TAKE 58 by Danish Film Directors

JULI 2012

TEMA

The New Auteur

Billeder fra Danske Filminstruktørers arrangement: The New Auteur, juni 2012

DANSKE FILMINSTRUKTØRER Nørre Voldgade 12, 2th 1358 • Kbh K. Tlf: 33 33 08 88 • Fax: 33 33 08 80 mail@filmdir.dk • www.filmdir.dk Ansvarshavende redaktør Birgitte Stærmose Design e-types & Benny Box Tryk Glumsø bogtrykkeri A/S • Oplag / 600 Forsideillustration Benny Box Take udkommer 4 gange årligt. Take er både et informationsblad og et debat-forum for aktuelle filmpolitiske diskussioner. Alle indlæg er velkomne. Næste deadline: 15 august.

LEDER

Farven på billetten Sikke et forår. Mens Vinterberg imponerede alle i Cannes, og Mads Mikkelsen modtog en pris som bedste mandlige skuespiller – samt pris til fotograf Charlotte Bruus (og stort tillykke herfra til hele holdet) – gik den hjemlige presse og en stor del af branchen i forargede sko over et afslag fra Filminstituttet. Den offentliggjorte del af afslaget kunne læses diskriminerende, på kanten til det racistiske. For filmen havde angiveligt fået afslag, fordi der var indvandrere i hovedrollerne – med begrundelsen, at det ville publikum ikke se. Især ikke i Jylland. Stor tumult – kunne det virkelig passe? Kan det passe, at vi har et racistisk Filminstitut, eller er publikum i Jylland det? Og hvem er den fordømte konsulent, som bør holdes ansvarlig? Svaret er, at det var et forventeligt afslag – men ikke nødvendigvis forargeligt. Forventeligt i kraft af, at Markedsordningen, som er den ordning filmen søgte, er en ordning med fokus på marked og publikumspotentiale. Markedsordningen “skal støtte film, der er kommercielt bæredygtige og har et betydeligt publikumspotentiale i forhold til sin målgruppe. Ansøgningerne vil blive vurderet med hensyn til fortælling, publikum, distribution, markedsføring og filmens samlede økonomiske bæredygtighed.” Jvf. Filmaftalen 2010-2014 Det er en ordning med en redaktion – og netop ikke en konsulent – som vurderer en film ud fra den samlede pakkes forventede publikumsperformance: Instruktør, Historie, Genre og Cast. En ordning med det eksistensgrundlag vil altid handle på baggrund af hidtidige erfaringer og er dermed konservativt i sin støttepolitik. At det i praksis betyder, at ordningen altid vil være ca. 2 år bagud i forhold til publikum, er så en anden sag. Her kan man anføre, at filmloven i sin essens er en kunststøtteordning. Bør vi så overhovedet have en markedsorienteret ordning som støtter kommercielle film? Det ubetingede svar er: Ja!

Dansk films styrke er, at vi har begge retninger – vi har et stærkt brand ude i verden i kraft af de kunstnerisk stærke film, som primært produceres på konsulentordningen og New Danish Screen. Men vi har som branche en folkelig opbakning og en (næsten) levedygtig branche i kraft af de bredere og mere kommercielt orienterede film, som klarer sig godt på hjemmemarkedet.

Uanset smag tror jeg dog vi kan være enige om, at vi har brug for diversitet og mod i både filmene og i filmstøtten, hvis vi vil vedblive at holde det kunstneriske og kommercielle niveau. At det ikke altid betyder kø ved billetlugen, er den risiko vi løber. Men bør dansk film ikke turde tage chancer og vise, at man godt kan skabe succeser? Producentforeningen har ofte slået til lyd for, at der bør være ligevægt i støtten imellem de to ordninger. Jeg vil ikke gå ind i debatten om det her, men blot anføre, at jo mere kommercielt støtten til dansk film skal agere, jo mere vil det betyde, at film vil få afslag på grund af parametre, som ikke nødvendigvis er af kunstnerisk eller kvalitativ art. For eksempel på baggrund af performance-erfaringerne for tidligere film med lignende rollebesætning eller genre. At vi i Danmark har en historie for lavere publikumstal for film med anden etnisk rollebesætning betyder ikke, at der ikke er potentiale for en Jalla-Jalla, Bend it like Beckham eller en East is East i Danmark. Tværtimod! Før Pusher og I Kina Spiser de hunde var selve ideen om danske actionfilm utænkelig. Før Nattevagten var der ikke fantasi til at forestille sig, at der var publikum til en gyser på dansk. Som med alle teorier skal der blot et eksempel på det modsatte til, for at teorien om, at der ikke er publikum (i Jylland) til film med etniske minoriteter i hovedrollen, må forkastes. Men handler det så ikke bare om at lave nogen bedre film? Kulturministeren siger jo selv, at det er fordi de film, som hidtil er lavet med indvandrere i hovedrollerne, er for dårlige. Med al respekt hr. Kulturminister, har du desværre lige gjort dig til nomineret i kategorien ”årets mindst velovervejede udsagn”. Antal billetter og kvalitet hænger ikke nødvendigvis sammen. I så fald ville Citizen Kane fx være en dårlig film, idet den nemlig floppede ved billetlugerne. Mange af de etnisk orienterede film er kunstnerisk stærke film, som har kastet sig over svære, betændte emner – det er ikke altid den største publikumsmagnet, men det gør ikke filmene mindre nødvendige eller dårlige. Hvis du ikke har set dem – bevares, man kan jo ikke se alt - så kan man selvfølgelig komme til at fortale sig. I så fald vil jeg gerne booke en sal i Cinemateket en dag og invitere dig på en visning af en håndfuld af filmene. Bagefter kan vi så snakke om hvorvidt det virkelig er, fordi filmene er for dårlige. Uanset smag tror jeg dog vi kan være enige om, at vi har brug for diversitet og mod i både filmene og i filmstøtten, hvis vi vil vedblive at holde det kunstneriske og kommercielle niveau. At det ikke altid betyder kø ved billetlugen, er den risiko vi løber.

Men at en filmpolitik med plads til diversitet betaler sig, må årets hidtidige publikums- og prisregn siges at være et udmærket udtryk for. Pt. har billetsalget til Danske film rundet de to millioner, med Hvidstensgruppen og En Kongelig Affære helt i top. Og danske instruktører har igen i år markeret sig stærkt ved verdens vigtigste festivaler: I den forbindelse skal lyde store lykønskninger herfra til Nikolaj Arcel for hele to priser i Berlin (og publikumssuccesen), til Mads Matthiesen for sin instruktørpris på Sundance og helt aktuelt: Søren Kragh-Jacobsen, som hjemtog en BAFTA for Borgen. Også i foreningen har det været et hektisk forår. I starten af juni var foreningen værter ved FERA’s (Fédération Européenne des Réalisateurs de l’Audiovisuel) generalforsamling (sammenslutningen af europæiske filminstruktør-organisationer). Det er sundt at få mulighed for at se sig selv udefra. Når verden flytter ind, indser man hvor privilegerede vi er – ikke bare på grund af vores filmpolitik, som bliver misundt i resten af Europa, men også på grund af vores organisation og sekretariat. Vi oplever, at instruktører herhjemme grundlæggende har en åbenhed og en respekt for hinanden, som få andre steder. Det kan godt være at vi er konkurrenter, og bærer på jalousi over hinandens succes, men det føles ikke sådan. Mange medlemmer var med til det indledende og temmelig inspirerende seminar The New Auteur: Artisan and Audience Builder, som vi holdt i Cinemateket. I den forbindelse vil jeg gerne takke sekretariatet for deres enorme indsats med at få dagen og generalforsamlingen til at forløbe smukt. Det har skabt stærke relationer til hele Europa. Og dermed giver jeg ordet til redaktøren af dette nummer af TAKE, Birgitte Stærmose.

Martin Strange-Hansen Formand, Danske Filminstruktører

THE NEW AUTEUR As a filmmaker, it is all about the story and the connection to the audience. Everything in the middle will be redone. Gerd Leonhard Danske Filminstruktører var i juni værter for den europæiske instruktørsammenslutning FERAs generalforsamling. Vi var værter for 60 instruktører fra hele Europa. I den forbindelse afholdte vi et debatarrangment: The New Auteur: Artisan and Audience Builder. Sheri Candler og Wendy Bernfeld var begge keynote speakers på denne dag, og der er to artikler i bladet som uddyber deres indlæg i debatten. Det er svært at spå om fremtiden, men vi er i bestyrelsen optaget af hvordan vi skal opbygge og nå vores publikum i fremtiden. Hvordan instruktøren skal lære at etablere en tættere forbindelse til sit publikum via de sociale medier. Hvordan man som instruktør opbygger et generøst og kreativt udvekslende forhold til sit publikum, er noget som Sheri Candler er noget nær ekspert på. Wendy Bernfeld er europæisk ekspert indenfor rettigheder i det nye medielandskab, og hun gav os et interessant perspektiv på nye muligheder både indenfor distribution og finansiering af vores film i fremtiden. Men der er jo også mange faresignaler på horisonten, og en af dem er den stærkt dalende offentlige filmstøtte, når man ser udover Europa. Både i Ungarn og Portugal er statsstøtten til film blevet skåret helt bort. De kan ikke længere få støtte til at lave film! Det er uvirkeligt at forestille sig et Europa uden europæisk film, men det kan ikke desto mindre blive en realitet. Danske filminstruktører er måske de mest priviligerede instruktører i Europa, men vores rolle er ikke kun som danske filminstruktører, vi er også europæiske filmskabere og set med de briller kan fremtiden virke både usikker og truende. FERAs CEO, Elisabeth Sjaastad, har skrevet et indlæg til TAKE, om hvordan afstanden mellem de priviligerede og de ikke priviligerede filminstruktører i Europa er blevet betydeligt større under krisen. Robert Bresson skrev: ’The future of cinematography belongs to a new race of young solitaries who will shoot films by putting their last cent into it and not let themselves be taken in by the material routines of the trade’. Måske spåede han fremtiden klarere, end han selv kunne have vidst. God sommer til alle.

