The beginning of another way

Imagine the day when you are logging on to your e-mail account and suddenly you have 50 new messages, none of which are junk mail. You are told that your short film has been watched by over 100,000 people on the Internet last night and you react as if you won an Oscar.

 

As that is all we really want, isn't it? A great number of people to view our work. But what else is it that we want and how can you actually get to that stage of having your film viewed by hundreds and thousands of people online? Does this really happen and is the Internet the beginning of another way for you to gain an audience?

 

The beginning of the end of the beginning

 

One thing that has been achieved in this ever-changing world of modern technology is the Internet. What first was described to me in 1997, as we upgraded from the Commodore 64, as a place for perverts to go and look at pornography, has come to serve a somewhat different function. It seems to have turned into this avenue of information, not always credible; into a medium of promotion, not always believable; and into a forum for entertainment; not always entertaining.

In 1996 the first lot of dotcoms began to appear. Oblivious to this during the time when it was happening, I first came to the realization of the Internet and its role in the short film industry last year whilst working on a research project for the International Short Film Festival Oberhausen. What was interesting was my excitement as I discovered a number of addresses of sites where you can view short films. While I worked on this research I compiled a list of websites that appeared in the years from 1996 to 2003. When going through this list again, a lot of these websites seemed to be down. Either the server was unavailable, or there was no site under this name any more.

What had been a huge list of sites ended up taking up only half a page, and excitement turned to disappointment.

 

The burst of dotcoms from 1998 to 2000 and the excitement about the next generation of entertainment seems to have clouded good business judgment. The biggest of these may have been Pop.com, a heavily publicized dotcom that was making deals with filmmakers even before a stable business plan was created. The rise and fall of Pop.com was captured in an ongoing discussion on indieWire (www.indieWire.com), where two filmmakers shared their e-mail correspondence with regard to their proceedings in making deals, one with the likes of Pop.com and one with Atom Films. It was interesting that at the end of it, the filmmaker who signed with Pop.com finally found out through this correspondence that Pop.com had been bought out by another dotcom and that the future of his signed deal was up in the air. There was also a debate with regard to Atom Films, which was not so big in the game at that time, as they were still a small company mainly dealing with the distribution of independent short films. However, Atom Films is the company that survived. It is also a company that expanded with the evolving Internet Entertainment Portals and has been able to establish itself in the short film industry as a major player both in distribution and online exhibition.

 

Many short film dotcoms seemed to offer the best short films the web-able world could carry. With programs such as RealPlayer and QuickTime, viewing short films on the Internet became so easy. Short films were easy to upload and quick to download, and as a business idea, it may have seemed an untapped goldmine. The entertainment industry could grow by leaps and bounds and the hunt for the most talented filmmaker could be made online instead of at film festivals. It is easy to understand why these sites grew around this time, and the excitement that buzzed around them didn't seem to hold back until the realization set in that the market for this short form needs time to grow and settle. But then the money ran out.

 

Pop.com seemed to have been acquired by CountingDown.com and after that short films weren't an issue on this site anymore. A number of other sites that made big names for themselves also went under, or were acquired by other dotcoms, but it was interesting to see that the small, non-profit websites stayed online and continued to grow, such as Bijouflix.com. This small independent website that started out as Bijou Café in April 1998 survived and made a name for itself by slowly building up a loyal clientele. Other sites that cropped up around 2000 and that also grew slowly and steadily were sites like Sputnik7.com that have short films and music available for download.

 

Most of these sites have a selection process. The same way as a film festival or a broadcaster selects films for screening, so do the dotcoms. So then, where can independent filmmakers simply upload their films and get critical feedback?

 

The beginning of making some money?

 

A number of websites have been created for filmmakers to upload their film and to make it available to be seen by the World Wide Audience, such as Guerrillafilmmakers.com & Netbroadcaster.com. Guerrillafilmmakers.com is set up so that you don't have to pay to upload your film. This also means they cannot pay you for the use of your film on their site. Their motto is to create a website to show your work, not for art’s sake, but for the chance to gain further work in the industry. It is more or less a resume website with a few short films on view. Their goal is to build an online community where you can make your work available for viewing as well as your credentials.

Apart from these few websites, there are also some with a slight catch. In general, you must pay them! Under normal circumstances you always have to spend money to get your film out to the public, but where exactly is this money going?

 

There are sites such as Aussieshortfilms.com & Ifilm.com, which have special packages available. Each of these packages includes a required minimum that you must purchase. Five years ago, this would have sounded like a great opportunity! For instance on the Aussieshortfilms.com the basic hosting is $15 per minute a month, but you must purchase at least 3 months’ worth of hosting. This allows up to 100 downloads per minute. For a 5-minute short film, for example, this amounts to 5 x 15 = $75 a month. So the initial payment from the filmmaker is $225 for 3 months! Now is this really a lot of money? For a short filmmaker, yes!

 

I would have thought a few years ago that if you have to pay this much money, they must have a hell of a lot of people downloading, right? Wrong, there is no way you can judge a good site by the amount you must pay to upload your film. It's the same deal with film festivals: you cannot judge a good film festival by the price of its entry fee, but this is a whole other topic that we can steer clear of for now.

