Truly Indie: What Have We Learned

When I first posted about Truly Indie last week, I had no idea that it would create such a swarm of interest and/or criticism. On first blush, it seemed a great alternative, a network of four-walling, that seemed of benefit to filmmakers. And because it seemed to me that Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner are consistently proposing new ideas related to the production, distribution and exhibition of independents, I wanted to give them due credit for another interesting idea.

As I noted later, I was surprised by the amount of anmosity towards Cuban and the knee-jerk criticism of Truly Indie. Then I became interested when I received a number of comments, both here and off-line, from folks in Boston who described a battle over the Brattle (the thrilla from Manilla) and numerous problems at Landmark's Kendall Square, which is owned by Cuban and Wagner's 2929 Entertainment. After Mark Cuban himself weighed in on the subject, I tried to do some investigation on both topics, including a at Truly Indie that tried to answer some of the lingering questions.

As Anne Thompson noted in the Hollywood Reporter this week, Cuban and Wagner are not the only folks looking at a new distribution model in the digital age. Rainbow Media (the behemoth that owns IFC among other channels and entities) have announced that they too are planning "day-and-date video-on-demand & theatrical". Joshua Sapan, the president and CEO of Rainbow is even quoted as saying, "I have for a long time held the view that art houses as we know them are disappearing." He continues, "We have the opportunity to use technological content and new platforms to recreate an electronic art house for a discreet, defined, limited audience in every village, town and city."

This is the kind of "end of the world" quote that is often attributed to Cuban, but which his detractors can never seem to produce (note the numerous references to Cuban supposedly having said that he's not interested in independent film, a notion that doesn't seem to bear the weight of scrutiny.) The base criticisms, that he seeks to change the environment at Landmark Theatres by experimenting with merchandising and/or alternative exhibition, are not factually challenged by Cuban, but he does challenge the hypothesis of his critics - that such moves are evidence of his contempt for independent films.

Let me state right out that I don't know Mark Cuban and have had no connection to him prior to this issue. But from the start, I was skeptical about the amount of anger directed at Cuban, and the assumptions that he was in this with some sort of scheme to take down indie film (or that indie film and distribution generally was some massive money maker just waiting to be plundered by the right pirate). Just on first blush, this didn't seem to ring true. If he truly wished to promote big-budget studio pictures over independents (or the "dependents"), there are numerous theatrical chains teetering on the brink of bankruptcy that he could have targeted (AMC included). Further, once he purchased Landmark he could have quickly turned all of the theaters into a mix of big studio releases and indies (say Doom & Dreamer on screens 1 & 2 and Capote and Thumbsucker on 3 & 4), then if the studios outperformed the indies, they could claim that they are just delivering what the audience wants.

[A quick look at the Landmark website finds that currently there are three Landmark theaters nationwide that have a mix of independent films and studio releases, one in Milwaukee, one in San Francisco's East Bay and one in Seattle. Los Angeles' well-respected Laemmle chain, has 2 theaters (out of 10) that do this, one in Pasadena, the other in downtown Los Angeles.]

His notion of introducing merchandise, whether selling soundtracks to films that are currently playing or DVDs of films that had played their earlier, strikes me as a great idea. Great for filmmakers, great for the notion of a place where you can get your indie film needs met. As I noted, the Arclight here in Los Angeles (which was initially derided for its high ticket price) has become an exciting and wonderful gathering place for film lovers. Meet early for a drink, buy a coffee table book about Kubrick, wander across the way to an exhibition, or in the midst of a festival like AFI, a rocking party. Why shouldn't all theaters have this? Seems to me that it would be great if you could have an adjacent "museum store" next to your art house where you could purchase the latest Criterion release, watch online shorts, have drinks...

As for using theaters on low-attendance nights for events like Monday Night Football or the World Series or the season finale of The Sopranos, I'm not sure why this is a bad idea. Having had a film distributed to all kinds of different theaters, we had numerous occasions when we'd have a night off because of some local event, or we'd have to share the screen with one or two other features, so on its face it's not a particularly new proposition. And with all the criticism of 2929's day-and-date theatrical/DVD/VOD projects ("he's trying to eliminate the theatrical experience"), it seems like you could make the argument that getting folks who want to watch MNF into a theater has some merit.