Birgitte Stærmose

Lone Scherfig, Director in Dialogue KĂ¸benhavn 8. juni 2012

Sheri Candler

DU er branchen Udfordringen er ikke længere distribution. Udfordringen er at få folks opmærksomhed. Verden består nu af en masse nicher frem for et massepublikum, og derfor skal man som instruktør vide, hvordan man kan blive leder af sin stamme. Sheri Candler, keynote ved FERA-seminaret The New Auteur: Artisan and Audience Builder, i juni Af Eva Novrup Redvall Sheri Candler er en flittig dame på nettet. Hun blogger løbende om det sidste nye på sin hjemmeside og er om sig i forhold til de seneste links og ressourcer for filmfolk verden over. Er man heldig, kan man dog også fange hende In Real Life, som det var tilfældet ved FERA-seminaret The New Auteur: Artisan and Audience Builder i juni. Her åbnede hun en dag med fokus på instruktørens rolle i et forandret medielandskab med et slide til alle om, at ”YOU are the industry”. Det nytter ikke, at du gemmer dig og tror, at dine værker taler for sig selv. Du skal holde op med at tale om publikum. Du skal tale om DIT publikum. Dine værker bygger på DIN vision, og den skal du selv sørge for at få ud i verden. Candler startede med at punktere de gamle forretningsmodeller, som hun er stærk modstander af. Det er tid til at finde nye veje og andre modeller, og i løbet af sin keynote introducerede hun mange eksempler på nye fremgangsmåder og eksperimenter. Hun var den første til at indrømme, at ikke alle

er lige økonomisk succesfulde endnu, men de er alle værd at undersøge nærmere i forhold til at finde nye veje. ”Der er altid stor usikkerhed, når gamle forretningsmodeller står for fald, og det tager tid af skabe nye; De tager ikke øjeblikkeligt de gamles plads. Det kræver uddannelse af både publikum og kunstnere,” konstaterede Candler og varslede disintegrationen af vante kunstneriske livsstile. Ifølge hende havde ingen forventet fuldstændig stabilitet i kølvandet på internettets fagre nye verden, men heller ikke absolut instabilitet. Imidlertid er det følelsen hos mange i dag, hvor økonomien er presset, visningsvinduerne er under forandring og de nye muligheder ikke passer til finansieringsmulighederne i de fleste organisationer.

Instruktøren som entreprenør Sheri Candler mener, at en konsekvens af de store forandringer for filminstruktører er, at man skal betragte sig selv som entreprenør frem for blot instruktør: ”Du er en lille forretningsejer, og hvert projekt er et start up-projekt. Hvert projekt bygger på sig selv, men også på det publikum, du har omkring dig.” Det store spørgsmål er, hvordan man kan undgå for mange mellemmænd i arbejdet med at nå sit publikum gennem bæredygtige modeller, hvor man kan få direkte kontakt. ”Ikke flere kunstneriske bobler,” formanede Candler, som på amerikansk vis også udnævnte alle i rummet til ophavsmænd for deres egen succes. Man skal selv skabe sine værker og også sin egen succes. Det skal man imidlertid ikke være bange for, for det, der kendetegner ens værker er netop

ens vision for dem. Det er den vision, man skal få ud til publikum. Udfordringen er, hvordan man bedst præsenterer sin personlige stemme online – og om der evt. er hjælp at hente i de eksisterende strukturer. Candler er fra Florida og talte for første gang til europæiske instruktører. Hun var bevidst om de europæiske støttesystemers fokus på produktion frem for distribution. Undervejs argumenterede hun for, at det jo ikke kun er filmfolk og publikum, som skal ændre vaner, men også institutionerne omkring europæisk filmproduktion.

Obskuritet er din fjende! Mens der tales meget om piratkopiering som filmbranchens fjende nummer et, udnævnte Candler en anden kandidat: obskuritet. Det værste som instruktør er, hvis folk ikke ved, at ens ting er derude, eller ikke forstår, hvad de bygger på. Kampen mod obskuriteten handler om at skabe en direkte forbindelse til publikum, så man kan uddanne dem og give dem adgang. Som hun understregede, er man nødt til at spørge sig selv, hvad der får folk til at finde netop dine værker i en tid, hvor der ifølge Candler i 2016 vil blive streamet det, der svarer til 38 millioner DVD’er i timen. Man er nødt til at have et identificerbart ’brand’ så folk kan finde én i mængden. Det gælder ikke kun filmfolk, men også alle andre brancher. Det handler om at skabe en relation til sit publikum. Candler tilbød en række forskelig

strategier for, hvordan man fx kan gøre det, bl.a. crowdfunding,

crowdsourcing og special screenings.

Crowdfunding Crowdfunding er ifølge Candler udbyttet af regnestykket: publikum + donation. Hjemmesider som Kickstarter, Indiegogo, Sponsume eller Verkami tilbyder platforme for at præsentere kommende filmprojekter og tilbyde folk at donere penge til dem. Der er stadig ikke mange penge i crowdfunding, men ifølge Candler rejser projekter i gennemsnit nu ti tusind dollars, så det er bedre end de første år. Crowdfunding kan både bygge på investeringer og donationer. Det gode ved donationer

Sheri Candler

er selvfølgelig, at der ikke skal betales noget er såkaldt

marketing and publicity strategist med fokus på

at hjælpe uafhængige filmfolk med at opbygge en identitet for både dem selv og deres film. Hun arbejder især med at opfordre filmfolk til at bevare kontrollen over deres værker og få så direkte kommunikationsveje med deres publikum som muligt. Hun arbejder bl.a. med online digital distribution og skriver flittigt om nye ideer og tiltag på sin hjemmeside:

www.shericandler.com

tilbage, og folk virker villige til at betale for at få medejerskab og blive orienteret om ens projekt. Ud over at man således rejser penge til et projekt, rejser man også et publikum og skaber bevidsthed om projektet. Med mange interessenter i ryggen kan man vise, at folk er interesserede og gerne vil se projektet blive en succes. Candler mente, at både nationale og regionale støtteordninger skulle begynde at tænke meget mere i crowdfunding. Det er jo ikke en

Man er nødt til at have et identificerbart ’brand’ så folk kan finde én i mængden.

dårlig ting, at man som instruktør kan demonstrere, at man har et publikum, og rent faktisk er i stand til at få dem til at hjælpe med at få film på benene.

Crowdsourcing Mens crowdfunding kan være en måde at få både penge og opmærksomhed på, bygger crowdsourcing i højere grad på at aktivere publikum og få dem til at generere materiale. Det er selvfølgelig en fordel, hvis folk producerer ting, man kan bruge, men under alle omstændigheder føler de sig delagtige i projektet og får forhåbentlig lyst til at se det endelige resultat. Candler nævnte en række projekter, som på forskellig vis involverer publikum, fx dokumentarfilmen Life in a Day, som fik 80.000 bidrag, i alt 4500 timers materiale fra 192 lande, som blev klippet sammen til en film. Et andet eksempel er Star Wars Uncut, hvor fans fra hele verden samarbejder om at lave et shot to shot-remake af Star Wars Epiode IV: A New Hope. Candler fremhævede også dokumentarfilmprojekterne Connected and Let it Ripple: Mobile Films for Global Change. Sidstnævnte projekt er af Tiffany Slain, som har udarbejdet et Cloud Filmmaking Manifesto, som i høj grad bygger på at involvere folk i processen fra selve skabelsen af filmen til oversættelsen og distributionen af den. Som Candler betonede, får projekter, som på den måde bruger fan-bidrag, naturligt skabt en skare af folk med en særlig interesse for netop dette projekt og en vilje til at kæmpe for det videre.

Special screenings Ikke mindst herhjemme har der den seneste

ResourcePlace fra The Film Collaborative

tid været fokus på biografdistributionen af smallere titler, og her mente Candler også, at der var online hjælp at hente. Hun nævnte

Sheri Candler har bl.a. hjulpet The Film Collaborative med at sammensætte en liste med anvendelige online ressourcer for independent filmfolk. Formålet med The Film Collaborative beskrives af grundlæggeren Orly Ravid således: ”With thirteen years of acquisitions, distribution and sales experience, I conceived of THE FILM COLLABORATIVE because I was sick of the layers of middlemen standing in between filmmakers and the revenues they deserved but were often not receiving. I was further bothered by the wasted money and ineffeciency, to say nothing of greed and cheating. And frankly, the old model of giving up rights never made any sense to me. So I wanted to find a way to work with film based on a service model in which my team could get paid for our time, experience and work, but not be given ownership and control of a film. It was out of this feeling of frustration and commitment to fairness that TFC was born. We’re non-profit, on purpose, and we truly believe in and stand by our two taglines: “filmmakers first.” and “we don’t own your rights…you do!”

arrangere visninger af film i sit kvarter. Ideen er, folk organiserer film events, hvor de sælger billetterne på forhånd online og dermed viser, at der er publikumsbasis for at booke en biograf. En lignende site er Eventful, hvor man som bruger kan prøve at kræve at få en særlig film eller anden form for event til sit nabolag. Det giver mulighed for at demonstrere en efterspørgsel, og en del filmskabere bruger sites som dem som vejledning i forhold til, hvor de skal vise eller rejse rundt med deres film. Candler argumenterede for, at tiltag som crowdfunding, crowdsourcing og special screenings netop bygger på, at publikum vil tage del: ”Publikum vil deltage. De vil ikke være passive tilskuere, men sande partnere.”

