be charitable) or walk out and try to see it on a real movie screen in the future. Well, our decision-making process had barely gotten started when the usher came in to let us know the film would be starting soon, but there would be some light issues due to the design of the space and to let them know if it bothered us.

??

That was enough to get us to leave. They gave us a refund after pointing out that we’d paid cheaper – $10 instead of $13 – because of the theater. I decided the poor ticket seller had nothing to do with this absurdity and just smiled as I got my refund. We left. We fumed about the state of cinema-going.

What the heck has gone wrong here? How does a film society, not just any society, but THE Film Society of Lincoln Center thinks it’s acceptable to show a film this way and charge admission? I’m not going to bother to point out all the reasons this isn’t acceptable – I can’t believe that any of the cinephiles I know at FilmLinc would possibly think this is acceptable, and I’m sure they know the reasons why. I know that the current leadership wasn’t there when this theater was designed, so I’m not blaming them for not realizing that Mr. Fancypants Architect designed them a no-good amphitheater that wasn’t practical for showing films. But I do think all of them should take a little retreat, perhaps to a cinema like The Paris, and have a big talk about how they might better showcase this “important art” we call film.

I am guessing that showing films in the amphitheater is a purely financial decision. These new theaters were expensive, the economy is pretty bad and nonprofits always need a way to make more money, and I can understand that need, but this is not the way to do it. Frankly, I’m also surprised that any distributor would let their film be shown this way. I’m all for shaking up how we think of seeing films, and I think we all need to be open to new ideas, which is why I love the ReRun, for example. But this doesn’t feel like a bold experiment to me. It just feels like putting a film where it isn’t meant to go.

In all the reading I’ve done about the Center, I never read that the amphitheater was meant for showing films. I heard about it being used for talks, for special presentations and such. I could see it being used in any number of ways, but not as a first-run, arthouse theater. Give me some lectures, even with some film examples being shown. Give me screenings with running discussions. Showcase some of the great art-world films that usually only get seen in a gallery. Heck, I’d love to see something like The Clock in there (well, maybe not, the gallery here was more comfortable). But please, stop showing films like this, and if you must, please make it much more clear on your website that the film won’t be seen in a real theater so cinemaniacs don’t waste their time and money.

I’m off to do that tonight, finally going downtown to Landmark. I’d rather not. I am a huge fan of the FSLC and their new leadership and staff. I want to spend every one of my cinema dollars at their Center. I’ll still go when I’m 100% sure the film won’t be in the amphitheater, and I’ll go to that space for other, non-cinema, events. People don’t take constructive criticism well in this business, but if they read this, I sure hope they do this time.

(Photo from Film Society of Lincoln Center website)

Enhanced by Zemanta

FilmDIY Guide to the Interweb

Recently, I was lucky enough to meet Kobi Shely, the filmmaker of MacHeads, and founder of both DocMovies and FilmDIY. FilmDIY is a very filmmaker-friendly e-commerce site where you can sell your film online at any price you want, nonexclusive terms and get an automatic 70% return. His company also helps with some promotion and things like Facebook apps, etc. Kobi sent me this excellent video they made to promote the service, and it’s pretty smart. Check it:

What is filmDIY? The Filmmaker’s Guide to The Interweb from filmDIY on Vimeo.

Breathing New Life into Your (old) Film

I’ve long thought that people give up too easily on older indie films that didn’t break into the big time on the first go-round. Usually, it’s the distributors that give up, (not to beat up on them, but because many older indie films that one has ever seen are locked up with distributors, not lying in the filmmaker’s closet), but sometimes it’s the filmmaker not being creative enough with their older titles. I understand this – people want to move on to the next project, so spending much time re-positioning an older film may not be worth the time. But when you have a little success that first go-round, you’re well positioned to tap back into that fan base, and bring in some new ones, and noting does that better than an event-based screening.

