DIY Filmmaker Sujewa is the the blog of DC-based low-budget filmmaker Sujewa Ekanayake. His current project is a film about Indie Film Bloggers.

[I]nfinicine: What do you think the biggest challenges have been for filmmakers in the past in distribution and getting their films out to the public and making money in the process?

Sujewa: I think the challenges for indie (working outside of Hollywood) filmmakers, when it comes to distribution, have always been pretty much the same; it takes a lot of money and a lot of work to properly or widely distribute a movie – at least theatrically, and then followed by various home entertainment options. However, few indie filmmakers (that I know of) have done theatrical distribution successfully. And many more have done distribution on DVD, etc. successfully. So both are possible to do.

[I]: What aspects of the internet have been the most beneficial to independent filmmakers?

Sujewa: I would have to say access to information – how to do things, and being able to easily connect with other people – through message boards/groups, e-mail, websites, blogs, etc. – you can find collaborators that you need in order to get projects done.

[I]: Do you see any drawbacks to the “digital revolution” for independent filmmakers?

Sujewa: No. Right now seems like the best time ever to make & distribute movies outside of Hollywood or independently, largely thanks to the digital revolution.

[I]: What do you think is the best model for filmmakers who want to make money with their films online now?

Sujewa: I do not know what the best model for that is (Scott Kirsner might know though). I am focused on marketing screenings & DVDs of my movies through the web & making money that way (through DVD sales, etc.). I am sure in the next 12 months I’ll experiment with online selling of movies & will see where things are – as far as making money through that process is concerned.

[I]: What kind of knowledge do filmmakers need to have about technology, distribution, and/or marketing strategies today? Can they “just be filmmakers”?

Sujewa: Being a filmmaker includes having all the knowledge necessary to make the movie, market the movie, and distribute the movie. Just as being a good chef, at some point in your career, may mean figuring out how a successful restaurant is run. These things (tech stuff, distribution, marketing) are not some closely guarded secrets – all the knowledge anyone needs is available on the web, in books, and through experienced people (many of whom openly discuss their perspectives & opinions on the web, in books, at film festival panels, etc.) The key thing is to break down the process, step by step, figure out the information needed to get through a step, and then repeat until you’ve completed your movie & made it available for potential customers/viewers to purchase.

At present a very simple filmmaking & distribution process would be: 1. make the indie film on a digital format, 2. submit to festivals, 3. submit to indie theaters, 4. set up screenings of your own, 4. look at other distribution options (internet VOD, cable VOD, selling the movie to a distribution company for theatrical & home, etc.), 5. start selling the DVD. Secret to success may be over-simplification :)

[I]: How has your blog and being online helped you as a filmmaker?

Sujewa: Operating the blog & keeping in touch with other bloggers makes me a part of the community of bloggers; meaning access to information, people to hang out with when I am in a city other than where I live, etc. – good stuff. Blogging has helped me get screenings, promote my work, and also promote other ideas – ideas that may not be related to film very directly but stuff that I am interested in exploring/discussing/promoting – saving the world stuff :) or far less important stuff like being a fan of a certain movie or something. Also, blogging for a couple of years gave me the idea to make the documentary that I am working on at the moment – The Indie Film Bloggers http://indiefilmbloggersmovie.blogspot.com/, and that project is possible due to the cooperation of my blogger friends/other bloggers.

As far as being online, pretty much all businesses & special interest groups are online now, so, being online makes it easier to get many things done.

Shooting People is an international networking organization of over 37,000 filmmakers who share their skills and resources through email bulletins, calendars, and networking events in New York, London, and elsewhere. Ingrid Kopp is the Director in NYC and took a few moments to share her thoughts on the emerging state of distribution and Shooting People’s members.

[I]nfinicine: What is the role of networking in distribution? Do you see that changing as online distribution methods emerge?

Ingrid [IK]: Networking has always been key but as the networking tools that Web2.0 enables become more sophisticated, the power of the network becomes greater. And as more filmmakers explore the possibilities of online distribution, self-distribution, or some kind of hybrid distribution, this networking becomes more important than ever. As new online distribution methods emerge the ability to network strategically is vital because this is how filmmakers can reach out to and connect with audiences and begin to get over the marketing hurdle which is definitely a huge problem for a lot of people pursuing online distribution (Netflix’s Ted Sarandos refers to this as the “cold start” on the Internet). Apart from anything else this can also be enormously gratifying for filmmakers: to have a more direct, sustainable relationship with their fans. Many filmmakers I have spoken to say that this connection really feeds them creatively and inspires them to continue to make films.