I also wonder whether the specific criticism about MNF is not some instinctual gag reflex that we, as film and theater geeks, tend to have towards those we perceive as "jocks". Cuban is well known for owning the Dallas Mavericks and for being a lightning rod within the NBA. Is not some of the criticism lobbed his way the leftover tension from the high school perception that "how dare he come over into our world?" It's like when the second baseman on the school's baseball team decides to try out for the musical. What's he trying to do exactly? Suspicious minds want to know. What if Cuban went straight from his dot-com success into the indie film world? Would we have a different reaction to him?

Frankly, the vociferous anger directed at Cuban (particularly on these two websites), makes me doubly suspicious of the charges raised. Even when I know and very much like those who are making the accusations.

Having already spoken to the merchandising and exhibtion experiments, let me talk briefly about the other two issues that have been raised: labor issues at the Kendall & the allegation that Landmark is somehow targeting the Brattle.

On labor issues, I can't claim to know the entire truth, but I don't think that labor has put its best foot forward wth sites like this. In my opinion, the worst thing that a union (or any activist group for that matter) can do is overreach and begin to sound shrill, casting the most benign move as the "end of the world". Top headline on their page (which links to the discussion here) is Truly, Truly, Truly Outrageous, a play on Truly Indie's name. They go on to describle truly indie as a "vanity press", or "a hooker" and potentially "rich moron from you film class get daddy to write a check to Landmark to get his pretentious, derivative, crappy film distributed."

Having said this, I'm happy to hear what the true grievances are of these Landmark employees - there are mentions of a wage freeze since 2002 and the fact that few employees are full-time. The Kendall Union site has this:

"Lauren Ryder, part of the floor staff, said morale had been decreasing since 2929 Entertainment purchased Landmark in 2003, and began showing advertising before films and pushing for digital projectors instead of 35mm film equipment, while maintaining a prolonged employee wage freeze."

[Cuban responds on their site as well, saying, "I prefer dealing with the issues at hand. Whether its Kendall, or any location, having a union changes the agenda. It no longer becomes just a Kendall issue. It becomes a matter of fitting the union agenda as well."]

The second issue, Landmark targeting the Brattle, seems, on the basis of a couple of conversations, something of a red herring. Is there competition for films? Sure. Do distributors sometimes pull a film from the Brattle and put it in the Kendall Square? Probably. Do indie multiplexes generally hurt attendance at single-screen art house and repertory theaters? Yeah. Is there a specific Starbucks-like plan to squash locally-controlled houses and monopolize a market? This is the unproven accusation. And again, while I'm interested in hearing more information on this, what I've heard so far hasn't convinced me that the situation in Boston is dissimilar from normal competitve forces elsewhere.

Which brings us back to what started this conversation in the first place, Truly Indie. Here lies the debate between those who prefer the established methods of distribution vs. those who see change ahead and look to find a new way. This secondary group includes both Cuban and someone like Joe Swanberg (with whom I've traded comments throughout this discussion), numerous folks with very different ideas of what is possible, what might work, what is most benefitial to filmmakers. In the primary group - those comfortable with things as they are - we find smaller distributors, independent consultants and the like - those who have figured out a pathway for their projects and who are reluctant to have the formula messed with.

This discussion over the future is not dissimilar to what happened in the music world over the past decade. Independents become entwined with major labels, not always to their benefit. Bands find that there are enough systems in place (indie rock clubs, alt-weeklies, college radio stations, myspace, Pro Tools, websites) that make self-distribution both practical and potentially more lucrative than signing with a label of any size. Ultimately, bands are faced with a choice, do I want to give up some of my money for some help from those who know what they're doing - tour support, publicity, etc. Is the benefit of not being completely DIY worth the loss of compensation and/or independence.

