Our current era of independent filmmaking/exhibition/distribution has introduced alternate methods of delivery for the new media content creator. That is to say, the new indie filmmaker has to tell a story with much more frequency, sometimes over longer periods of time. Before, a filmmaker would just make the film and then hope the finished product connects with some sort of audience for fiscal gain (ticket sales, studio deals, yada, yada, yada). But Web 2.0 and the social media revolution have (thankfully) lifted Oz's curtain. Therefore, a revived need for (daily) content has really put filmmakers on the spot. The good news is, is that filmmakers have more power in actually choosing their audience than ever before. The bad news is that this daily content (an active Twitter feed, updated YouTube channels, blogs, etc.) is often free content and therefore returns no immediate revenue for the artist. But don't fret.
A post in Filmmaker Magazine--"The Microbudget Conversation: Art and Poverty"--really puts it in perspective:
"Throughout history there have been connections between oppositional art movements and reduced resources. There have been artists for whom a rhetoric of poverty — or, perhaps more accurately, a rejection of the conventions associated with making art in more accepted (and usually more expensive) ways — has enabled empowering forms of self-definition."
Thus, we find ourselves in a culture of "free content." The slogan has shifted from "Content is king" to "Free content is king." This is who we are. This is what we have to work with. Think about that.
This free content, again, has value for you the artist because it is defining who you are. And after you have developed your online voice--your online presence, your industry significance!--you can then identify your true audience. Audiences gravitate towards points of interest and the more clear, prominent (and I believe "distinct") you are as an independent filmmaker, the easier it will be to pinpoint your group of followers and provide them a direct feed. Think of the audience's points of interests as eventual points of purchase for the filmmaker. Sooner or later, these loyal fans will be there to help kickstart that passion of project of yours or will even be there to pay for a download your completed film project. They'll be there and they'll support because they will care about your work. Because you showed them your passion and perseverance.
Basically, as "starving" artists we need to keep reinventing ourselves, our industry. Maybe by developing more intertwined relationships with our core audiences, we can elevate our content and thus engage each other to produce more valid pieces of work. Flight of fancy? Maybe. A more productive state of mind than sulking over not being financed by Hollywood? Definitely.
Frank Rose, author of "The Art of Immersion: How the Digital Generation Is Remaking Hollywood, Madison Avenue, and the Way We Tell Stories," recently said in an interview:
"We've spent the last hundred-plus years with a strict delineation between author and audience--you read a book, you watch a movie, and that's it. You're a consumer. We came to think of this as the natural order of things, but in fact it was just a function of the limitations of our technology. Mass media, which is the only media we've ever known until now, had no mechanism for participation and only very limited, after-the-fact mechanisms for feedback. But there was nothing natural about that [...] Before culture became a consumable, it was something people shared. The problem is, that was so long ago we've forgotten how to do it."
Let's share our stories with more viewers, by actually targeting our REAL viewers. But first thing is first: Go out there and cast your audience. Make sure they're perfect for the part.
Comments
Post a Comment