 

Ifilm.com has a similar sort of deal. Ifilm.com is a case of a largely successful website that has lived through the entire beginning of this Internet and short film relationship, but they still ask for money. Submission is free, wow thanks! But if your film is selected you must purchase an 'Exhibition Package', the cheapest being: $75 for 3 months. You can also pay an extra $100 to see your film up on the web within one week of payment. So, this seems like a better deal than above, but if this site is so successful, then why must filmmakers pay for their works to be put up on the site? Shouldn't this money be coming from subscribers or sponsors?

 

Are there so many short films on offer that you have to go to the extent of paying people to see your work? It's like when you're a child at school and you pay another child to be your friend, it never works! The short film is not a product where a long-term profit is visible. It is known that some companies have made a profit off them, as some individuals also appear to have done. You can make a profit, but not a long-term, I-am-going-to-put-my-children-through-college type of profit. So what is going to happen to the marketplace when it is swamped by businesses such as Aussieshortfilms.com?

 

The way to get around this is to question everything! For instance, if your short film has made it into festivals and/or has won awards, then you should not have to pay anyone anything for having your film screened; these people should be paying you! In the other circumstance, if your film has not made it into film festivals and a distributor has not picked it up, then you must ask yourself the following question: Do you really want to spend more money on uploading it onto a website when there is perhaps only one person in the world who may view it? Sure, one person is better then none, but have some respect, you should never sell yourself short, it is just not worth it. There are more creative ways of getting an audience and it is important not to consider the Internet to be your last chance. In some cases the Internet is the first opportunity for a film and or filmmaker to be discovered.

 

The beginning of something new

 

The New Venue (www.newvenue.com) is a site that started up in 1998 and is designed to stream short films especially made for the Internet as well as offering mobile and handheld services. Started by Jason Wishnow, this small short-film portal survived through what others lost out to. This site does not charge the filmmaker, or the viewer, and it contains no advertising. It is run out of the pocket of the owner, Jason, to offer exposure to other filmmakers. It is a site that shows one specific type of film – digital – with the aim of fostering that one selected form.

 

The site, which has been at a standstill for over 6 months because the founder is making his own film, is due to come back online in the near future, and this is one site I eagerly await the return of. This is a website that has merit and inspires hope for what could be created with the Internet in mind instead of what should we create to be shown on the Internet. Now, it’s true that the Internet needs creators, but is it possible that perhaps the Internet in itself is an art form waiting for experimentation - and could this be achieved with digital films made specifically for the Internet?

 

Cortoweb.it, Undergroundfilm.com & NetBroadcaster.com have also added a number of extra elements to their entertainment portals on the Internet. For instance, Cortoweb.it offers resource information and screens Italian short films from film festivals in Italy. And Undergroundfilm.com offers forums and film festival information. Their 'bottom line' seems to be the promotion and development of the short form plus the development of an online filmmaking community. Are these sites also asking for money from filmmakers? No. These are the companies we need in order to carry this art form through the beginning stage of the relationship, through to stage two. What is stage two for the Internet and the short film?

 

The beginning of what could be stage 2 - Internet & television broadcast

 

Another interesting discovery is that now some short film TV programs are not just broadcasting films, but are also expanding their programming to their websites. One such program is the relatively new 'ZED TV' on Canadian National TV. The Internet is also part of their entry process: people can upload their films onto the website (www.zed.cbc.ca). Some will be purchased for TV as well as for the Internet and some are selected only for Internet streaming.

 

Also in Canada, there is ARTV cable television with the program 'Silence on Court', which screens mainly French-speaking shows or films without dialogue. The night that it airs, the shorts also become available on the program’s website (www.SilenceOnCourt.tv), where they can be viewed for the period of a year. The interesting aspect of these television shows is that the broadcasters purchase your film not only for TV but for Internet use also. Are they getting a good deal here? Again, it depends. From the filmmakers' point of view, if a film is purchased, say by ZED, it is not an exclusive contract, so the film can be purchased by other TV programs and the film is available for screening on other websites, too. From the programmer's point of view, some TV buyers will refuse to purchase a film that has been screened on the Internet, just like some film festivals will not select a film for screening if it has been broadcast on TV before. For some reason, once a short film has been screened on TV, it suddenly seems to lose its appeal. The reason is perhaps that there are so many short films being made today, that everyone is looking for the newest and most innovative short film only. Programmers also want to be the first to discover this short. Why is that? If audience members see a short film they love, they remember the program, become regular viewers and eagerly await their next chance to see the newest, most innovative and entertaining short film.

 

The beginning of another way

 

In terms of how long it takes some relationships to work, the relationship between the Internet and the short film is still to this day a young and freshly turbulent one. We just have to realize that all of us have the power to shape the way in which this relationship can work for the short form.

 

Could this then be the beginning of another way to promote and exhibit the short form? For some, the Internet is the other way, but again, it is a long and rocky road, just like the film festival road and the broadcasting road. At least there is one more opportunity out there for your short film to be screened; it is just up to you as to whether or not the Internet entertainment portals are right for your film.

 

Then again, none of this even matters if you, like myself, own a very old and slow computer not even capable of downloading a JPEG.

 

Bartholomew Sammut

 

Contact:

PO Box 396

Brunswick, VIC, 3056

Australia

e-mail: bartholomew  fullyflared.com

 

 

Notes: Picture taken from the New Venue.com website.

Aussieshortfilms.com information taken from their website.

Ifilm information taken from their website.