Which is why I’m so happy that Milt Thomas is planning a 10 year anniversary screening of his little masterpiece, Claire. A very smart event-based anniversary screening. See, Claire was always an event-based screening kind of film. Shot on a hand-cranked, Mitchell 35mm camera in Black and White, Claire was a silent film only shown with a live orchestral accompaniment. This made for quite the magisterial screening, but it was also quite expensive to pull off. In fact, one very famous, major film festival turned down the film solely for this reason, but the film premiered at the Frameline San Francisco LGBT Festival and went on to play multiple festivals and cities. One of these was recorded to make a DVD of the film, but the real way to see this film has always been live.

Now, Milt is putting together an anniversary screening on November 3, 2011 in Atlanta, GA and he’s holding a very tiny Kickstarter campaign that will pay for the venue rental and for the composer, Anne Richardson, to re-compose the film for a string quartet, which will allow the film to travel to other venues much more economically. This is a very smart idea, and I imagine Milt can get a fair amount of 10th Anniversary bookings. I’m planning to support him, and to travel back down to Atlanta to be there for this screening. I recommend you do the same – Atlanta is great in November, and this promises to be a great event. I hope to see you there!

Social Media Vacation

Whoa, August caught up with me something fast. I usually take the month of August off from all social media. I’ve just realized that I broke that rule by nine whole days, yikes. Time to get off these interwebs. Why am I telling you this? Well, as I said last year, I don’t want anyone to be offended if I don’t answer them on Facebook or Twitter for awhile. I’ll be back after Labor Day and I’m sure I won’t miss much (things slow down in August, that’s why I picked it for this kind of vacation). If you know me well, or are a client, you can find me on old fashioned email until August 18th, when I disappear for about ten days from all communications while I take my real world vacation.

Last year, this little experiment led me to abandon FourSquare altogether, but I missed Twitter a little bit. I imagine that this year might cause me to go ahead and abandon Google+ early and will likely kick me off Facebook, as I get less value from that place daily. We’ll see.

I am never one to blog super often anyways, but if you miss me, I suggest you spend some time reading Donald Whittington over at “The Automat” for awhile. I just discovered him when he wrote a stellar review of a film I’m a fan of, and now I’m a huge fan of his blog. He wrote my quote of the year regarding General Orders No. 9: “This movie is a plea to everyone to start thinking, now, about what you want from living. What do you want from the day? Surely there is more to existence than scrambling back and forth in our cars like maddened human tumbleturds trying to figure out where to push all our shit. “

I’m going to spend the next month thinking about what I want from the day, without asking the internet to help me out. I suggest you do the same sometime.

Enhanced by Zemanta

createEquity Rocks…someone in film pls imitate

Ian David Moss of Fractured Atlas, itself a rockin arts group, has a pretty cool blog called CreateEquity. Every week of two, he posts a wrap-up of the latest news from the art world, which he calls “Around the Horn.” Here’s last week’s post. It rocks.

It sums up pretty much everything you need to know that happened in the art world recently – from new studies to new hires to important news. With enough info that you can actually learn something (unlike similar columns in the Hollywood Reporter, for example).

It rocks so much that it makes me miss having a similar service in the indie film world. I get more value out of this one column than I do from a week of reading every indie newsletter in existence. I’m too lazy, but can someone take the charge and copy/imitate this for indie film? Please?

Edinburgh and the Future of Film Fests

'Edinburgh' photo (c) 2009, Moyan Brenn - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/

For my money, there’s no better reading right now in the film world than David Cairn’s excellent series of interview posts on the Edinburgh Film Festival. You can read the latest one here, and part one and two here. I think this is essential reading for anyone who cares about film fests, the film industry, the state of and future of film going…or about the state of culture generally.

Why are they so great? Well, there’s been a lot of griping about this year’s Edinburgh Int’l Film Fest, but David’s series is going beyond the gripe. He’s interviewing several people involved with the festival, promising to also run an interview with this year’s artistic manager, and he’s not concentrating on the bad. For example, he starts by asking them to talk about their favorite moment’s from their history with the festival. The stories he hears are great, and tell us a lot about what makes a great film fest, as well as why people keep working at them. A few gripes do get shared, but what comes across the most is a great discussion about why festivals matter, what they mean to their local community and the film industry, and how that might evolve. I’m finding them a fascinating and much needed discussion.

