Distribution for Independent Filmmakers

The hardest part about being an independent filmmaker is distributing the film through the appropriate distribution outlets. It is imperative to understand that choosing the right distributor is crucial. The distributor should be able to distribute the content through several different outlets: Video on Demand, DVDs, television, theatrical distribution and so on.

When a filmmaker signs a deal with a distribution company, the deal is called a Gross Adjusted Deal. The deal involves the distribution company paying the filmmaker an advanced fee then the distribution company and the filmmaker split the revenues generated. There is one thing that should be cleared up: the advanced payment mirrors a promise from the distributor that he will push to ensure the filmmaker gets the best benefits from signing with the company. It motivates the distributor to look out for the best interest in the filmmaker’s success.

The deal that filmmakers should be wary of is the First Dollar Split deal. The deal is when the filmmaker and the distributor do a 50-50 spilt and the distributor does not include an advanced payment, which can be a large disadvantage to the filmmaker. When the distributor makes the First Dollar Split deal, the distributor lacks motivation and may choose to leave the film on the shelf until the contract expires.

Most independent filmmakers do not have a strong reputation. So, it is important to market the film well. The independent film must display some aspects in marketing itself. If the filmmaker does not see the potential in the film potentially marketing itself, then it will be hard to find a distributor to distribute the film.

Sometimes, depending on the project, self-distribution can be the most beneficial option. This can be used as a last resort. This is once the filmmaker has done everything possible to find a distributor that believes in the project, and has walked away without closing a deal. Amazon.com offers great self-distribution opportunities that are utilized by a wide variety of genres. The filmmaker can use this as an opportunity to build a following and show a potential distributor the advantages of assisting in distributing the content.

Being an independent filmmaker means understanding the advantages and disadvantages of all aspects of producing the film. Distribution should take an extensive amount to planning and strategizing to maximize profit.

Legal Issues in the Entertainment Industry

Entertainment Law Update: Faulkner,Einstein, Superman, and Talent Managers Podcast provided some interesting insight, especially in regards to copyright infringement and misappropriation of likeness.  The podcast hosts mentioned a case in which a picture of a couple was used in a negative light for a strong anti organization advertisement. The organization cropped the couple out, placed them on a new background, and claimed the picture as an original photograph.  The organization tried to pursue the case stating the edited photograph as fair use. Copyright infringement regarding photographs has been an ongoing issue. If my company, Front Row Pictures, were to provide still photographs of the production and post it online, the photographs could be used as part of an advertisement for another company. The conflict sits with the issues of another company receiving income on an original photograph used in advertisement, and not compensating the original owner.

This also coincides with original music created under the company, if we choose to do so. The musical artists may or may not want the original music to be used and distributed outside the company, usually in a political aspect. But how does an artist protect their first amendment right to prevent their music for being used, through any manor, in a political advertising campaign? Tamera Bennett of Entertainment Law claimed that there is not an available license that prevents political campaigns from licensing and using an artist’s song; despite the musician’s political viewpoints.

In the Entertainment Law Update:Holmes, Zorro and the Tin man walk into a bar...  podcast; we once again encounter a case in copyright infringement. The Broadway shows “Jersey Boys” was sued for using a seven second clip from the Ed Sullivan in the show without using the proper licensing. The court ruled in favor of Jersey Boys and stated that the video is fair use. In situations such as these, it is frustrating trying to control content publicly released. If the Ed Sullivan Show had a more elaborated copyright protection, they would have won the case. Generally, when a creative works displays copyrighted content, the content used cannot be claimed as fair use. The clip used was using factual information, so it was difficult to protect the video.

Listening to the podcasts helped identify reoccurring legal issues that are highlighted in the entertainment industry. It brought to my attention that it is imperative to go through the proper precautions to protect all works cr

Copyright Infringement, Is It Out of Control?

After spending time browsing Hollywood Reporter Esq, I noticed there is a trend in the entertainment industry with copyright infringement There are a few stories that imply the ongoing trend in the industry.

Peteski Productions, Dr. Phil’s production company, brought about a lawsuit against Gawker Media. The lawsuit is focused on Gawker Media posting footage on Deadspin.com, from the Dr. Phil show, about the Manti Te’o girlfriend hoax. The footage was posted several hours before the episode air. In result, this jeopardized the rating and viewers.

Gawker released the footage as exclusive and claimed the footage was their own. They gained some profit from their readers about the breaking news.

Since the Internet has become such a vital source of passing along information, new issues about infringement are arousing. As the Internet is developing, it is getting more difficult each day to monitor copyright infringement. After the post was made, Gawker cut down the video to clips instead. I do not have a problem with someone posting footage of someone else’s, as long as the credit is given.

In 2010, Caitlin Sanchez, the young voice actress who played the Dora in Dora the Explorer filed a lawsuit against Nickelodeon saying that she was bamboozled into signing a contract. At the time, she was underage, and the network assigned her a lawyer. Sanchez claims that she was given only twenty-two minutes to sign the contract. Because of the pressure and short amount of time, she signed a contract that had high lawyer contingency fees and tax payments. This resulted in Sanchez earning very little money.

Even though Sanchez felt she had no control over the situation, she should have tried to take control of the situation. It appeared Nickelodeon tried to maximize their profit under any circumstance. Nickelodeon hired an inexperienced lawyer to represent Sanchez, which backfired on her end.