It seems to me that we're at exactly that point. Sure, you can make a film on DV, edit on Final Cut Pro, sell it on your website and play a few festivals for press purposes and perhaps you'll make a little bit of money in the process. Jonathan Caouette could have done this easily with Tarnation - take his festival acclaim, play some museums and sell the film himself (although there still would have likely been rights questions). But he chose to work with Wellspring to clear the rights, handle a national release, coordinate travel, publicity, etc.

As I said when talking about Gigantic, our 65-city tour (spread out over 5 months) required me, my producer Shirley Moyers and 3 folks at Cowboy to work mostly full-time. Shirley and I could never have launched the effort alone. We needed Cowboy's instincts, their theatre and press connections.

The question always comes down to the filmmaker and his or her expectations for their film. Do they even know which market they are targeting (as we always knew that DVD was Gigantic's primary venue for ultimate financial return) and how to exploit other areas to their benefit. Are they willing to take a financial risk on a theatrical (spend money to make money) for later return in another market? We felt that was important on Gigantic and it has proven to be correct (although Gigantic more than broke even on its theatrical return, the closing of Cowboy Pictures late in our run caused us to lose most of the money we had made on the theatrical.)

For someone like Joe, who is making challenging films without name actors, something like Truly Indie might not make any sense. He is probably better off using his festival run as a promotional device, holding targeted specialized screenings and selling his DVD off his website.

In our position with Gigantic, we knew that there was a market for the subject matter. We also knew that we wanted Cowboy to release the film (this was even more important for us than the DVD company, although Plexifilm has ultimately proved to be the right choice). As we talked to other distributors (as we were waiting on Cowboy), we found some who knew and liked They Might Be Giants but "we have our doc for the year" and those who didn't know or understand They Might Be Giants and didn't realize that there was a base of support that we could rely on. For someone like us, with a digital master in hand, the idea that we could eliminate the cost of making a print, go straight into some of the top 20 markets in the country, get 100% of the box office, and continue to play other venues and museums at our own whim, Truly Indie would have to be thought of as potentially the right solution. The sticking point is that we didn't have $150,000. Could we have gotten Plexifilm or some other DVD company to put up this money as an advance against potential sales? Maybe.

But while many quantify Truly Indie as four-walling, it's really more akin to an up-front service deal, save that the distributor and the theater go home together at the end of the night. Maybe that's bad for filmmakers, maybe it's good (you don't have to worry about the theater failing to pay the receipts - a not uncommon problem). Perhaps that makes Truly Indie less than startlingly original, but it is different. It is an option.

We're clearly at a point where 2929, Rainbow and other entities are rethinking the costs and benefits of the traditional indie distribution model. (Whether the vast American populace is really looking to transform their home into their own personal art house or film festival remails to be seen - does anyone know how Larry Meistrich's Film Movement is doing?) Filmmakers have the chance to take advantage of these new or transformed ideas, OR they can come up with their own new systems.

Perhaps what is truly needed is a nationwide network of venues, support groups (similar to myspace), radio stations and websites that are solely dedicated to films like Joe's. But like the indie rock bands of the 1980s (see Michael Azerrad's Our Band Could Be Your Life for the definitive look back), this isn't going to be created by Mark Cuban, Rainbow Media or the Weinsteins, it's going to be up to a grassroots network of filmmakers and film lovers, who want to support truly original and challenging work. I'm all for this kind of thing developing, but it's truly up to us to make it happen.

Comments

[Joe Swanberg]

I totally agree that a filmmaker support network that allows a film like mine to play alternative venues around the US is going to have to be created grass roots style. I think tools like MySpace will help that happen. I'm excited about the potential. This is a good time to be an indie filmmaker.

[Giovanni Sanseviero]

Hello there,
I'm offering the following to anyone whom enjoys film work. Your're clearly in there. Thank you. Giovanni Sanseviero, Dir.
---------
“I do enjoy sharing my work with others.”

Please check out
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0402991/combined
(and/or)
www.theemptybuilding.org

for information regarding "The Empty Building," a 40 Min. Drama,
now on its 36th Film Festival acceptance and the recipient of 18 awards.