What is most striking to me is the fact that I can’t imagine anyone in the US film news/blog scene doing anything remotely as important as this. Seriously. No offense to my friends in the film news space, but what has happened and is happening in Edinburgh is worthy of some serious reporting. Not just from the current perspective of “oh shit, this was a bad year,” but from the perspectives of: there’s great change facing many film festivals, what can we learn here?; Edinburgh has a glorious history, what did it use to do that we can learn from by examining the past?; How is film going changing?; What does it mean to run/be a film festival today?; and yes, Who is at fault and what can be done??!!

On that last note, can I just say publicly, since no one else is doing so:

Give me a f-in break people. Quit blaming artistic director James Mullighan for all the woes of Edinburgh this year. He may be a friend, but even if he was an enemy, I would point out that he only took the job some four months before the festival, he inherited many problems and the buck doesn’t stop with the artistic director. He had no time to do much of anything, and even less budget. As much as I loved Hannah and her predecessors (and am not pinning the blame to them either), I have attended the festival for the last few years, and there was a lot of (less public) griping going on about many of these same issues. The problems didn’t just start this year. He also seems to have experimented with some cool new programming that actually worked, as well. And last, and to my mind most importantly – the problems facing the Edinburgh Film Festival are arguably completely in the realm of the management level, not the artistic one, and I’d be willing to bet that ANY artistic director with less problems on this front could experiment more and honor the past more than was possible here. Let’s face it – if the festival is losing money, bringing in an artistic director too late and losing both big name support and street cred, the buck stops at a higher level. Without having met the CEO or board of the festival I am quite certain that’s where the blame should be placed.

Yep, them’s fighting words, but no one I’ve read yet has convinced me otherwise.

In the meantime, every film festival director and their board chair should make this series of posts a must-read for their entire staff and board. There should be a staff/board retreat dedicated to thinking about what can be learned from this debacle, and if you happen to run a film conference attended by many festival people, or maybe a conference for festivals…ahem…perhaps you should consider a panel about this as well.

In closing, so it doesn’t seem I’m wallowing in anyone’s failures and changes – I have loved the Edinburgh Film Fest since I first attended it. I’ve liked every staff person there that I have met, and think they are doing an excellent, hard job and took too much criticism this year. I think it can and will become an important festival again. Its problems can’t be pinned on any one person, but can be linked to leadership failures. I can’t wait to attend it again in the future.

What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

On Gettin’ One Over: Food Trucks and the New Ethos of Quality

veronicasLike everyone else in NYC (and SFO and many other cities), I’ve been enjoying the recent explosion in Food Trucks and pop-up restaurants. Near my office in Midtown, I can often hit up any number of random food trucks, with my favorite indulgence being the Daisy Mae’s BBQ truck near Rockefeller Center. On the weekends, I love hitting the Kelvin and Kimchi Taco trucks, usually at the Hell’s Kitchen Flea Market, and I really miss Veronica’s Kitchen near my old office downtown.

There’s all kinds of ways to look at this phenomenon: too many rich people in NYC and the hipsteryuppification of NY; entrepreneurial business endeavors; menace to existing restaurants and old style water-dog and pretzel stands; or proof there’s not enough real jobs for college graduates. I like all of these simultaneously, but what is most striking about these to me is how different the ethos of these trucks is to what we’ve gotten before.

If you look at the recent, say 50 year, history of food trucks/carts in the City, they’ve been about one thing, really – ripping you off. Getting one over on someone who needs a quick lunch for not too much money. Give em a f-in dirty water dog. Or a crappy pretzel. Or a stale bagel that’s more expensive and worse tasting than the one at any corner deli. The customer has nowhere else to go. F-‘em

Now, not every vendor actually felt/feels this way. Many were/are struggling entrepreneurs, often immigrants, who were/are just trying to make a living, renting their cart for way too much money from another boss. It was what you did, what was expected. A way to make some cash. The history of the food carts, and how the City (from the bureaucrats down to all of us) have dealt with them is too complicated to explore here, but I think we can sum it up as – barely tolerable food, barely tolerated by the authorities and served up to suckers of either the tourist or harried worker variety. But whatever the motivation, giving a customer something good, decent, that had real value has not been a top priority.