[I]: How are Shooting People members getting involved in new distribution technologies? Is it something that is addressed specifically on the site?

[IK]: There is a great deal of conversation about this on our email bulletins and blogs but I am sometimes surprised by how resistant filmmakers can be to explore this new territory. I think so many people still hold out for the holy grail of being discovered at Sundance, getting a great theatrical deal and making a killing, despite the extreme unlikelihood of this ever happening. It seems less sexy to pursue alternative avenues which is why I was so pleased to see John August’s candid blog post about his experience with distribution of The Nines, and what he has to say about Sundance and theatrical distribution. I think festivals are enormously important and I would always encourage filmmakers to pursue a well-thought out festival run but it always comes back to managing your expectations and really thinking about the realistic possibilities for you film what YOU want for it. Doing a 4am deal at Sundance is not necessarily the measure of success that filmmakers should be aiming for.

[I]: What do you think is the best model for filmmakers who want to make money with their films online now?

[IK]: First thing I want to say is that I would never discount the experience, knowledge and connections of more traditional distributors and, again, to really think strategically. People often talk about distribution strategy as though a one size fits all model will work, which is ridiculous when you look at how vastly different films are. As some people have pointed out, Mark Gill’s recent comments are simply not relevant to the vast majority of super-indie producers out there who will never be part of Indiewood in the first place. And strategies should obviously be different for someone making viral shorts specifically for the web and someone making a feature-length social issue documentary for example. The doc might be very well suited to educational distribution which is another avenue that people often don’t think of and which can be lucrative. Many of the tools used will be the same but referring to all of this as “content” obfuscates the differences. After all these differences are GOOD differences that enable filmmakers to come up with a distribution strategy in the first place, targeting different niche audiences etc. It also drives many filmmakers crazy to be lumped in together with people who are using their phones to make 2-minute videos of their cats – and I totally understand this.

[I]: How do you think theatrical screenings will figure into the new distribution landscape of 5-10 years from now for Shooting People members- and what is their significance now?

[IK]: I do believe that failure creates opportunity and I also believe that people will still want to go see films in theaters so I think that for the kind of films we are talking about there will be a lot more event screenings, limited runs with filmmaker Q&As, special guests, that sort of thing. For certain kinds of films, filmmakers can also create outreach strategies around their films which can bring new communities to these screenings and create a dialogue that carries on beyond the screening itself. I am endlessly impressed by the work of Working Films, Active Voice, Sandi DuBowski and others in this area. Again, I do believe that people will always want to go to the movies, and see films on a big screen with great projection and great sound. But I think the distribution bottle-neck for independent films vying for theatrical release and audience attention is going to force the current model to change (and simultaneous release on VOD, DVD etc makes a lot of sense to me for many films).

[I]: e="font-size:12;"> As a filmmaker yourself, are you looking at your distribution options before you begin a project? How do they influence you in terms of your technical and content decisions for the film?

[IK]: I have to be completely honest and say that I am doing my damndest to be completely naïve when it comes to my own project. I’m not thinking about anything other than getting it done. At this stage I really just want to have some fun creatively, work with some really talented people, and explore a subject that fascinates me. Also I still feel like if I actually get this thing done it will be a miracle. I’m in awe of each and every one of the filmmakers I know who get their films made and out into the world. I think my strategy in a nutshell is to have a day job to support myself to minimize the risks and and to try not to over-think anything and just enjoy the process. I’ve basically given myself permission to screw up royally. Which is great!

But if this was a different kind of project then sure, I would absolutely be thinking more strategically. Especially because funding and distribution are often linked – if you create partnerships, your funding opportunities can turn into distribution opportunities. Again, I think it all comes back to the kind of filmmaker you are and what you want your film to do: fame? fortune? creating change in the world? creating community? just getting people to see it? Films are not laundry detergent and should not be treated as just another commodity.

[I]: What do you think are the biggest misconceptions or questions Shooting People members have about digital distribution?

[IK]: I think a lot of members have no idea what to think and no idea where to look for clues as to what they should be thinking! It’s very confusing. People talk about splitting up rights and and creating sticky websites and SEO and I can see people’s faces just cloud over. That said, there are people and organizations doing a lot of great work to provide more resources to filmmakers or offering us new ways of thinking digitally. People like Lance Weiler, Scott Kirsner, Tiffany Shlain, Chris Anderson – plus lots of bloggers, and indieWIRE and Shooting People of course. I think it’s really great that so many of these folk are so generous about sharing what they have learned – but it’s hard when you are talking to such a vast constituency with such different needs and so ultimately filmmakers will have to learn to play the distribution game better, and I know many producers are stepping up to the plate in this area. It always comes back to looking at each film on its own merits and really asking yourself what you want your film to do and what you honestly think it can do. And I think it’s really important to be realistic and not bankrupt yourself to make a film because you have to create a sustainable career for yourself too.

