|
Defining the Audience, and Seeing Both Challenges and Opportunities
|
|
Nov 7, 2024
Day two post-election. I don’t have much to add about that, but one thing – expect ITVS and POV to be cut early in 2025, and I won’t be surprised if we lose all support for PBS, the NEA and the NEH. Get ready for a fight, folks. Now, on to our regularly scheduled post.
Heard about the crisis in indie film lately?? Sure, you have, especially if you read this newsletter. One of the main reasons for this crisis is the fact that the major streamers (Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Apple, etc.) are buying, licensing and commissioning less indie films. Distributors can’t rely on this pay one window anymore, so they also can’t take as much risk, meaning they also acquire less films, or pay less for them than they cost to make, which starts a cycle where these films have a hard time getting made, or seen. The streamers are pursuing more subscribers, and now eyeballs for advertisers, and they clearly think there’s not a big audience for indie and specialty films. But is that true? What is the actual size of the indie film audience? Who’s watching these films? Where? And is there an argument to be made that maybe there’s a bigger audience than the streamers think? That might be good to know, but we’ve had no data about this, so we’re operating in a vacuum.
 Until now. This past week. Keri Putnam, the former ceo of Sundance, released the results of her long in-the-works “US Independent Film Audience and Landscape Study” as part of her recent Fellowship at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center, which you can read in full at the IndieFilmLandscape website. I also had the pleasure of speaking on a panel with her this past weekend at the IndieWire Future of Film Summit (along with Sam Harowitz from Tubi, and moderated by Dana Harris-Bridson, of IndieWire). The results of her study are pretty fascinating, and show us both the problems facing indie films, and the potential for exciting solutions.
I recommend you just stop here and go read the report in full – and there’s an executive summary/key findings if you can’t handle all 118 pages of the full report, which is transparent about all of its data sources and methodologies, and has great charts and analysis. You can also read many of the news reports, including this one in IndieWire. But I’ve been lucky enough to have been following this research while it was in progress (I was a minor advisor to the project), and I’ve been thinking about her study, its findings and implications for a long time, so here’s my take.
First, I can’t emphasize enough how important this report is – I know Keri doesn’t want to overstate anything, but I’ll do it for her – this is the most comprehensive and necessary report on the sector that I’ve seen in my entire career. If you have even a passing interest in this space, you need to read the report’s key findings and recommendations at minimum. And this includes my brand film clients, because the talent you work with, or should work with, usually started in indie film, and one of the major findings of the report is just how sizable the addressable market for indie films is – so smart folks should be thinking about how to serve this audience.
Some quick background. Eleven years ago this month, in November of 2013, I was in Amsterdam for IDFA, when I did a call with Keri Putnam and several of her colleagues at the Sundance Institute to discuss the idea of launching an exciting new project to collect all of the data on what indie films were making – in investment, on MG’s, at the box office, and on steaming. This was data that was hidden from everyone who needed it – producers, investors, donors, filmmakers – and only known to the gatekeepers. A little over a year later, we announced the early results from what became known as the Transparency Project (here’s an article in Filmmaker Magazine about our launch, in 2015). It was a great project, but it was nearly impossible to get people to share data – they were bound by NDA clauses, or they had never gotten reports from their distributors, and the major streamers and bigger distributors were getting nervous about anyone having this data. For those and a variety of other reasons, we had to stop the project, but the need for better data about the independent film world never went away, and that need has gotten even greater. Luckily, that need stuck in Keri’s mind, gestating and becoming something different, but just as urgent. By focusing on the audience – where we should always have our attention – we can make a better case for the importance of indie film, and start to find solutions which by aiding audiences, might just help filmmakers as well.
Independent film, and alternative voices, are facing their biggest crisis in ages. Some think this is cyclical, but I don’t think it is this time. Independent films are the lifeblood of our overall industry – it’s where we nurture and discover talent, hear alternative voices, and sometimes, change the world. But major streamers are cutting back on what they acquire/license and commission from the sector. In fact, that’s one of the findings of the report – the streamers are passing on “diverse, political, or challenging independent film titles in favor of investing in more expensive and popular mass-market fare. Viewership of independent films on the major platforms decreased by nearly 50% in two years from 30M in 2020 to 18M in 2022. That trend looks to be continuing as acquisitions on major platforms are trending down as free platform viewership rises.”
But is that drop because the audiences don’t want to see these films? Apparently not. Working with Evan Shapiro and Publisher’s Clearing House Insights, they conducted a major survey of US adults, and found some interesting things:
- 27% of survey respondents said they would be willing to pay for a channel dedicated to independent film and documentary, equating to a potential subscriber base of 77M.
- Nearly one-fifth of American adults describe themselves as ‘definite fans’ of independent film (52M) and independent documentary (57M).
- Based on research from Parrot Analytics showing affinity for independent scripted films among independent documentary fans, we estimate a 30% overlap between the documentary and scripted film audiences.