If interested, e-mail
info@theemptybuilding.org

with a mailing address. A DVD and press kit will be mailed to you all free of charge including shipping. ALL FREE OF CHARGE, NO STRINGS.

Likewise, if there's any Indie Shorts you'd like me to see, direct me to a website or just mail it on over to:

Empty Building Production Corp.
3108 Northern Blvd., 2nd Fl.
Long Island City, NY 11101

I enjoy keeping informed of what’s going on out there on the festival circuit and abroad,
who's doing what, and who knows what could come of it. At best, it’ll be entertaining.

Check out a film clip:

http://www.theemptybuilding.org/default.asp?id=57

Thanks,
Giovanni Sanseviero, Dir.
www.theemptybuilding.org

[lauren]

Hey bloggy –

If you “can't claim to know the entire truth” about the union situation, why not ask before attacking a site in support of unionizing customer service workers? Isn’t attacking something without knowing the entire truth the definition of knee-jerk reaction? And isn’t attacking the efforts of 19 employees who serve you popcorn for $7.25 an hour just kinda mean?

Either you didn’t read much of kendallunion.org, or you intentionally wanted to discredit it. Here are a few errors in your post which I feel need to be corrected.

1) The quote from Lauren Ryder, which is me by the way, is from an article in Boston’s weekly Dig, as stated on the site. There are also links to an IndyMedia article about the union and one from The Patriot Ledger.

The way you introduced this quote insinuates that the comments were just from the site, rather than quoted from the local media. I feel this misrepresents us just a little bit.

2) The site also contains several articles about the Union drive of three Landmark Theaters last year in Minneapolis. These labor issues are not unique to Boston.

3) I rarely post things about Mark Cuban directly, although after his incoherent response, I’m tempted to. All the work issues the Kendall has would have happened under any other business dude. It’s just really hard not to mention Cuban occasionally since he continually makes a spectacle out of himself. Did you see The Benefactor? Seriously.

I posted the Truly Indie thing because I think it’s a funny concept, and yes, I think that comparing his new program to a hooker is also funny. Sorry, that’s how I roll.

Generally, I just update the films playing at the Kendall and occasionally some news (as we are currently in negotiations, there isn’t a whole lot of news to broadcast at the moment). I do make fun of a union busting firm called Labor Relations Solutions, which Landmark hired to try to get us to vote against the union. Which, for the record, I believe is more obnoxious than “shrill”.

If you, or anyone, wants more information feel free to ask. There are forums and contact info on the site.

Oh, and for those who didn’t get the reference “Tuly, Truly, Truly Outrageous” is a pop culture reference to the Gem theme song. Personally, I only find “Truly Indie” to be slightly, slightly, slightly, outrageous.

[AJ Schnack]

Lauren,

Thanks for coming by,

I'm not sure how you could have felt "attacked" by my post. I checked out your site, just as I checked out another site that has posted on the Kendall Union situation - http://www.markcubanhasnoclothes.com/index2.html
- and my impression after looking around it for a bit was that a.) the tone didn't help your cause and b.) it was difficult to tell exactly what your grievances are.

And I posted exactly that - "I'm happy to hear what the true grievances are of these Landmark employees - there are mentions of a wage freeze since 2002 and the fact that few employees are full-time."

The quote of yours that I used was not in any way a slight to you (I don't know how mentioning it was in the local press changes its meaning), it was an effort to understand the issues involved:

"Lauren Ryder, part of the floor staff, said morale had been decreasing since 2929 Entertainment purchased Landmark in 2003, and began showing advertising before films and pushing for digital projectors instead of 35mm film equipment, while maintaining a prolonged employee wage freeze."

Thus my questions, which no one has yet answered:

Is your fight solely a wage freeze/part time v full time problem?

Or are "quality of life" issues like commercials, merchandising, digital, etc. the things that really piss you off (or are you just trying to use those issues to demonstrate to your customers that something is off the tracks at the Kendall?)