I should add that I feel really optimistic about all of this. I think it’s tremendously exciting that filmmakers have so many tools and options at their disposal now. It’s really great to be able to make a plan for your film knowing that it is in your power to avoid total obscurity. Whatever your film does it does NOT need to gather dust on a shelf somewhere. And it is very empowering to be able to think as creatively about your distribution process as you would the production process. But we’re all on a steep learning curve at the moment. I think the hardest thing for many filmmakers is realizing that once they have finished their film they are only at the beginning of another Herculean task – at exactly the moment when they are often financially and physically spent. So it’s important to recalibrate for the long haul and to surround yourself with people with the skills and expertise to help you. If you don’t want to spend 2 years working full-time on the distribution of your film, you may need to find people who can help you.

[I]: Shooting People is an international organization. Do you think the concerns and knowledge about these new technologies and opportunities is pretty universal or does it vary a lot by region?

[IK]: There are obviously huge regional variations but the web is breaking down a lot of geographical divisions. I think it’s also really important for filmmakers to think globally these days. A lot of people think of foreign markets as an afterthought and I’m always amazed how little different filmmaking communities communicate with each other when there are so many mutually beneficial opportunities. Co-productions, foreign sales, international outreach partnerships, communities across the web. People need to think globally. I think that the UK is starting to learn a lot from the US as filmmakers wean themselves off total dependence on television or government funding – filmmakers there are starting to explore new digital opportunities and people like Liz Rosenthal and Matt Hanson are on the frontier exploring the boundaries of what is possible. I’m very excited to see what happens as more and more people join them and the frontier is pushed further. And I’m really happy that Shooting People can help our members navigate this new territory.

Festivals have been a hot topic in the blogosphere as of late for their role in the distribution landscape. Recently, Jonathan Marlow of Green Cine Daily caused a bit of a stir when he suggested that festivals, which have replaced traditional theatrical as a distribution mechanism for indies and docs, start ponying up part of their ticket sales to filmmakers. AJ Schnack, DIY Filmmaker Sujewa and several others got into the fray, arguing that festivals provide benefits to filmmakers that go beyond screening fees. (It’s my opinion that this all should work on a kind of intern- paying job- mentor hierarchy in which the middle level of films, who are the most hard-hit in the current move away from independent theatrical exhibition, get fees from fests). But how many filmmakers are really even thinking about distribution at this point?

NewFest, The New York Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender Film Festival, is celebrating its 20th year with its 2008 festival going on now. Kyle Schickner, director of NewFest centerpiece film Steam (starring Ally Sheedy and Ruby Dee) shared some of his thoughts about distribution:

(ICI): How much thought did you put into distribution in general before you started shooting?

Kyle: One has to of course always be aware of distribution on some level, but honestly, I try to just put together a good film, something I would like to see, and figure others will respond to it as well. The problem with taking distribution into to much consideration, is you start to make decisions based more on selling the movie, and less on what serves the film best. And then what you get is “What Happens in Vegas”.

(ICI): Did you alter the way you produced the film itself in anticipation of screening it online and on mobile/portable devices?

Kyle: Sadly no. I am an analogue man in a digital world. My co-producer is always trying to get me up to speed.

(ICI): How difficult do you feel it is for independent filmmakers to access the many different marketplaces for broadband and mobile distribution?

Kyle: It is difficult for independent filmmakers to get access to ANY audience. But I think in the next 5 years, there will be a “revolution” with all the new technology (like what is happening with music) and voices that would normally not get heard, will find an audience. In many instances a huge audience. Hollywood is always a decade behind the trends.

(ICI): Do you have any concerns, hopes or positive experiences to share about digital distribution past/present/future? Do you feel like GLBT films will have an easier or more difficult time accessing an audience digitally?

Kyle: GLBT content will have a much easier time finding an audience. One of the things FenceSitter Films does is we make movies that deal with women, people of color and/or the GLBT community and unfortunately, mainstream Hollywood has always felt there these is simply not a big enough market for these films. Obviously we feel differently, and all these new outlets will prove once and for all that the GLBT community is STARVING for content and will seek it out.