The new food truck phenomenon is completely the opposite. Good, usually awesome, food that people will not just eat when they are desperate for a meal, but that they’ll hunt down via Twitter and follow obsessively. The vendors are usually quite serious about making high-quality food and giving you value for your money. Many are overpriced – yes, I could never eat at Rickshaw Dumpling knowing that I can get a better deal in Chinatown at Prosperity, but here’s the thing – at least they’re making quality food and you can tell they enjoy doing it. They’re also, by the way, not limited to hipsters – the food truck phenomenon is remarkably diverse, with the annual Vendy awards consisting of Red Hook vendors alongside Belgian waffles. Most importantly, regardless of the truck, you don’t get the sense they’re just “gettin’ one over” on you.

This to me is not just a defining attitude of food truck vendors. I think it’s something bigger and it might even qualify as a generational divide. Up until recently, we’ve been willing to live in a world of “getting one over.” Everyone was doing it – from the food cart vendor, to the McDonald’s franchisee, all the way up to MoMA. Yes, even MoMA. Every frickin’ museum in this City, including MoMA, has always had a crappy cafe where they’d sell you horrible, overpriced food created with not one ounce of love. It was endemic and accepted. “Eh, that’s what you get” we’d say. “Suckers” they’d think as they served up another steamed soy burger. Gettin’ one over.

Yes, the new food truck scene is sometimes overpriced, but I don’t get the sense I’m being ripped off by a scam artist every time I visit one of these trucks. I usually have an actual conversation with the owner, who is sweating it out right alongside his/her employees. I get quality food I’d actually recommend to someone else, not something I’d tell my visiting relatives to avoid.

It’s not just the food trucks. I rode my bike this weekend to the Morningside Park Market to buy sausages from “Brooklyn Cured,” my favorite food vendor in the City (he also does the New Amsterdam Market). The guy is working his ass off, and selling a quality product at a fair price because he loves doing it. I’ll keep going there because of this difference.

It’s very easy to knock this all down and say – just a bunch of rich people trying to find a new version of “authenticity.” I know all the arguments, but I’m putting them aside for now because I do think there’s an underlying ethic of providing quality goods to the consumer that we haven’t seen for some time. Oh, we’ve seen lip-service to it, and marketing to it, but not much of the real thing.

We’ll see it copied too. It’s already happening across the board, and you do see it in all the “authenticity” marketing going on, as well as in the move to “high-quality” in other places. My favorite example is, once again, MoMA. They’ve gone upscale with their cafe and their restaurant. They have a fancy chef instead of someone more used to school-cafeteria cooking, some craft beers and what not, but they’re still “gettin’ one over.” The restaurant is under-staffed, the feeling is still one of getting ripped off and the quality of the artisanal snacks (and entrees) reeks more of “how do we suck another dollar out of this jerk’s wallet” than “how do we make this a better, more valuable, experience.”

Contrast that with a place like the Rerun Gastropub Theater. The seats and environs are decidedly less fancy than at MoMA, but I’m getting food, beverage and a movie all of which have been created by someone who gives a flying fuck about the quality of what they’re giving me.

That attitude is relatively new as a mass phenomenon. It has its problems, but I like it more than the status quo. I see this same attitude in many of the newer galleries I respect, the filmmakers and film festivals that I tend to like, and that, to me, is something I hope to see more of.

I’m sure people in the worlds of food, film, art, etc will continue to get one over on us (I’m lookin’ at you, 3D), but I also think many of us will want something better, and demand it. Artists who take this to heart will have to work harder, just like the food truck vendors, and have a more direct connection to their customer/audience, but the experience will be more rewarding for both of them.

Photo of Veronica’s Kitchen from FeistyFoodie.Com

Enhanced by Zemanta

Karlovy Vary Follow-up

I’m just back from the fantastic Karlovy Vary Film Festival. It was my first trip there, and I had a great time, saw some great films, met incredible people and learned a lot. Karlovy Vary is a beautiful spa town in the Czech Republic, about a two hour drive from Prague. The KVIFF is one of the oldest film festivals around (at 46 years), but its spirit is very young.