- We derive a total market of 76.3M from this survey result.
- An estimated 36.7M people watched independent films in theaters or on small screens.
And what does that mean? There’s a potential gap of about 40M people who think of themselves as fans of indie film, but who aren’t finding and watching them now. That is what you call a sizable opportunity to be addressed. But why are these folks not watching indie films? Sure, some of them were probably being aspirational and might put an indie film in their queue or their survey answers to feel more sophisticated, or they’re just lying. But the survey accounted for that.
Well, the cynical part of me thinks that maybe those extra 40 million people just don’t see any good indie films worth watching, and there’s a case to be made for that argument, but that won’t be a popular take. So instead, I will say that what we have here is a problem of our independence when it comes to distribution. We have too many platforms, too many tiny distributors, too little funding for marketing, and too little actual data on our audiences. For far too long, we’ve relied on a “build it and they will come mentality” and we live in our own little bubbles (kinda like with politics), and think that because we pay attention to Sundance and Cannes, so does everyone else. But a lot of audiences don’t pay attention to those places, or maybe they do, but they don’t feel connected to their local film fest or arthouse theater, so they miss these films. (Another finding of the study - Theatrical is 22% of the independent scripted film audience and less than 1% of the independent documentary audience. Per-film theatrical viewership has fallen by 90% in the last 20 years across both categories.) Before, they might end up on Netflix and get lost in the algorithm, but now, they might not even find a home.
Putnam’s study summarizes the challenges as follows:
- Fragmented audiences (spread across too many disconnected platforms)
- Discoverability of the films
- Fests and arthouses lack resources to best engage their potential audiences
- A marked increase in films being produced, but an even more marked decline in per film viewing
Those are big issues. But some of them are solvable – especially when it comes to engaging audiences and making these films more discoverable.
What’s great is, Putnam also identified a lot of opportunity in the marketplace. First, she found that audiences want alternatives to mainstream fare. Second, lest you think we’ve all moved on to gaming and social media to the exclusion of movies, she also found that movies remain popular. As she states, “We encountered a general perception that films–and in particular smaller films–are not relevant to a new generation. Our research shows that this is not true. In our national survey, 67% of people say they watch movies frequently. 37% (or 100M people) say they watch movies ‘every day or several times a week.’ And guess what? People 18-24 report the highest percentage of movie watching of any age group at 74% (7% above the average). That’s pretty exciting data.
She also points out several potential directions for solutions, all of which I find quite compelling (albeit some of them are easier than others to implement). Her ten recommendations based on the data:
1. Combat market fragmentation with a new, consolidated streaming destination. I’ve argued here many times that no one needs another streamer, but the data seems to contradict me here. We have too many streamers, but we don’t have the ones we need. Now the problem seems to be – from the emails I’ve received from people who have read the report – is that everyone is reading “we need a new platform” and is stopping there. That was just one recommendation, and I think it’s not the most important one, so keep reading for the others.
2. Invest in Theatrical Exhibition: Build data and marketing capacity at Festivals and Independent Cinemas. Because this will help connect these films to audiences, locally, and where they deserve to be seen (which also has been shown to increase in-home viewing as well).
 3. Invest in 21st Century Streaming Public Media and Include Scripted Films on PBS. This one is super important. Read the full study for the data, but she found some surprising pockets of success in public media (especially Frontline), but it’s chronically underfunded, under attack and has become focused on documentary to the near complete exclusion of scripted films, and we need alternative voices from the entire artistic spectrum. In fact, if you look at this chart, it would seem that if you added scripted indies to PBS, you might add at least another 22M viewers, and I’d argue given the data, you might double that. To me, this is the single most important opportunity, but also the biggest challenge because under this new administration, there’s a good chance we will lose public media completely, and little chance we’ll improve upon it.
4. Leverage Free, Mass Market Platforms: Build a field-wide vertical on a mass-market free streaming platform. Places like YouTube and Tubi, for example. Aggregating multiple distributors on these platforms, in one curated space might be the second biggest opportunity she identified. The problem is – we might get more viewership, but we won’t get a lot more revenue from this space.
5. Expand and Engage Audiences of Color. We can’t push this one enough- there’s a huge underserved audience here, and guess what else – there’s riches in serving such sizable niches – as Tubi has also proven.
6. Thoughtfully enlist Brands and Philanthropy to Fund Production and Marketing. I’ve been singing this song, and practicing this for many years, but it’s not just brands – we need a mix of brand support and philanthropy because not every film fits brands, and only philanthropy will truly support alternative and “truth to power” or controversial projects.
7. Innovate on Sector-Wide Marketing. I’ve said this a million times – we’ve figured out how digital effects production and distribution, but the entire sector seems to have skipped the marketing part of this. And I’d also point out that this is a place brands excel, and that can be another opportunity for collaboration.