In my opinion, Sanchez’s parents should have had an entertainment lawyer prior to showing up to review the contract the moment they knew their daughter received the job as Dora. They should have not let the network have control over who their lawyer should be. If, for unmentioned circumstances, they had to use the lawyer the network provided, they should have researched the lawyer and reviewed his history. When they would have saw how inexperienced the lawyer was, they could have requested a new lawyer.

This situation mirrors the advice Julee Milham delivered in her interview during the Full Sail guest lecture. She mentioned that contracts should be read as slow as possible to ensure full comprehension. If not, then the contract will get signed with several consequences. This is what happened to Sanchez, and because of that she technically worked for free.

Another story I encountered was a conflict between Michael Costanza and the producers of Paranormal Activity 4. Paramount was sued by Michael Costanza claiming that the Producers of Paranormal Activity 4, Steven Scneider and Spencer Medof, used some concepts from his screenplay without any form of acknowledgement. Constanza pitched his horror film called The Collingswood Story, back in 2002.

Situations, such as this one, happen often in the entertainment industry. It is important to copyright any and everything you can to protect written or visual work. Most screenplay writers only register their screenplays through the Writers Guild of America. The screenplay does not have the same protection if the screenplay were registered with the Copyright Office.

It is blatantly obvious that there needs to be a more strict method on maintaining the rights for works. But as the industry and Internet are developing, it is becoming nearly impossible for someone to prove that work is originally theirs.

Arrested Development, It's Time.

Netlix is taking on several new ventures on its distribution outlets. Netflix is in the process of becoming a new outlet for releasing new original television series and reviving television shows.  The most anticipated Netflix release coming next month is Arrested Development. 

Arrested development, by definition, is an abnormal state in which development has stopped prematurely. This explains how to show is written and operates on its offbeat comedy. The premise of the show is for Michael Bluth to keep his family intact after his father is arrested for his suspicious financial practice in the family owned business. Around this conflict is how the family copes with the situation and having little to no money.

Arrested Development’s season 4 will be released in its entirety on Netflix. So, if you are a fan, start watching season one to three to catch up. Each of the 14 episodes will follow a character from the past seasons. Jason Bateman’s character, Michael Bluth is the only character to appear in all 14 epsiodes. Arrested Development also stares Jeffrey Tambor, Michael Cera, Will Arnett, David Cross, and Jessica Walter.

Arrested Development was cancelled with many questions unanswered. After seven long awaited years, this new season is to answer all questions. Since the moment Arrested Development went off the air, fans have been demanding it come back in some form. The show will not have the exact same feel of the original. All of the actors were tied into other projects, so creating the show was very difficult. The necessary adjustments were made to make this work.

But wait. Fans of Arrested Development are not only getting another season to the series, fans also receive a movie. There is not a projected time on when that is going happen, but it is happening, one day. It keeps getting push back further and further and has not been green lit yet. Hopefully, it will happen . But, at the same time, Arrested Development will operate and flow better as a television show instead of a

Catch the release of Arrested Development on May 25^th.

Is Shameless TOO Shameless?

This past week, I was taking a tour on the Warner Brothers studio lot. As we drove by The Alibi, an exterior set from the US television show, Shameless, he mentioned that the show itself has yet to be nominated for an Emmy. Then I remembered that Shameless has only received two Emmy nominations total, both for Joan Cusack as Best Supporting Actress. It got me thinking.

US Shameless is a British adaptation on Showtime about a dysfunctional family who lives under the worst circumstances in Chicago. Shameless has a variety of personalities that make the Gallagher family unique. The eldest daughter, Fiona is the one who takes care of her five younger siblings. This is because her father is an absent alcoholic and her bipolar mother left the family years ago. The show is raw, but maybe it is too raw.

Shameless, lives up to its name. In order for the family to survive, they spend most of their time conning money and essentials just to make it to the next day. Shameless has dealt with murder, conning, homosexuality, mental disabilities, frequent nudity, and that is just scratching the surface.

What keeps Shameless from an Emmy nomination?

There are extremely strong performances that deserve formal recognition, from every actors: Emmy Rossum, William H. Macy, Justin Chatwin, Ethan Cutkosky, Shanola Hampton, Steve Howey and more.

If any, at least William H. Macy and Emmy Rossum should have received a nomination. William H. Macy plays Frank Gallagher , the absentee alcoholic father. His character has performed some of the more extreme actions on the show. Because of his careless actions, some drug dealers held his youngest son, Liam, hostage because he owed money.  His daughter, Fiona, who holds the family together, is working from temporary job to another, barely making enough to feed the family. Fiona is played by Emmy Rossum. Emmy has deliver outstanding performances one after another, but has yet to get any formal recognition for it. Her character has had a handful of emotional breakdowns that was portrayed realistically. 

The reason this show has never been nominated for an Emmy may be because of its extremity. The events that have taken place may be perceived as over the top. It might make the nominators feel uncomfortable to support a show under these standards. It is not that the events do not happen to families, it is that they do not happen to only one family in a condensed amount of time. This puts this situation in an odd perspective. The extreme events are so crazy that it is good and that may be overshadowing the acting ability portrayed in the show.

Despite its lack of formal recognition, this show is peaking in success on Showtime. I avidly watch this series and every episode is unpredictable. What makes this show special are the actors provide input on each episode after the table readings. If an actor has any suggestion regarding their character or plot, the Show Runner listens and usually takes the actors' suggestion because it was better. This show inspires me to write outside the normal to schock audiences.