Literally. It was amazing to see thousands of young Czech and Eastern European film-lovers in line for each of the films. People love their cinema in the Czech Republic, and rumor has it that in addition to filling up the hotels, people fill up campgrounds all around the area, spending the week watching arthouse films. Theaters were packed for every show, no matter how obscure, and audiences were enthusiastic in their appreciation.

While the festival is not the marketplace of a Cannes or Berlin, it wasn’t short on industry attendance either. Buyers, sellers, directors, programmers and critics were in abundance, and while many would admit they weren’t swamped with business, that was the charm – having an opportunity to watch great films with great audiences, and to linger a little longer at each meeting and really get to know people better.

I was there to speak at a masterclass on “The Future of Film” with Ted Hope. We tried to change the format a bit, and make it more participatory by posting our thoughts in advance and by encouraging feedback in the comments before the panel, and to encourage more input from the audience. We didn’t fully succeed – Ted and I didn’t shut-up enough to really make it an open dialogue with the audience – but we did get great feedback and commentary from the audience.

We received one excellent email from Brendan Fletcher, the director of Mad Bastards, playing at KVIFF and in theaters and on VOD now, and we asked him to post it to the comments, which he did. I recommend reading that and the other comments, and I hope you’ll add your comments as well over at Ted’s blog. KVIFF Industry Head, Andrea Szczukova told us, and Screen International, that the panel “was such a success this year that there could be more sessions in 2012 devoted to ideas about the film industry’s changing future.” We hope so, and we hope to continue the dialogue between now and then.

I was also lucky to see some great films, especially my co-panelist’s film (Ted produced it) Collaborator, by Martin Donovan. Like most film buffs of my age, I’ve been a fan of Martin Donovan since the Hal Hartley days, and was excited to see his feature directing debut. He did an excellent job, both as a director and lead in the film. David Morse stars as well, in an outstanding role that won him best actor honors at the festival, and the film also won the Fipresci Critics award, which is quite an honor. I highly recommend the film.

I also highly recommend visiting the festival next year. The Karlovy Vary Film Fest is a blast.

Future of Film at Karlovy Vary

KVIFFI was recently invited to the Karlovy Vary Film Festival to give a talk about the future of film with Ted Hope. He and I spoke about this once before at the Vimeo Festival, and we decided we wanted to try something new, and make the panel a bit more participatory. So, we have jointly written a blog post laying out some of our thoughts about the future of film and are encouraging people to respond in advance of the festival with their comments. As we say in the post:

“As we put our thoughts out there for you to consider, ask yourself: “are these the trends that will most effect content, production, and consumption?” Did we leave something out? Is one not important? Join the conversation and let us know. Similarly, consider that these five suggestions may be the preeminent factors in shaping the next few years, but the real question is always “how?” As creators, facilitators, and consumers, what must we do to confront these issues? Are there models and best practices already emerging? Have there already been noble failures and/or arrogant efforts attempting to address these factors? What would a vision look like that might address these key elements? We all must share our thoughts, our hopes, our failures, along with what we learned from our successes if we are going to build something new, something that truly works for everyone.”

We hope to hear from you in advance, and yes, we’ll be incorporating feedback from here and the festival organizers will be selecting some responders who are attending the festival to participate in the discussion in person. I don’t believe it will be live streamed, but we’ll circle back with some conclusions, or at least further thoughts.

And yes, by the way and because I’ve been part of these discussions before, we did take note in our essay that the future of film is more diverse than two white guys prognosticating about it. So, give us your input, but don’t do it here. In order for us to track the comments, it’s best to leave yours here. Thanks.

China Solves Piracy

pizzaI’m willing to bet that the future of film won’t be decided in the US or Europe, even if that’s the framework most of us begin with (us being my readers and me, most of whom are in the West). I think we’ll be learning a lot from China, where the business is booming, like everything else. I was speaking with some people well-versed in the Chinese film business lately, and they told me something interesting.

Piracy is rampant in China, so much so that the majority of their profits come from theatrical, because soon after it opens, the film is on every pirate network so there’s no ancillary business to speak of. This is the opposite of the US, for example, where the box office is largely a loss-leader for the ancillary revenues (its marketing).