As digital distribution evolves, it seems likely that smaller operations will benefit from serving niche markets- both to concentrate sales efforts and to become more attractive to advertisers.

dGenerate is a new distribution project set to launch this summer that partners American indie producers, Chinese filmmakers, and Tribeca Film Institute and TFI’s Amazon digital distribution partnership Reframe. dGenerate head Karin Chien was kind enough to share some information about this exciting new venture.

(ICI): How did you come up with the idea for dGenerate?

Karin: Honestly, the idea came rather unexpectedly on a chilly January night in New York City, via 4 degrees of separation.

A panel at the Museum of Chinese in America (MOCA) connected me with Andrew Gluckman and Wei Wei Shannon, of People’s Architecture, who introduced me to Ou Ning, a filmmaker in Beijing, who I introduced to Alexandra Chang at NYU’s APA Studies Institute. Alexandra agreed to host a screening of one of Ou Ning’s projects, and while watching the film, I found myself blown away by its content, visuals, and production methodology. It felt to me like discovering unknown treasure, further confirmed by Ou Ning’s assurances that his film was just one of many examples of visionary filmmaking happening in China today.

So, in the time it took to walk from NYU to Andrew and Wei Wei’s apartment, I hatched the idea for dGenerate Films. It took another 9 months, however, of false starts and going at it alone to figure out that I needed a team of collaborators, and a trip to China, to properly make the thought a reality.

(ICI): How did you connect with Tribeca Film Institute and Reframe?

Karin: Through a friend of mine, Diana Williams, who sits on Renew Media’s board. (Renew recently merged with TFI).

Diana connected me with TFI’s executive director, Brian Newman, to discuss a Chinatown Film exhibition that I’m producing for MOCA. Brian and I met at Sundance about my MOCA project, and after the meeting, we boarded the same Sundance shuttle bus, where we made small talk. I happened to mention my idea for dGenerate, and Brian told me about Reframe. It immediately made sense – without Reframe’s digital delivery capacities, and non-profit mandate, distributing these films would be too difficult to attempt. Since that fateful shuttle ride, Brian and all the folks at Reframe and TFI have been hugely supportive of our efforts.

(ICI): Do you feel that Asian films have any particular advantage in the VOD/digital marketplace?

Karin: I think the VOD/digital marketplace is set up to serve niche markets in particular. At least right now. I wouldn’t say Asian films have an advantage. But I can say that without digital delivery, dGenerate would not be happening.

Besides Reframe, a number of VOD, streaming and download sites have already asked to license our content. What might also be a factor is that no other American distributor is dedicated to sourcing and distributing independent Chinese films.

(ICI): What will be your strategy for marketing films that haven’t had the benefit of a theatrical release here? Do you think people are very invested in the review system of meritizing films?

Karin: Our marketing strategy is based on our target audience. Which for now is the educational market. As a way to get to know our audience, and to introduce these films to them, we are conducting informational meetings with top scholars and academics across disciplines, as well as listening to the needs of programmers and curators of cultural institutions. We will have a full arsenal of traditional marketing tools as well: trailers, postcards, catalogues, newsletters, conference attendance, and a multimedia website.

But given that we are a company invested in digital delivery, the online space is an important one for us. We are planning to create what I call “intellectual networking,” as opposed to review-driven marketing. Our site will be a place where scholars, critics, curators, programmers, etc can contribute critical content about our films, as well as thoughts about independent Chinese cinema. Critical content will include essays and blog entries but also podcasts and video essays, which point to new ways of consuming film criticism. “Intellectual networking” will give our target audience a way to understand the films through the words of their peers.

(ICI): What kind of technical challenges are there for this type of distribution?

Karin: Formats differ across countries, but Reframe is able to digest almost any type of video or print master, which makes our technical challenges quite small. The main challenges of this type of distribution are not technical, I would say.

(ICI): What, for you, is the most exciting aspect of this type of distribution?

Karin: The films. I wouldn’t be doing this if I didn’t think some incredibly exciting things were happening in independent Chinese cinema. Also, as a Chinese-American, I’m personally invested in disseminating diverse perspectives from inside China. Nearly all documentaries, for example, that American audiences see about mainland China are not made by mainland Chinese filmmakers.

(ICI): When/how can we expect to see dGenerate films available for VOD or download?

Karin: We plan to launch in August 2008, in preparation for the academic calendar. Films will be available for educational DVD or download-to-rent for the public by September.

We have been approached by VOD outlets, but are still in talks. No launch date for VOD yet.