Instruktøren som storyteller Mens nogle instruktører elsker de mange nye muligheder, understregede Candler, at hun godt var klar over, at andre ikke umiddelbart trives med selv at skulle træde frem i lyset, når

Under distripedia™ på hjemmesiden for The Film Collaborative kan man nu finde et

bl.a. en hjemmeside som Tugg, hvor man kan

Re-

sourcePlace med links, som efter planen løbende skal opdateres, kommenteres og kontekstualiseres:

www.thefilmcollaborative.org/resourceplace

der skal interageres mere direkte med publikum. Det kan føles risikabelt, ubehageligt og svært at styre. Candler mente, at det i høj grad handler om, hvordan man går til det som instruktør. ”Jeg taler ikke om instruktører som selvpromoverende robotter. I har alle sammen unikke visioner for jeres arbejde, og de siger meget om

jer. Det er dem, I skal dele med andre. Jeg taler ikke om at sige: Jeg er fantastisk, her er min film! I skal ikke behandle redskaberne på den måde. I skal betragte selvpromovering som en måde at hjælpe andre på,” som hun formulerede det og holdt en længere kunstpause, så den lige kunne synke ind. ”Jo mere du deler og giver publikum af sand værdi, desto mere vil de blive tiltrukket af dine projekter.”

”Jo mere du deler og giver publikum af sand værdi, desto mere vil de blive tiltrukket af dine projekter.”

Løbende dialog En fordel ved at dele på den rigtige måde er,

Caine’s Arcade På www.cainesarcade.com kan man læse mere om Nirvan Mullicks film og evt. lade sig inspirere af hans oplæg til, hvordan man kan støtte The Caine’s Arcade Imagination Foundation: 1. Donate to Caine’s Scholarship Fund (help us reach our $250k goal to receive a matching challenge grant.) 2. Buy an official Caine’s Arcade STAFF shirt 3. Download the Caine’s Arcade Theme Song 4. Join our Caine’s Arcade School Curriculum Pilot Program for Inspired Educators 5. Join: Caine’s Arcade on Facebook & Twitter + The Imagination Foundation on Facebook Share this film with friends!

at man finder det publikum, som er inspireret af de samme ting. Det mente Candler, at alle instruktører er i stand til at gøre. Det er kommunikation mellem folk, som er interesserede i lignende ting. Som instruktør er det godt at have den dialog løbende og ikke kun i forbindelse med et enkeltstående projekt. Man skal ikke begynde forfra hver gang. Hun opfordrede også til, at man som instruktør kan tænke i at producere indhold, som ikke umiddelbart kan kopieres. Tænk i oplevelser. Tænk i visninger som begivenheder. Giv folk en årsag til at gå ud af deres hus for at komme og se noget. Tænk på biografen som et rum, der kan mere, end kun at vise film. Candler mente, at film i sin tid blev opfundet som en enklere og billigere måde at tilbyde underholdning til masserne. I dag har internet overtaget den funktion, mens biograferne kan noget andet.

Digitale entreprenører Afslutningsvis introducerede Candler to eksempler på ’digitale entreprenører’, som har haft stor succes på forskellig vis. Det første møde var med youtuberen Freddiew, som har tre millioner abonnenter til sin youtube channel. Han laver korte videoer, senest VGHS (Video Game High School). Candler oplever, at mange filmfolk afskriver ting fra youtube som fjollede eller værdiløse, og det er en fejl. Man skal holde øje med, hvad der sker, og lære af det. Ifølge hende bliver der set 3 millarder timers youtube hver måned. Film kan sprede sig som steppebrande på øjeblikke. Man vil forstå det og være en del af det. I dag konkurrerer man med alle, for alle kan være skabere. Freddiew har ikke blot mange fans; han har fans, som er villige til at betale for mere indhold. Da han annoncerede, at han ville producere ti nye episoder til sin kanal, skrabede han 273.000 dollars sammen i finansiering fra abonnenterne. Tanken er, at de ti episoder også skal blive en spillefilm, og på den måde kan store ting vokse ud af de små formater.

Papkassehit Candlers andet eksempel på en digital entreprenør var den Los Angeles-baserede instruktør Nirvan Mullick, som har lavet kortfilmen Caine’s Arcade om den ni-årig Caine, som bruger en sommer på at bygge en omfattende papkasse-arkade i sin fars bilværksted. Hun viste et klip om den 11-minutter lange film, som i dag er set af over seks millioner. På baggrund af filmen har Mullick også indsamlet 200.000 dollars til et scholarship, så Caine kan komme på universitetet. Ifølge Candler siger man normalt, at film på over ti minutter aldrig bliver virale, men det gjorde Caine’s Arcade, og der blev fulgt dygtigt op på interessen. Hendes afsluttende eksemplar var ikke tænkt som formularer, men som inspiration til, at der er mange forskellige veje at gå – og det er NU, man skal gøre det. Som Candler sammenfattede til sidst: ”DU er branchen. Hold op med at vente på, at andre mennesker skal finansiere dine projekter. Redskaberne er tilgængelige i forhold til at opbygge

Sheris bog Her kan man downloade Sheri Candlers bog ‘Selling Your Film’ helt gratis eller man kan købe den i forskellige versioner.

www.sellingyourfilm.com/store/

sit eget publikum, og det er i dag, du skal gå i gang.”

I GIVE SO THAT YOU WILL GIVE

8 questions for Sheri Candler These answers are being written from the perspective that all directors should be dedicated to building up a long term base of supporters for all of their work. Sheri Candler TAKE Should I keep my FB identity as a director seperate from my identity as a private person? Meaning should I have two seperate pages?

SHERI Yes, I would advise having a separate professional Facebook page for all of your professional work and leaving those privacy settings as open as possible. Your private profile should be for your actual friends, family and colleagues and the place where you put your personal thoughts and interests and that will have privacy settings optimized to only be shown to those people. While your family and friends may also want to keep up with your professional endeavors, not all of them will and having a professional page allows you to have a place to connect with your fanbase and industry people regarding your work.

TAKE At what stage should you know the title of your film? Can you change title later on? How do you avoid misleading people, if the film changes radically after the title has been set?

SHERI Some film titles change as soon as a distributor takes hold of it, so I wouldn’t be too worried about changing a title because your true fans, your community that you have been building for your work over time, will be the first to know the reasons for the change. Remember, you are building up a relationship with these people, they aren’t being gathered for the one film. If the title changes (and I highly recommend doing a thorough title search before you set one so that it doesn’t need to be changed later), only those who have not been with you all during the production of the project will come to know the new title. Same thing for branding on the film. In fact, this is a way to include the supporters, take a poll on which title they like or on which key art they like. American director Edward Burns held a poster contest for his film Newlyweds.

blog.moviefone.com/2011/03/28/create-a-poster-for-edward-burns-new-film-newlyweds He asked his fans to contribute their designs and they voted on the most popular one. It became the poster for the film. American director Tiffany Shlain did the same for her documentary Connected.

www.talenthouse.com/tiffany-shlain-create-a-movie-poster-for-connected Don’t treat your supporters as strangers, keep them informed of what is happening with the project and why.

TAKE What sites should a director have as a minimum? (FB, twitter, website, blog?) SHERI First, you must have a website, that is imperative. It is the only true piece of internet real estate you own and control. Every other platform belongs to a third party that may change the rules, go out of business or lock you out whenever they like and that would completely cut you off from your supporters if you depended solely on those for communication. I think directors should choose the social channels they feel most comfortable using and where those which would be most interested in their work frequent. For now, that is probably Facebook (with 900 million users, of course!) and maybe Twitter. But it could also be Pinterest, MySpace, Tumblr etc.

TAKE How and where do I use my time best online if I want to engage with my audience? It seems that one can use a lot of time on many different things, but where does it have the most impact?

SHERI The answer to this would be as unique as the audience members. The thing to realize is there are no set rules, there is no magic formula. This is all going to be an experiment and trying out services to gauge a fit. Online tools are just that, tools. It is all in how you use them and you only get out of them what you put in. The more time you spend connecting with others, the more you will get out of the process. I would say you need an outlet to speak from, which typically means a blog on your website. That blog should be updated weekly, ideally, so that you keep the site higher in search results and it feeds your social channels. Blog pieces do not have to be long, only 500-700 words, and they should primarily be devoted to sharing valuable information and insights, not self promotion.

TAKE How do you see the relationship between engaging your audience in a dialogue and the ability to earn money on having the dialogue? Does one exlude the other?