This is a big concern to all of the producers here trying to crack the market there, but my friends told me it isn’t such a concern for the producers in China – they’ve come up with a model that uses piracy to their advantage – product placement. As much as 30% of their budget will often now be made up from product placement by brands who just want to have their product seen by consumers. The brands don’t care if the film is seen legally, or via piracy, because they just want eyeballs. Win, win for everyone.

I know a bit about the arguments against branding, consumerism and yadda yadda, but I think this is a business model we should start following more closely.

Enhanced by Zemanta

On territorial licenses and geo-restricting

RegionsWe do a lot of stupid things in the film business to keep our old business models working, but to my mind lately, the dumbest one is the continuance of territorial licensing and geo-restricting. I know the reasons why these persist, and I also know that right now, we’re in a time where we can’t completely change the system overnight, but…

I recently went to Tel Aviv to be on the DocAviv Jury and give a masterclass. In advance of the workshop, the organizer sent me a stack of Israeli Docs to watch on DVD, ones that he received legally from the rights-holders by asking them if he could get them and send them to me. Ninety (90) percent of them wouldn’t play in my DVD player here in the US. I had recently traded my region-free player for a gifted Blu-Ray and didn’t think to check about the region encoding, but I shouldn’t have to do this. About half of the discs that wouldn’t play in my DVD player, would play in my Mac (oddly, I usually got an error message saying they couldn’t be played, but then they started up five seconds later).

This is insanity. I should be able to buy a DVD anywhere and play it anywhere. The inability to do so drives piracy, of course, because all of the films could be found on pirate networks with no hassle. I could go on and on about the idiocy of this system, but luckily someone else already has – over at his excellent Transmediator blog, David Wilson has summed up the problems nicely. I recommend reading the entire post, especially as to how this is now creeping into digital downloads and streaming (lesson learned???). What is his solution? Pretty simple, but I doubt we’ll see much progress anytime soon. From David:

“Here’s the mantra again: anything, anytime, anywhere.

If you don’t give people what they want, they will find an easier way. And, I’m sorry to say, pirated content is by far the easiest way. It’s easy to find with search. It’s one-click. It’s generally pre-formatted to the widest common denominator. It doesn’t have licensing restrictions. And, it’s free.

I don’t want movies to be free. But, it makes me angry to see them so difficult to get my hands on. Why can’t I simply Google a film that I’m interested in, click ‘rent’ or ‘buy’ and – boom – watch it straight away on any device I own? Why is that beyond comprehension?

I get angry when I think about this – not least of all because of all the time I wasted with region-restricted content – but because of all the money that the industry is losing to piracy when it’s within their control to do something about it. Studios are actually CONTRIBUTING to the problem. Their inability to collect revenue results in a shortfall to filmmakers. That makes me mad. It should make us all very mad, indeed. We are being shortchanged by their shortsightedness.

If we want to stop piracy, we’ve got to make it easy to get, easy to use and offered at an attractive price. Nothing else is going to work.”

Agreed.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Possible Media Futures…Redux

In moving my blog over to this new site, I looked back at my very first blog post on Springboard Media, way back in January of 2006, and was surprised to see that almost everything I wrote back then could be written today without much having changed. It’s also a pretty long post, it had been written originally as an essay for a Foundation, and it kinda set the tone for all of my future posts – long.

You can read the original in its entirety here, which includes the state of affairs as I saw it then and still see it now. But here, I’m going to cut straight to the solutions I thought we should focus on then, and I still agree with them now:

POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
This is a pivotal moment in the history of media arts, a time filled with possibility and uncertainty, but most of all, promise. To address these challenges and to have the greatest societal impact, the field needs to think of innovative, transformative ideas.

Research, Policy, Advocacy and Education
There is great need for continued research, mapping, convening and policy work. The field needs the data to show the problems (such as lack of diversity), and the advocacy to ensure good policy decisions. There is also a need to convene around the multiple issues facing the media arts: What can be done collaboratively to broaden the reach of socially important media? «Note: This is largely being done now, one good thing.»In light of new developments, what directions are most central? Who is not being served? What can be learned from other fields? Last, there is still a need for education — of gatekeepers, of artists and of general publics — in the importance of media arts; in the value of media artists’ contributions to society; in the craft, technology and business of media arts; in its distribution and in media literacy. Through such work, the field can encourage broader support for and public understanding of the value of media arts.