Putnam also suggested a bigger, sector-wide marketing project “where financiers, distributors and exhibitors might collaborate on a sector-wide effort to rebrand ‘independent film’ with a compelling message, potentially involving celebrities and local artists to enhance appeal and excitement. We believe there is potential for a campaign tied to authentic and innovative stories made outside the ‘system’ to attract audiences tired of the impersonal and corporate flavor of mainstream media.”
8. Deepen and Enrich Engagement with Younger Audiences and Fan Communities. This one is obvious, but not done nearly enough.
9. Conduct More Research and Share Data Across the Field. We need the next phase of her research, and a re-launch of something like the Transparency Project, and a lot more data sharing.
10. Build a Trade Organization to Facilitate Field-Wide Research, Innovation, Public Policy Advocacy.We lost AIVF which did this about 20 years ago, and we need a new version. Luckily, I know some good people are working on this right now. We’re also going to need this more than ever given the recent election, but I also fear we have less chance of success, so people building this organization should be plotting for four years from now, as nothing will happen before that time (except planning and field-building).
That’s it. Ten easy-peasy steps to success. Ok, not that easy, but definitely that urgent. And now we have the data that proves it.
|
|
Film
The Rise and Fall of Docs in Charts: Everyone in the doc world talks about the boom then bust we've had thanks to streaming, but Daniel Parris at Stat Significant has put this into charts in a recent post. He shows that not only did streamers invest in a huge boom, and then pull back, but he also shows that the quality has gone down - at least by reviews and sentiment. Just look at this one chart (above) he has for the ratings drop for docs vs. other movies. Ouch. Check out all of his charts, and his (too kind to my mind) takeaways in the link. (BN)
Repertory Cinema Keeps Booming: I've written about this here a few times, but Abe Beame over at The Ringer probably has the most comprehensive piece you'll see anytime soon on the recent boom in repertory cinema. This one looks at every aspect you can imagine, and paints a pretty rosy, but not naive picture of possible futures for the continued revival. Check it out. (BN)
 ‘Locarno Meets’ is a video podcast where established legends of cinema and exciting new talents chat about art, life, movies, and everything in between, all from the Locarno Film Festival. I was a guest on an earlier edition of this, and if you read this newsletter, you know I think Locarno is ahead of the curve and their podcasts are great! A second season has just been released, bringing new episodes from the 77th edition of the world-recognized auteur film festival in Switzerland, featuring a star-studded line-up of guests who travelled to Locarno to receive major awards and present new work. Listen to lively conversations with the likes of Shah Rukh Khan, Jane Campion, Alfonso Cuarón, Nick Frost, Tim Blake Nelson, Luca Marinelli, Irène Jacob, and many more. A new episode every week until March 2025, available wherever you get your podcasts. ‘Locarno Meets’ is a Locarno Film Festival original production, presented by UBS. Watch/listen here. (BN)
Metrograph Started a Magazine - The Metrograph Theater has done another awesome thing, and started a print magazine. This is a pretty smart move, and they've got just the audience who will appreciate this. Large format, specialty print magazines are a booming business right now, which makes it kinda funny that the reporter for this article doesn't seem to read his own outlet's reporting on the phenomenon, - the NYT reported just a few days earlier on this trend within the outdoor industry, for example. Hint hint, we've been suggesting this to a few of our clients with loyal audiences for a while now, and a few others should follow Metrograph's lead. (BN)
AMPAS fired its Archivists - Sign the Petition to Bring them Back: AMPAS, the Academy, fired its main archivists recently. You know, the people that actually have an important job at the Academy, and help preserve the art form the Academy supposedly honors, and celebrates at its awards and museum? Oh, I guess it is just about the sponsorships and the red carpets. A petition has been started, which has zero chance of success - what ceo is going to change their mind because of a petition?? - but I signed it to show support, and so should you. (BN)
|
|
Branded Content
Mor Chikin with Your Streaming (and brand history): Everyone in my brand world is posting this long, in-depth piece from Clint Rainey in FastCo with more details on the new Chick-Fil-A Studios and App. He's got the details on the types of shows and games, and why they'd do such a thing. For the record - I think it's a pretty smart brand loyalty move, and I appreciate the deep-dive. But as someone who has worked in this field for over ten years, it's strange to see it hyped as something relatively new. Anyway, read on for some history, and good info on why brands are making destination channels, even in an oversaturated market. I can think of about ten brands who should be doing the same thing. Some are even clients who we've pushed to do this for... almost ten years. (BN)
 Should Your Brand Film be on Netflix? Or Not?: I sat down with my friend Marcus Peterzell of PassionPoint Collective for a podcast interview with Jesse Roesler for the Brand Storytelling/Credo "Content That Moves" podcast. We chatted about just about every aspect of brand film distribution. Check it out here. (BN)
|
|
|
Like This Newsletter? Subscribe & Past Issues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