SHERI I want all not to start this process with the eye for making money as their foremost thought. It is like saying you are making friends with people only to see how much money you can get out of the relationship. A relationship that starts that way is doomed to fail because people can feel it, feel the insincerity. The mindset you must start with is ”I am going to find my ’people,’ the ones who would care the most for my art.” And you truly have to believe that. The Latin saying “Do ut des” (I give so that you will give) is extremely valid in the virtual world, in fact it is expected. The online world rewards generosity, not selfishness. Directors who already have fans or a reputation would actually find this process easier because their fans are eager to connect. But oddly, those directors are the least likely to do this right now. I think we will either see a change in that mindset or a loss of relevance for those directors because people are very fickle and they are getting very used to having personal contact with creators. Those who continue to ignore their fans will find themselves ignored in favor of artists who understand this new mindset. Money and fame are by products of relationship building, so concentrate less on those things and more on the relationship.

TAKE How private or personal do you feel that one should be? Many of us directors are shy people and only used to talking to journalists about our films before a release.

SHERI One would think it will be easier to speak to real people than to journalists! I don’t think you need to share intimate details about your personal life, but I do think we should see some sort of personality behind the communication efforts. All directors are creative people with lots to say to the world. If you aren’t, then perhaps you should rethink your occupation. Writing a blog isn’t journalistic writing, it is personal writing about your inspirations, helpful suggestions, recommendations, personal commentary on events happening in the world. Something that lets the supporters know who you are as an artist. Like attracts like and ideally you will attract those who love the way you tell a story no matter what the story is. We want to see the essence of the real artist, not some sound bite ”message” of the synopsis of the film.

TAKE Can you give us inspiring examples of feature film directors that use social media to engage their audiences?

SHERI YES! -American director Kevin Smith connects with his fans every day via Twitter and through his own channels at smodcast.com He is really an example of a director who tells stories in lots of mediums, not just film. A true storyteller.

-British actor/screenwriter/director Stephen Fry is also very accomplished at using social channels as well as his own website to connect to his fans.

www.stephenfry.com -Documentary filmmaker Errol Morris also has his own website and social channels

www.errolmorris.com -David Lynch uses Twitter, his tweets totally correspond to who he is as a storyteller.

www.davidlynch.com I would say though that Morris and Lynch do not do a great job at having conversations with their audience, their sites and social channels seem very one sided to me. -British director Duncan Jones uses Twitter to the extreme (several times a day!) and actually does talk with his followers.

TAKE What do you mean when you say that a director should be a tribe leader? Does that go for all directors?

SHERI The tribe idea originates with Seth Godin who wrote a book in 2009 called Tribes-We Need You to Lead Us. It is this idea of finding and connecting with like minded people and leading them to a place they want to go. The means to do this is universally available to everyone now with the internet, so it isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t based on geographical location or on having large financial resources to advertise your way into an audience. Advertising has been the default way of building an audience for films for a long time, it is costly and wasteful as you have to start again with each film. The tribe building idea is a totally different way of doing this and it is meant to be more cost efficient and longer lasting for the artist. You donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need to sell people on the fact that they want to connect (to art, to other people, to a movement) because that is inherent human nature, we want to connect to like minded people. So as a film director, or a storyteller, your job is to connect those like minded people through a platform that you create (your website, blog, or whatever tool you choose) and eliminate the need for them to find each other on their own. They connect through you as the artist and through your work. You are the leader of the tribe and you make your work only for them. They, in turn, bring in their friends, also like minded people, and that widens the reach of your work. Your job is only to make work and nurture those people, delight those people. They will bring the others aboard. This is a very radical idea though. When the artist is in charge of her tribe, where does that leave the chain of middlemen that once were so important to reach the mass? Mass reach is becoming less and less important because it isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t sustainable. Audiences for entertainment are becoming fractured and very focused about how they spend their time given the multitude of options for entertainment. Advertising is becoming much less important, but social connections, trust building are becoming more important. People are trusting recommendations from their personal connections much more than advertising blasts. If you have no personal relationship with your audience, your work will be lost in the multitude of other viewing options.

NAVIGATIONSKURSUS TIL NYE MEDIER OG NYE VISNINGSVEJE Cord cutters, modsat migration, VOD-variationer og middle manmudderet. Mange nye ideer og begreber florerer for tiden, og Wendy Bernfeld fra Rights Stuff gav ved FERA-debatarrangementet The New Auteur: Artisan and Audience Builder tips til at navigere i new media/cross platform-helvedet … Af Eva Novrup Redvall

“Jeg er det snakkende jakkesæt”, advarede Wendy Bernfeld indledningsvis, før hun kastede sig ud i hele to præsentationer ved FERA-arrangementet The New Auteur: Artisan and Audience Builder i Filmhuset i juni. Det var imidlertid ikke en tør omgang facts, der blev leveret, men snarere et hav af slides med myldrende muligheder af nye platforme og investerende brands, som alle tilbyder alternative måder at tænke både filmfinansiering og distribution på. Canadiske Wendy Bernfeld er managing director i selskabet Rights Stuff, som ifølge deres hjemmeside tilbyder ’pragmatisk’ rådgivning i forhold til mange forskellige aspekter af det, der beskrives som hhv. den traditionelle film og tv-verden og nye, digitale medieprojekter. Bernfeld har siden 1999 specialiseret sig i ’new media/cross platform-helvedet’, som hun selv kaldte det, og lagde ud med en introduktion til tilstandene i det aktuelle medielandskab. Som de fleste læsere af Take allerede ved, er bl.a. TV og DVD under pres fra nye medier og visningsvinduer og leveringsveje under forandring. Publikum er fragmenteret og har et stort udvalg af illegale fristelser. Det er et komplekst medielandskab at navigere i, men der er også muligheder, fordi så meget er under forandring.

Cord Cutting Centralt i Bernfelds introduktion var begrebet ’cord cutting’, som refererer til, at online abonnementstilbud som fx Netflix pludselig bliver mere populære og tjener flere penge end en kabelkanal som HBO. Ifølge Bernfeld er der flere Netflix-abonnenter end folk, der bruger pirattjenester som Big Torrent, og det må man betragte som en god nyhed.

Wendy Bernfeld under The New Auteur arrangementet i juni 2012

”Det handler ikke om, at folk vil have det gratis,” forklarede Bernfeld. ”Det handler om, at folk vil kunne finde ting til en overkommelig pris.” Cord cutters er det nye publikum, som vil se film på andre måder. ”Spørgsmålet er selvfølgelig, hvordan vi når det publikum, for de traditionelle fremgangsmåder inkluderer dem ikke altid,” konstaterede Bernfeld og understregede, at nutidens publikum vil se det, de vil se, når de vil se det. Ifølge Bernfeld er der i mange tilfælde – især for smallere film – flere penge at hente i VOD end i de traditionelle indtægtskilder. Hun advarerede imidlertid imod kun at satse på ét vindue. Man er nødt til at tjene penge i flere og have adskillige aftaler. Hun mente, at der i øjeblikket var mange muligheder for europæisk film, fordi der er en ny efterspørgsmål på art house film. Nye spillere som Netflix og Hulu satser i højere grad på undertekstede titler, og visse er begyndt at investere allerede på manuskriptstadiet for at sikre sig rettigheder. Som en del af deres strategi for at have egne produkter finansierer Netflix således anden sæson af den norske serie Lilyhammer. Kunsten er ifølge Bernfeld at balancere de traditionelle indtægtskilder med de nye digitale muligheder.

Modsat migration Bernfeld gav flere eksempler på, at alt er udfordret i øjeblikket. Der er eksempler på eksklusive online premierer, men visse værker laver også det, hun kaldte ’modsat migration’ ved først at åbne på digitale platforme og dernæst komme i biografen. Nogle laver først webisodes om en film eller med dele af filmen og først derefter kommer filmen. De nye medier fører også mange nye formater og hybridformer med sig, som man med fordel kan

Gode råd på én film kan være gavnlige for de næste mange, og man er nødt til at have en plan for, hvordan man bruger de sociale medier og bygger et publikum omkring sin film. 22

tænke i. Frem for altid primært at tænke film til biografen, kan man udvikle film til web eller mobil og prøve at benytte multiplatform-strategier. Selv om meget er muligt i den fagre transmedia-verden, anbefalede Bernfeld imidlertid, at man ikke ser sig blind på det hele på én gang. Man skal altid have et primært vindue for øje, og så kan man få de andre vinduer til at interagere og udvikle derfra.

VOD er ikke bare VOD Når man taler om de nye muligheder, er der ind imellem tendens til ikke at skelne nævneværdigt mellem de mange forskellige platforme og formater. Men nye medier er meget forskelligt, og VOD er fx ikke bare VOD. Bernfeld gennemgik forskellene på TVOD (som bygger på leje af film), SVOD (S for Subscription, som bygger på abonnementsadgang), AVOD (med A for Advertisement, som er reklamefinansieret adgang til film) og decideret VOD-salg, hvor folk køber et værk og derefter har det for altid. Tidligere var tv-stationerne centrale finansieringskilder, men ifølge Bernfeld byder online platforme i øjeblikket ofte flere penge for rettighederne. Hun understregede, at man som instruktør skal sikre sig, at distributøren af ens film tænker bredt og satser på de nye muligheder frem for kun at kontakte de gamle samarbejdspartnere.