Frankly, I care a lot about the theater situation in Boston, particularly about the fate of the Brattle. I'd be glad to revisit the Kendall situation if I knew what the specific issues the union was asking for. What are your specific demands?

AJ

[lauren]

AJ,

Thanks for having me.

I think my basic issue with your post is that if you cared enough to mention the union, why didn’t you care enough to actually post your questions on the kendallunion site, rather than just here, and then complain that you have unanswered questions?

"I'm not sure how you could have felt "attacked" by my post."

Perhaps I’m reacting to the fact that your questions turn towards the staff as to way they would want a union, which I think is obvious, rather than wondering why Cuban would spend so much to keep one out. Why did you use his vague quote about “issues” rather than his statement “I cant claim to be pro union at all.” which appeared in that same post? Why are anti-Cuban comments shrill and his not?

"I don't know how mentioning it was in the local press changes its meaning"

First, it’s incorrectly referenced, which just bugs me. If I see a quote on your blog taken from an article, I wouldn’t attribute your site as the origin of the quote. Second, if someone says they just read something on some blog, or they just read it in the paper…which gets more weight in your mind?

"What are your specific demands?"

I’m going to pull a Mark Cuban and not give you specifics just yet. As I mentioned, we are in negotiations now, so I don’t know if mentioning specifics is cool or not.

I’m sure I can safely say that unions provide regular wage increases, a grievance process for employees and a voice in the workplace. All of which are very nice things.

"Or are "quality of life" issues like commercials, merchandising, digital, etc. the things that really piss you off"

Commercials before films upset me personally. I think selling Landmark merch is super-funny (have you ever wanted to buy a Landmark t-shirt?). Digital will be great if used properly. These things are different issues, but some of them reflect the short-sighted mentality that results in cutting hours/freezing wages/etc.

"(or are you just trying to use those issues to demonstrate to your customers that something is off the tracks at the Kendall?)"

We have never really had to use anything to show the customers that something was off track. They point it out the off-trackiness all the time. They complain about commercials, they dislike the new ticketing system, they would like it if there was enough staff to get them through line faster and stop theater hoppers. Our customers have been, and continue to be, very supportive of the union and the staff. Since the election in July, I’ve regularly had patrons congratulate us and some even offer their help if we need it. I have yet to have a single customer suggest the staff should not be union, or to challenge the premise that floor staff deserve to be treated fairly. I (heart) Cambridge.

[AJ Schnack]

Lauren,

OK, fair enough that I didn't post on your site. However, as you yourself say, you're not going to give me specifics right now. So, my main question - what is/are the grievance(s) - remains unanswered.

I went to your site both because you had linked to the discussion here and because there had been discussion on the Chlotrudis site about labor issues at the Kendall and troubles at the Brattle - both of which seemed to point towards Mark Cuban. I was struck, as noted above, with the virulent tone against Cuban, perhaps you view it as satirical, but not sure it comes off that way to the uninitiated.

Ultimately, I think websites are sources of information. Your site - www.kendallunion.org - means to be a public voice for your union and your cause. Someone checking out your site shouldn't, I don't think, have to post a question to get basic information about who you are, what you do and your issues.

But clearly, you guys are still coming up with a public face to put on your demands - which is certainly your right, but not entirely effective, in my opinion.

Finally, I'm not sure where you get the notion that I am questioning why labor would want to unionize. I don't think that's a fair reading of my initial post at all.

Look, I've got an open mind; I've tried to present accurately what I could find "out there" about your cause and Cuban's response on your site. When the union is ready to go public with your specific issues, I'll be happy to revisit the issue.

And I'm glad that community support has been strong for you. I'd expect nothing less from Bostonians.

AJ

[lauren]

Quick FYI
Just wanted to let you know that The Kendall opened Ice Harvest last week.

I think this is the first time we opened a film at the same time it opened at our local AMC and Loews chains.

[Movie Buff]

A great film that is going around the country is 'The Genius Club' about 7 geniuses who are forced to solve the world's problems in 1 night.

http://www.TheGeniusclubmovie.com