Distribution
There are new models for dissemination, including alternative distribution and marketing strategies, new exhibition avenues, direct video sales and ever-increasing home video markets. Systemization of festival screenings, web-based networks and new distribution strategies could get the work to broader audiences than ever before. The field needs knowledge sharing — strategies, stories, case studies and experiments focused on distribution and dissemination. Citizens need assistance in building communal media experiences where individuals and groups can connect, learn from and utilize media for social change or educational purposes. Leaders in the field must think of what the public wants and deserves, and work together to make that happen so that audiences can find and use this important media. As a result, media artists will prosper, by finding new audiences for their work.

New Financing Models
The media arts need innovative funding models that validate artists, help them attract new sources of funding, and help them find and reach the broadest possible audiences. New strategies could be found in novel approaches to the venture capital model, or with open source and social networking advances. For example, an online, audience-driven fund for progressive media arts could enable individuals, foundations and investors alike to support a variety of work «We’re getting there». The Internet provides great potential to encourage individuals to become art patrons rather than mere consumers. Most of all, funders need to support creative experiments, where new knowledge and thinking may help expand the field. Many funders are experimenting with ways to get money, services and advice into the hands of artists. Such funds may come from multiple sources, but collaboration could be encouraged to leverage investments to most benefit artists and society.

Furthermore, boundaries between commercial and noncommercial media are disappearing, and are increasingly irrelevant to creators and consumers of content. Many people theorize that successful future strategies in media arts will come from combining the assets of the for-profit and non-profit sectors to realize both financial and socialprofits. This new space, perhaps called with-profit (as in social goals with profit potential), promises a rich field for exploration. What if with-profit organizations funded socially important work that will receive commercial distribution, thus reaching broader audiences that aren’t commercially attractive to the for-profit community? What if a with-profit developed a rights-licensing system that allowed creators and rights-holders to be compensated based on actual usage while simultaneously increasing public access? Perhaps the greatest potential for increasing the impact of media arts lies in with-profit ideas.

Conclusion
These potential solutions, while not all-inclusive, suggest some of the work that remains to be done. Society will benefit most from a multi-faceted strategy that considers these options alongside methods that are already working. Most of all, the field needs to continue to discuss the “big picture” and imagine possible futures for society. Every new technological advance in the arts has brought us closer to realizing the ideals of a civil society. Each time, there has been a chance to realize dreams —of technology allowing everyone to share and build knowledge, of a more democratic society where everyone could be producers, not just consumers, where multiple viewpoints could be shared and, in general, where the world could be a better place. Each time, such possibilities have been squandered due to a lack of vision about the future, the forces of greed, the power of the few over the many and the simple fact that technology never quite realizes its potential. Once again, society has been given a set of tools, none perfect, that can help realize our dreams, if we are willing to imagine the possibilities and act soon to ensure their success. All that we need is in front of us. Will we act upon it, or let this chance slip away once again?

A brand new website, a brand new blog

Yessirree, I’ve finally gotten around to updating my online life a little bit. Just under two years ago, I left my day-job for more independent pastures and launched my new company sub-genre media. But, I had many years worth of blog posts over at Springboard Media, which was never a company, just a blog, and I kept blogging there. Every single time I give a lecture or do a consultancy, this leads to confusion. On top of that, I never really liked the Springboard Media name. I had actually just grabbed that name for a project I was working on at the time and it stuck around. But lately, I’m getting tired of the Blogger platform, and figured that when you couple it with the fact that it was confusing…there needed to be a change.

Well, I’ve decided to finally launch the new sub-genre website using tumblr as a backbone. I’m still making improvements, and I’ll be adding a lot more soon, so please hold back on the critiques until I figure out how to make this look prettier. In the meantime, if you’ve ever liked reading my blog, please update your RSS feeds, etc to here. I’ll keep Springboard up as an archive of my past writing, and will refer to it via links here and there, but from now on, all of my writing will be from sub-genre, where you’ll also be able to follow more about my consulting (as I get around to adding it).