Hvor er pengene? Efter Bernfelds mening er det ikke kun i forhold til distribution, men også på produktionssiden, at man kan tænke i nye muligheder, fordi flere for tiden netop investerer på manuskriptstadiet. Mange digitale spillere har fokus på projekter med transmedia-potentiale eller producerer pludselig selv eget materiale. Flyselskabet Virgin er fx begyndt at finansiere egne ting, som både kan bruges online og som underholdning om bord på deres fly. Myspace er gået i gang med at producere, og Yahoo er begyndt at investere i amerikanske produktioner. Bernfeld mente også, at man med fordel kan vende blikket mod andre mulige finansiører som fx producenter af spilkonsoller, mobiltelefoni-selskaber, elektronikfirmaer og andre selskaber og brands, som i større grad end tidligere er villige til at smide penge på bordet for at være del af en produktion. Hun nævnte, hvordan Nokia finansierede syv kortfilm til Shanghai Film Festival sidste år, og hvordan et projekt som Tim Krings The Conspiracy for Good har appelleret til flere forskellige investorer. Et andet eksempel er filmen The Fourth Dimension, bestående af tre halv times film af bl.a. Harmony Korine, som er finansieret af det hollandske ølmærke Groisch som en del af deres initiativ Grosich Film Works. Ifølge Bernfeld er det et eksempel på, hvordan mærker i højere grad prøver at blive associeret med et særligt budskab frem for fx at få folk til at drikke deres produkter i billederne.

Støttesystemer skal ændres Bernfeld kritiserede de europæiske støtteordninger for ikke at være fulgt med udviklingen de seneste år. Der er stadig alt for meget fokus på produktion og vel at mærke produktion til biografen. Hun argumenterede for, at man skal blive bedre til at støtte multiplatform-aktiviteter, og at man om ikke andet kan indføre undtagelser til de gældende regler for at skabe noget dynamik. ”Man bør have nogle undtagelsesmuligheder i de gældende guidelines, så de støttede værker ikke nød-

vendigvis skal i biografen. Det skal også være tilladt at have en anden rækkefølge på vinduerne end den traditionelle, hvis der er en solid plan for markedsføringen.” Bernfeld mente også, at man med fordel kunne sætte penge til markedsføring og distribution ind i selve budgettet og bruge penge på at få rådgivning i processen. Gode råd på én film kan være gavnlige for de næste mange, og man er nødt til at have en plan for, hvordan man bruger de sociale medier og bygger et publikum omkring sin film.

Du behøver ikke være online 24 timer om dagen eller være det i dit eget navn. Uventede veje Frem for alt gælder det om at være åben for nye veje og også at kunne vende uforudsete begivenheder til sin fordel. Bernfeld nævnte som eksempel, hvordan The Parking Lot Movie pludselig lå i sin helhed på youtube, hvor en million havde set den. Det var ikke planlagt, og det blev besluttet at få den fjernet. Men samtidig tilbød man folk, at de kunne købe filmen på DVD, så der opstod en salgsmulighed. Som et mere kontroversielt eksempel fremhævede Bernfeld den svenske film Nasty Old People fra 2009, som indgik partnerskab med netpirater. Det viste sig, at der var stor interesse for filmen, og at folk, som så den ulovligt, faktisk gerne ville se den i biografen. Fans verden over hjalp med at lave en udenlandsk version og skabte mulighed for premierer flere steder. Et tredje eksempel var dokumentarfilmen Molotov Alva, som først blev vist gratis på youtube, men senere blev solgt til HBO for et sekscifret beløb. Det var første gang en amerikansk tv-station købte rettighederne til en produktion, som havde haft premiere på youtube. Den virale succes havde vist, at der var et publikum, og HBO vurderede, at filmen ikke havde været vist for deres målgruppe af ældre tilskuere.

Rettighedsrodet Når man gerne vil have sin film ud i verden og i mange vinduer, er et essentielt spørgsmål for instruktører i dag, hvordan man bevarer rettighederne til sit værk. Man kan satse på sin IP (intellectual Property) og en Do It Yourself-strategi, men man kan også gå via agenter, konsulenter og distributører, hvor man ofte må opgive i hvert fald dele af rettighederne. Bernfeld var fortaler for, at man om instruktør løser rettighedsspørgsmål organisk hen ad vejen. Hvis man ikke kan få de rettigheder, man vil have, kan man måske få de non-eksklusive digitale rettigheder. Man kan prøve at begrænse salg af rettigheder til særlige lande og deres sprogområde, og så selv være fremme i skoene i resten af verden. Man kan prøve at tidsbegrænse aftaler og lave performance-mål, så man kan få rettighederne tilbage, hvis andre ikke gør noget med dem. Man må tænke kreativt, og som Bernfeld fortalte, skal man fx ikke nødvendigvis lade sig bremse af, at man ikke har rettighederne. Man kan stadig pitche sin ide til fx Nokia, og hvis de er på, kan man så gå tilbage til den tv-station, som har rettighederne og tilbyde dem procenter af salget. ”Og på magisk vis 24

Wendy Bernfeld med Thomas Robsahm under The New Auteur arrangementet i juni 2012

forsvinder spørgsmålet om rettigheder pludselig,” konstaterede Bernfeld, for tv-stationen vil jo også gerne tjene flere penge. På den måde kan man være udfarende, selv om man ikke har rettighederne, og så forholde sig til de nye situationer, efterhånden som de opstår.

Middleman-mudderet Som instruktør er en fare i dag, at man let kan havne i det, Bernfeld beskrev som ’middleman-mudderet’. Hun understregede, at der er gode og dårlige middlemen, så det er vigtigt at orientere sig. ”Der er ikke nødvendigvis noget dårligt ved at have middlemen, hvis de arbejder hårdt og ikke koster for meget; Hvis de har en funktion. Nogle laver mere end andre, og det er vigtigt, at man som instruktør gør sig klart, hvilke funktioner man har brug for. Hvad gør du selv, og hvad har du brug for andre til at gøre for dig?” forklarede Bernfeld og introducerede det potentielle motto: ”Delegate, don’t abdicate!” Man skal stille folk de rigtige spørgsmål og være så specifik som muligt. Hvad har de tænkt sig at gøre for din film. Hvordan vil de gøre det? Og så skal man huske selv at gøre sit. Mht. sociale medier og instruktørers arbejde som publikumsbyggere var Bernfelds opfordring, at det bare er med at komme i gang, også selv om man ikke har meget tid eller lyst til det: ”Du behøver ikke være online 24 timer om dagen eller være det i dit eget navn. Du kan godt udvikle en gruppe af followers anonymt og så udvikle det eller komme ud af skabet senere. Gør det – selv hvis du ikke gør det hele tiden. Lidt er bedre end ingenting.”

9 QUESTIONS FOR WENDY BERNFELD TAKE Can I produce material that I post on

you don’t have the rights, but want to do this now,

my own site?

then use common sense where you feel that you need to ask someone else’s permission. Maybe cut

WENDY

Yes, if you are producing your own origi-

nal material and putting it on your site as a direc-

them in practically on a small token share of your share, then the rights issue can melt away.

tor – e.g. to show it or clips. Then it is fine.

TAKE Can I make money off this material? WENDY

TAKE Can I publish a special director’s edition – DVD or extra material on VOD and charge for this

It completely depends on the context. If

you are showing short promo clips or excerpts e.g.

WENDY

under 3 minutes, it can be promotional and not

when you first were hired as a director. I’d like to

charged for, then not requiring rights or royalties

encourage you all to expressly get these rights up-

to others like talent, etc. If you are selling materi-

front, but if they don’t pay you more for rights, e.g.

al that you don’t have the rights (underlying) for,

to VOD, and you’ve not granted them those rights,

then you would have to compensate the talent for

then you have the rights to do what you want on

a share, or have their ok to use it on a revenue

VOD and exploit your made for web/VOD mate-

share basis. It is however extremely context dri-

rial, subject to talent, etc. Also, it depends on the

ven, so you would need to judge it case by case.

context. So very much depends on that! For in-

Though generally speaking, where you have the

stance, if you are ”using’’ the characters, the story,

rights to your own material, you can rent, sell, put

etc. from the original film that you were commis-

ads on, whatever, as long as you build these rights

sioned to do, you can cross some lines and get into

into your deal as a director in the first place. If

some grey areas and start infringing. But usually,

It depends on the arrangement you had

if you have a separate “Director’s Commentary’’

arising therefrom, with the other possible intere-

and things they didn’t pay you to do, and you are

sted rights holders or talent.

mainly using your original work and thoughts (and subject to the talent/clips/excerpts) it can

TAKE Can I design merchandise and sell it

be OK.

from my website?

TAKE Can I hold a twitter auction of props

WENDY If the merchandising rights weren’t given

from the film and make a earning from this?

away to someone else exclusively from the film, then why not. If it’s your own film, then it’s easy. If it’s something, where you draw on other people’s

WENDY

Why not, if the props are yours. Some-

rights, then ask or offer to cut them in on a per-

times it depends on what you signed, when you

cent token (amendment short form to whatever

signed up for the film. I think you all probably

contract was otherwise in your way or limiting

want to have an update of the director’s contract

you).

and production agreements, or so called standard forms (which are not standard these days in

TAKE Can I encourage fans/followers to de-

VOD/new media). You should update them radi-

sign merchandise?

cally to expressly deal with these sorts of issues and to give you rights. Or alternatively have them

WENDY Yes, but be aware of what happens when

left out, and when left out they become yours.

you “use’’ their stuff. If they submit designs, etc.

And/or to build in the possibility that you can ex-

are they doing it as a game, or for real expecta-

ploit creatively other things around the film, and

tion of % or $? Be clear – but engaging the users/

then you’ll share a small piece of those revenues

audience in any way is great.

TAKE Can I organize secret pre-screenings

TAKE If I am missing 50.000 DKK for a

of my film, i.e. in a garage or at my home? Can I charge for this?

special camera, can I then crowdfund the money and invest it into the film?

WENDY

Why not. It can be prepremieres to a li-

Check out various crowdfunding sites

mited private “club’’ or “fans’’. It can be a party,

and rules. Some have people just donate to the

where people contribute to the costs, or make

film, in exchange for certain things (see for e.g.

donations, or something. Often in new media we

www.kickstarter.com as well as other european

deliberately offer sneak previews, prepremieres,

ones that are growing). Here check about dona-

fan screenings, and fans have to pay. This can be

tions of $10, $50, $100, $1000, etc. for increasing

an event where you rent a local art house theatre

rewards. In those cases people are just donors,

or a venue like a café or a place like this. That’s

in exchange for feeling a part of the film and the

OK. The other talent, like a star or a creator, can

constant buzz/blogs/emails/updates/feel of the

come to appear, with a little talk. Should be OK

filmmakers nearby. They are not investors. If,

in context. Maybe keep it small. If the group be-

however, you promise them the wrong thing (like

comes too large and too frequent, you can be

an ownership piece), then you are becoming a

bumping up against the “real theatrical’’ rights

securities (stock)broker and have to field all sort

holder, so use common sense and good caution.

of legal and tax and regulatory requirements. So it is best to make it a donation/crowdfunding ba-

sed on no expectation of return from the donors

(in Youtube sense) “subscribing’’ in the sense

other than the joy and “rub’’ from the constant

only of having a user name and password, being

contact/updates and helping get the film to go

required, and not paying a monthly subscription

forward.

(as Youtube is ad-VOD not s-VOD). But for those paying a monthly subscription e.g. on your site,

TAKE Can I thereby have a larger owners-

then that is a subscription based model, and of

hip in the film?

course you can do that. The issue is that with sVOD, you need enough constant stuff, or else

I don’t see the connection to this, but if the mea-

people see everything in a month or two, and

ning is that the producer can not come up with

then cancel or don’t see the reason to continue.

the money, and you help him find it, then you/he can agree that you get an increased percentage

Overall I encourage you to do and try as much

for helping bring more money into the film.

as possible. Use social media and VOD sites, who will license your stuff on their site. You can

TAKE Am I allowed to establish a paid

also have your own site licensing your director’s

membership on my own site. For example one that would allow you as a member to gain special access to valuable knowledge, anecdotes about the film and access to the people making it?

commentary, making ofs, etc. to third party sites, who are showing the film is also usefull. Depending on what you agreed upon with your producers and/or commissioners beforehand, this can be an activity you control and monetize separately and directly. Or it can be something you do

WENDY

Yes of course. They can be subscribers.

with them being cut in in part on the revenues.

You can start with free subscriptions using for e.g. Youtube and your own site, cross linked. This allows you (as director) to start your own channel already, and if have enough traction, you can get ad revenues, etc. around it. That is

THE

FILMMAKER AS ARTISAN AND AUDIENCE BUILDER 3 QUESTIONS FOR HENGAMEH PANAHI

TAKE

You have advocated a return to an artisanal form of filmmaking, why

is that ? And how would it be different from how the film director works and views him/herself today?

HENGAMEH Filmmaking is artisanal by essence and our Industry is a prototype Industry. It’s a mix of art and commerce. And above all , cinema is a ’beautiful mystery’ which does not enable anyone to predict the market value of a film in production, a value which is known once the exploitation is over! If we add the element of ’luck’ to this unpredictable business, because many parameters are beyond our control, then all possibilities are open.

TAKE

But what are the business models of today?

HENGAMEH With the new change of paradigm, changing the consumers behaviour, we have to not only rethink our way of watching films, but also our way of making them. The pace of our world has been accelerated and continues in a direction where the notion of time and space have disappeared. One image replaces another one immediately… and images are a big part of our life and communication. Everyone’s life is now recorded instantly and sent out. The number of images exchanged on the net every second is astronomical. We’ll watch news instead of reading newspapers. Everything has to be accessible now and immediate. The offering is huge and fast and needs branding to reach its targeted audience, or it’s lost for good in the huge wasteland of our overproduction.

I’d advocate for less European co-productions, where there are too many cooks in the kitchen and there is no true vision of one film...

There is, on the one hand, the INDUSTRY with one goal which is to make money, therefore the films are ’products’ aimed to entertain the audience with laughters, fear and tears: an established system with very predictable fares and big productions for a mass mainstream audience. Now the blockbusters have been ’Marvelized’ offering characters coming from comic books and using special effects to heroes with super powers. And once this is worn out, there will be other trends or ’franchises’ after savvy market analysis of what the main audience wants to be served. But here as well there are failures next to successes! And there is, on the other hand, the ARTISANS/artists/auteurs who want to express themselves and push their ideas as a free human beings to reach and touch other human beings. Their films help to change the world or change the perception of the world. But until now, for these filmmakers there was no specific business model other then the market place. They were not as free as they can be today. These individually based-initiatives with more personal propositions aimed at smaller but spe-

Hengameh Panahi

Producer Company President & Founder For 25 years Hengameh Panahi has been a major player in international world cinema. Her passion has always served as the driving force behind her campaign to discover new talent and to boost the cultural exchange between producers, filmmakers and the market. Her motto has always been about dedication to the development of long-term relationships; always

cific communities, are now more feasible with the new paradigm. You can identify your audience, interact with it and build it further almost at no cost and you can be your own promoter. What’s required is not money, but the capital you’d need is original ideas, imagination and time. I’m convinced the generation born with this new paradigm will use it differently. The way they will tell stories and watch films will be very different. Therefore, the way to make films, promote them and distribute them will be as well.

looking for new, innovative and better ways to do business, Panahi has never been afraid to push forward new business models, many of which are today standard practice among international sales agents. In 2008, she co-founded MUBI, an international online distribution platform dedicated to alternative ways of exhibiting and promoting cinema outside the traditional theatrical models. This strategy of innovation has played an important role not only in the success of emerging talented directors such as François Ozon, Bruno Dumont, Laurent Cantet, Jafar Panahi and Jia Zhang-ke, but also in maintaining the careers of established directors such as Jacques Audiard, Takeshi Kitano, Marco Bellocchio, Abbas Kiarostami, Jacques Rivette, Otar Iosseliani, Alexandre Sokurov, Michael Haneke, and Jean-Pierre & Luc Dardenne among others. This dedication was implicit in the development of the company she founded in 1992, Celluloid Dreams. CD is a unique model of an indie powerhouse specialising in the production, co-production, financing, sales and promotion of quality films from Europe and further afield. Above all, Celluloid Dreams is a brand that stands for quality, with a catalogue of over 400 films, the majority of which have been selected in A-list festivals and are multiple award winners including the Palme d’Or and Oscar nominations.

TAKE

The Americans seem much more flexi-

ble when it comes to testing new ways of releasing films. What is different when it comes to European films? What and who is holding us back?

HENGAMEH In North America, films are produced with equity money only, which means that they have to recoup their investment or they won’t be made. The market reality is very real. So, they’re extremely attentive to the market changes, and they are extremely creative in finding new ways to adapt to the new environment. Cinema is business and it is an entertainment industry. Here there are no other rules other then the market rules. In Europe, films are considered an art form and they’re part of our cultural program. We have access to considerable funds/subsidies, and we benefit from astute regulations to help the production and the distribution of our films through investment quotas from the broadcasters for instance, or tax levied from the cinema tickets, etc… in return of regulated chronology of media, offering each media its window to co-exist. These production schemes and specific protection rules become the biggest handicap, when it comes to adjust to

a new rapidly changing environment. The interests are not the same along the chain value, and to change such an institutionalized system, which has created its own ’ecosystem’, will require considerable time to discuss and lobby before reaching any consensus for new ideas and changes. And by the time we achieve some, they will already be obsolete. We see here that what made the strength and asset of a publicly institutionalized Europe is now faced with brutal challenges, coming from a liberal world which has other values. But the main question is how to change and adapt to the new world, while not losing our values, reinventing the forms of our resistance.

TAKE

In your opinion what are the most urgent steps needed to help European films reach an even

bigger (niche) audience?

HENGAMEH

First and utmost BETTER films. More original stories, better told with true personal pro-

positions. I believe we should do what we’re best at, and even then work harder on our specifities and differences. I’d advocate for less European co-productions, where there are too many cooks in the kitchen and there is no true vision of one film and no strong determination to take the necessary risks to produce something surprisingly new and powerful. Why would I see a new film today, while I’m constantly surrounded by images? There should be something more valuable, something more special, more mysterious to make it a ’must see’ film. How many of those films are there in the ocean of our yearly production? I’d say in our crowded, liberal market, less is more and good is not good enough. It would be great to incentivize our producers ’to protect our cinema environment’ by giving them the resources they would need to care more and spend more time for each single film they produce. One idea can be to make 5 times less films with 10 times higher quality, and then all the problems of distribution would be solved immediately. I can say from experience, that when we have a strong movie, there is no problem along the way. We should also dedicate a place for reseach and development like in any Industry where new forms are experienced to be used by all but where these experimentations are not supposed to be commercial but visionary for the entire Industry. Cinema is an artform which has its own language and it would be great to give the younger generation the possibilities to experiment their proper filmic languages. In other words, since we’re not on the side of the formatted big productions, we should raise our quality benchmark and produce much better, more original, more imaginative and stronger ’must see’ independent films to take a market share more naturally.

WHY

borders thanks to support from EU’s MEDIA Programme?

FERA?

• And did you know that the EU decides on the

During the 3 years that I have been working for

but while many things have changed and will

FERA here in Brussels, I have often been asked

change, what does not is the fact that films are

why film directors are represented in Brussels.

made by filmmakers.

legal basis for our remuneration when it comes to cable retransmission, private copying and hopefully soon - the online exploitation of our films? These days it seems like the consequences of the digital revolution cannot be overstated,

Indeed it may not seem obvious – even to ourselves - why our profession needs its own EU lobby

Just as the audiovisual industry finds itself in a

organisation and why some of us have fought to-

state of transition from old business models to

oth and nail to keep it going for 32 years!

new ones, the global financial crisis has caused several European countries to cut public fun-

But in reality, while you are busy with what you

ding for new films, broadcasters to pay less for

believe to be your unique national concerns,

screening rights, corporate sponsorship to de-

you are probably dealing with an issue that was

crease sharply, and private investors to invest

decided in Brussels a few years earlier.

more conservatively - if at all.

Here are some examples:

In a time when our works are circulated in an intangible format, it is even more important to

• Did you know that the rules for public funding for films are decided by the EU?

underline that what is being paid for by the consumer is not the piece of plastic that the film is stored on, but the creative efforts of the filmma-

• Did you know that film directors in Europe all got the status of being an author of the film because of an EU Directive?

kers and the costs of promoting and distributing that work as widely as possible. So what is the EU up to now?

• Did you know that it is an EU Directive that defines what an independent producer is, and that requires broadcasters to spend 10% of their budgets on independent productions?

With the opportunities and challenges that online use of our works represents we find ourselves at a crossroads. Fundamental principles are questioned and the basis for us to deliver pro-

• Did you know that it is the EU that sets the rules for advertising breaks and product placement?

fessional creative work in any format is at stake. All major issues of concern to film directors are

• Did you know that 50% of European films released outside of their national territory cross

currently subject to some form of action by the EU institutions:

Film funding – revision of the Cinema Com-mu-

is our tool. The success of FERA’s work depends

nication on state aid rules and budget negotiati-

on our combined efforts and shared responsibi-

ons on the new EU Programme Creative Europe

lity.

(MEDIA will be a part of it). I often joke that putting directors together to Film distribution – after two years of consultati-

decide as a group is against nature. But the

ons we still do not know if there will be any legis-

present circumstances and our fragile creative

lative proposals by the European Commission,

ecosystem demand it of us. Politicians are still

but in July the European Parliament will vote

sensitive to our concerns, but we must get a co-

on a report in which it will express its position

herent message across.

on core principles relating to film funding, our contracts, and our right to remuneration for all

Even on the political stage in Brussels we can be

forms of distribution, including online.

directors of our own destiny.

Elisabeth O. Sjaastad, CEO

of the Enforcement Directive, and the ACTA controversy, which to our dismay has added fuel to the fire in the general ideological battle over copyright. It is sad and frustrating that this debate has become so polarized that politicians seem forced to choose between creators and consumers. Because in the long term our interests are - and must be - the same: Legally offered quality creative content online at a reasonable price. Online copyright infringement (piracy) is more

FERA MISSION STATEMENT FERA’s focuses are the issues of major importance in the creation and promotion of audiovisual works. FERA’s mission is to enhance the recognition of the cultural significance of audiovisual works and to defend their integrity in 21st century Europe.

rampant than ever and has taken on massive commercial dimensions. And while plenty can

FERA represents directors as the primary crea-

be said about creators not getting a fair share of

tors of audiovisual works. The director is the

the revenue from their work, those who justify

creative decision maker in a process of artistic

ripping off the “copyright industry” because the

collaboration and takes final responsibility for

artists and filmmakers aren’t getting the money

the aesthetic cohesion and artistic integrity of the

anyway, are missing the point: 10% of something

work.

is a whole lot better than 100% of nothing. FERA is committed to safeguarding the craft, arThere is a chance to improve the creative and

tistry and the creative and economic rights of the

economic conditions for film directors in Euro-

director as essential components to the diversity

pe, if we make full use of FERA to articulate our

of audiovisual culture in Europe and beyond.

legitimate interests and demonstrate how we are

www.filmdirectors.eu

affected by a number of issues on the political agenda. FERA is now a solid network, and FERA

DRAMA & DEMOCRACY By Elisabeth O. Sjaastad A few months ago 22 culture ministers, and EU Commissioner Vassilliou, signed a document with the slightly pretentious title ”Decalogue for Europe of Culture” which solemnly declares that culture ”embodies the values of democracy in all the nations of the EU” and that a Europe of Culture ”ensures absolute freedom of creation”. Among the signatories where the culture ministers of Greece, Hungary and Portugal – although in Portugal culture is currently not important enough for there to even be a Minister of Culture, but rather a Secretary of State for Culture.

Over the past months I have been travelling to meet FERA members in Greece, Hungary and Portugal. I wanted to see and hear first hand what it is like to be a filmmaker in the countries that struggle the most right now. In Athens I met directors Sifis and Costas. They are also active in a small association for short and documentary filmmakers called MIKRO with about 50 members. They told me that the Greek Film Center has not awarded any grants for the past two years, and even very successful filmmakers are about to give up. Still they try to document what is going on in their country at this time of crisis. Equipped with a small digital camera, they take to the streets to capture the frustration of the steel workers on strike, and the disillusionment of the unemployed youth - which very much mirrors their own. In the evening we went to a taverna where Lefttsatsis, an actor friend who had just played the role of Plato in an upcoming film, got everyone to sing along to heartbreaking traditional songs until the early morning hours. For Sifis, Costas, and their friends the concept of the single market makes no sense: ”Imagine that the logic of the market now means that Greece is importing tomatoes from Belgium! Before we all grew our own on every balcony or backyard. We have been made to depend on others for things we used to do much better ourselves”.

”Imagine that the logic of the market now means that Greece is importing tomatoes from Belgium! Before we all grew our own on every balcony or backyard. We have been made to depend on others for things we used to do much better ourselves” Other guests came to join our table. A young woman named Christina told me that she had just lost her job as a pre-school teacher because the government had to lay off public sector employees. So only two years after finishing her own higher education, she had to go back to waiting tables at a café rather than teaching kids. The following day I walked around to see the sights: Pnyx – the birthplace of democracy - where all Athenian citizens had the right (and duty) to attend and vote on all decrees before they became law. The Theatre of Dionysus where before large audiences comic poets filled their plays with stinging criticism of all the leading politicians of 5th-century Athens – with state funding. A reflection on how important theater was in the life of an Athenian citizen, and a powerful force for the molding of 37

public opinion. Many of the comedies satirizing democracy and its practitioners were awarded prizes for excellence in dramas such as Aristophanes’ Knights, in 424 B.C. I ended my historic tour at the Stoa of Attalos, in the Agora (picture above), which was also the site of the 2004 EU enlargement signing ceremony of the ten new acceeding members. One of the new members was Hungary. In Budapest I met directors Béla and András. The Hungarian government is not awarding prizes to those who satirizes its officials, but has rather introduced a new controversial media law to silence critical voices. I was there to show support for the 43rd Hungarian Film Week that had been organized on a voluntary basis, as the government offered no financial support. But the filmmakers themselves wanted to show the Hungarian public that their national cinema is still viable, vigorous and many-sided. In the past year the main responsibility for the national film industry has been moved from the Ministry of National Resources to the MInistry of the Interior, and the executive body for funding the professional industry is under the authority of re-patriated ”Terminator” producer Andrew Vajna, who has been the government film commissioner for a year. In theory the Ministry of National Resources is still supposed to deal with ”artistic films”, but there is no budget for them. The day before, Vajna reportedly got up and left a debate with the film industry, insulted by the criticism they voiced. Béla expressed little hope for improved communication, so he and a few colleagues each put 10 € on the table and resolved to try to set up an alternative fund. ”Hungarian cinema is an integral part of both our national and European culture”, he said. ”The films made in recent decades just like the ones presented during these days are about Hungarian people, life in Hungary, our country and our fate - in an individual and free manner. I hope that these days will strenghen our solidarity and give all of us inspiration and hope for our work”. They asked me if there are any possibilities for additional support at the European level. I had to give a less than optimistic answer, but promised to investigate. In Lisbon I met directors Margarida and João. Margarida’s latest feature film Passion had its cinema premiere just two days earlier. The Secretary of State for Culture was present and, beaming with excitement, he talked about his plans for sorting out the financing of Portugese films. it seemed a little too good to be true… Margarida explained how she now has to face closing down the small production company she coowns with a fellow (Swedish) director. Their modus operandi with a modest mix of short films, television commissions, and stage projects is too fragile for the current crisis. Sadly this will also mean that the technicians and assistants they hire will lose their jobs. 38

After two successful short films, João is about to finalize his first feature film, shot in Africa, which he is producing himself. Last year the Institute for Cinema and Audiovisual (ICA) awarded grants for this and another project he is working on. Ten days ago, he was told that these grants will not be paid until 2015 (!). As a small entrepeneur this puts him in an impossible situation. How can he access credit in these times? A ruthless and irresponsible way to treat creative talents. While it is sadly unsurprising that filmmakers in these countries are experiencing very tough times, what is even more alarming is that the financial crisis also seems to be a pretext for public instiutions, such as national film funds, to abandon core democratic principles such as transparency and accountability in the way they function. One of the non-signatories to the Decalogue was the Danish Minister of Culture. During the Danish EU Presidency this spring one of the mottos has been ”Doing more, with less”. Back in 1999, the European Commission articulated the values underlying cultural objectives in the audiovisual sector in a statement that all the member states should still keep in mind: The audiovisual media play a central role in the functioning of modern democratic societies. They… help to determine not only what we see of the world but also how we see it…and have a major influence on what citizens know, believe and feel. In Europe’s audiovisual sector, we always do more with less – even with nothing. So this time around if politicians want to ”ensure absolute freedom of creation” so that we can fulfill our potential to influence what citizens know, believe and feel about Europe, it would not be unreasonable to suggest that the Danish approach be revised to ask Sifis, Costas, Béla, András, Margarida and João: ”Do even more, with just a little more”.

Istvan Szabo, President of FERA

CREATIVE EUROPE CREATING EUROPE Statement from the General Assembly of FERA, Copenhagen, June 2012 A vibrant film and television industry creates

as many countries are now seeing increasing

both economic and cultural strength. Film is a

public demand for films made in the national

real product, creating employment and growth,

language for the local audience. Cultural diver-

but it can also have a greater and longer lasting

sity is not just a crucial European principle: it

value, enabling us to reflect and renew our soci-

works.

eties. It is a universal medium, literally crossing borders, described by retiring FERA President

New digital media also offer exciting opportu-

Istvan Szabo (Mephisto, Sunshine) as ’the lan-

nities for growth and access to new audiences,

guage of the human face’, offering a meaningful

especially the young, many of whom also aspire

narrative of our past and our future.

to work as professionals in our sector. FERA welcomes the passion of a new generation to engage

As Europe seeks to rebuild its economies, Euro-

with our films, in the cinema and online, and is

pean directors from 29 countries, meeting in

determined that together we will defend both

Copenhagen heard of a sector under attack.

the art and the practice of European film. At a

Members in some countries reported that wi-

time when Europe turns to creativity to deliver

thin two years they expected to have no national

smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, it is im-

film production at all, following the withdrawal

portant that its citizens gain a better understan-

of government support. FERA believes that fai-

ding of the value of author’s rights, as the basis

lure by national governments to support their

of a viable cultural and creative industry.

creative sectors is wrong, and also short sighted,

European Film Directors call on: • Every European country to reinforce support

• FERA itself to defend author’s rights, and to

for film with legislation and financial incentives

campaign to protect national archives, grow

that allow film makers to contribute to the cultu-

production and to encourage the Europe-wide

ral and economic wealth of Europe:

distribution of European films in cinemas and online.

• The European Commission to remember its duty to “take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of the Treaties, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures” (Article 167 Trea-

NO CREATIVITY, NO ECONOMY!

ty of the Functioning of the European Union) in the current process of revising the ’Cinema Communication’ on state aid. Any damage to the sector at such crucial juncture in its transition to the digital environment would be very difficult to repair. • The European cultural community to mobilise across all disciplines to fight for the creative sector.

Resolution signed by:

Marco Bellocchio, Agnieszka Holland, Alan Parker, Istvan Szabo, members of FERA Creative Council, and

The Members of FERA

FRA SEKRETARIATET Pitch me baby-succes gentages på årets Odense Film Festival I skrivende stund planlægges der på livet løs mellem festivalen og foreningen om en fortsættelse af Pitch me Baby arrangementet og speed date sessionen på Odense Film Festival. Sæt derfor allerede nu kryds i kalenderen torsdag den 23. august! Invitation med detaljerede pitch-krav m.m. sendes ud snarest.

Ny hjemmeside Bestyrelsen

besluttede

ved

årsskiftet

foreningen skal have en ny og langt mere interaktiv hjemmeside, samt et nyt grafisk udtryk. Arbejdet med at designe siden er nu færdigt og sekretariatet arbejder på at indføre al det materiale, som skal findes på siden. I den forbindelse er det meget vigtigt, at I alle hjælper

NEDSAT ÅBNINGSTID I JULI Sekretariatet holder nedsat telefontid i juli måned. Åbningstiden vil således være fra kl. 10-15 hver dag.

Sekretariatet ønsker alle en rigtig god sommer !

os med at indsende billeder af jer selv og jeres film – så vi kan gøre websiden repræsentativ for vores levende fag. Vi glæder os til at præsentere siden efter sommerferien.

BONANZA-AFTALE I HUS En del medlemmer har igennem længere tid efterlyst afklaring på forhandlingerne om fordelingen af midlerne på DR Bonanza. Forhandlingerne er nu endeligt faldet på plads, så det er med glæde vi kan påbegynde udbetalingen af midlerne til instruktørerne her i sommerferien, sammen med en række forældede kabel og båndmidler.

LEGATUDVALGET UDDELER MIDLER FRA DEN KOLLEKTIVE 1/3 AF BLANKBÅNDSMIDLERNE FRA COPY-DAN. De kollektive båndmidler kan søges af ophavsmænd og kunstnere indenfor alle genrer, herunder navnlig de, som yder væsentlige og nyskabende bidrag til dansk musik og film, men som ikke har mulighed for at leve af deres kunstneriske virksomhed.

Næste ansøgningsfrist er fredag den 28. september 2012 inden kl. 12.00. Der skal udfyldes et ansøgningsskema. Ansøgningen må højst fylde 4 A-4 sider inkl. budget. Ansøgningen skal afleveres i 7 eksemplarer. Skemaet kan downloades fra vores hjemmeside www.filmdir.dk (filmstøtte) eller rekvireres hos sekretariatet.

STATENS LEGATBOLIG I PARIS Der indkaldes hermed til ansøgninger for ophold i Statens legatbolig i Paris for 2013. Statens legatbolig i Paris administreres af en stiftelse med navn efter boligens givere, Ludvig Preetzmann-Aggerholm og Hustru. Stiftelsens formål er at give danske kunstnere og forskere mulighed for et ophold i Paris. Ansøgere, hvis projekt har en konkret tilknytning til Paris, vil blive givet prioritet. Boligen m/opholdsstue, sovealkove, badeværelse og køkken i 3, Rue de la Perle, 75003 Paris, er fuldt møbleret og udstyret til 2 personer. Huslejen er 1150 Euro pr. måned inkl. varme, lys og telefonabonnement (retten til prisjustering forbeholdes). For at tilgodese flest mulige ansøgere tildeles ophold som regel kun for én måned. Ansøgningsprocessen foregår elektronisk fra denne adresse: frankrig.um.dk/da/om-os/statens-legatbolig-i-frankrig Ansøgninger om ophold i legatboligen i 2013 bedes indsendt senest fredag den 14. september 2012. Tildeling af legatboligen forventes afgjort primo november 2012. Besked om tildeling/afslag vil blive sendt pr. e-mail til samtlige ansøgere.

DANSKE FILMINSTRUKTØRERS BESTYRELSE

Peter Flinth Mette-Ann Schepelern Søren Kragh-Jacobsen Martin Strange-Hansen formand

Birgitte Stærmose Annette K. Olesen Christina Rosendahl næstformand Klaus Kjeldsen

DANSKE FILMINSTRUKTØRERS SEKRETARIAT Sandra Piras Bibi Skousen Christian Lunøe

Camilla Solkær Buskov Signe Kærsgaard Mortensen Lars Kragh Louise Worm Reumert Laila Øer 45

RÅD OG UDVALG Danske Filminstruktørers Legatudvalg:

FERA:

Sidse Carstens, Jesper Jargil, Klaus Kjeldsen,

Birgitte Stærmose

Kaspar Munk, Charlotte Sachs Bostrup, Malene Vilstrup

SNF: Sandra Piras

DFI Rådet for kort- og dokumentarfilm: Klaus Kjeldsen

Statens Kunstfonds repræsentantskab: Klaus Kjeldsen

DFI Rådet for Spillefilm: Christina Rosendahl

Nye medlemmer: Helle Pagter

DFI Festivaludvalget for kort- og dokumentarfilm:

Kasia Køhler

Max Kestner

Peter Dodd Sussie Weinold

COPY-DAN:

Joudi A. Saheil (genindmeldt)

Fællesbestyrelsen – Martin Strange-Hansen

Tommy Ipsen

AVU-medier – Martin Strange-Hansen

Jacob Olrik

Verdens TV – Sandra Piras

Adam Neutzsky-Wulff

Blankbånd – Sandra Piras

Lasse Lau Andreas Johnsen

Dansk Kunstnerråd:

Lea Glob

Martin Strange-Hansen

Anne-Grethe Bjarup Riis Christian Grønvall

Dansk Kunstnerråds post i DFI’s kontaktudvalg:

Bo Mikkelsen

Franz Ernst Filmkontakt NORD: Cæcilia Holbek Trier (referencegruppe)

FOTOKREDITERING Fotos fra The new Auteur: Artisan & Audience Builder: Tobisch & Guzzmann photographers Portrætter af bestyrelsen og sekretariatet: Tobisch & Guzzmann photographers

Billeder fra Danske FilminstruktĂ¸rers arrangement: The New Auteur, juni 2012

Danish Film Directors 48 www.filmdir.dk ISSN 1601-5843