International Industry event Meeting point – Vilnius, the professional’s meeting during Vilnius IFF, will kick it’s start in a week, March 26th -27th. During the preparation period, event’s moderator Michael Gubbins and a longtime industry professional and expert, agreed to share his views on the main issues, that will be discussed during the event in Vilnius.
In Michael’s opinion, cinema industry faces challenges, but they may become opportunities in the hands of talented and thoughtful. It makes sense to embrace both digital opportunities and international partnership simultaneously and to continue with the creative film making. Here are the whole interview with Michael Gubbins.
Michael, you are film industry expert and have been working in this field for almost a decade and in the media industries for more than 25 years. What in your opinion are the main challenges film industry face nowadays?
The European film industry may be approaching the biggest challenges for decades. Like music, publishing and other creative industries, film is struggling to come to terms with digital change, and most importantly the shifting demands of consumers that digital technologies enable. With the vast increase in both the choice of content and where to watch it, consumer demand has fragmented, which in turn has undermined the business model of the industry. Life was much easier for business when the public was offered a limited choice of releases at roughly the same time.
On top of this digital revolution, there are other factors that are having an impact. They include piracy, globalisation, the growing marketing muscle of Hollywood and government cuts in the face of economic downturn. For independent European film then, life has become more difficult in terms of finding investment, visibility in a crowded market and revenues.
On the other hand, there are opportunities for those willing to embrace change, including radical financing models, such as crowdfunding; lower production costs; social media marketing; and cross-media marketing and production.
It should be remembered that independent film has never been an easy business but, however great the challenges, talent has found a way to audiences.
In the age of austerity – what chances do the film financing have and what might be the alternative sources of financing?
Film financing has become increasingly dependent on state funding, which has allowed producers in some countries to weather the storm of digital change. In fact, film production in Europe has risen by around 70% over the last decade (which has not necessarily been a good thing because it has led to an often overcrowded market.)
But the pressure on state funding is rising, and a number of countries have already announced cutbacks. Some state broadcasters, which have been an important source of funds, have also been reducing costs, as they seek to compete in a changed market. Smaller nations are often the most vulnerable.
Any discussion of funding ought to start with the point that digital technologies have made it possible to reduce the costs of production and, to an extent, marketing and distribution. For some independents, this lower cost of entry can be liberating, and we have seen movement in what some call a ‘microwave’ of low-cost, often self-distributed film.
These new film-makers sometimes employ techniques, such as crowd funding, where audiences voluntarily and directly contribute to the making of a film. Some create cross-media, or transmedia, products with other sources of revenues, such as games, comic books and live events. For this movement, financing film is about creating a direct relationship with the audience, with particular emphasis on social media.
At the other end of the scale, some producers have sought to create economies of scale, through partnership with other companies, agencies and distribution channels.
International co-production has become an important means of making films with the scale and ambition to make an impact on the global market. The rise of so-called ‘super-indies’ in broadcasting, made up of diverse companies working in a number of fields and countries may well become a bigger trend for film.
So the answer at the moment to the finance question is about either scaling up or scaling down. Over the long term, new opportunities will arise as telecommunication companies, IT giants, broadcasters, etc fight for domination of the VOD (video on demand) world. These big players need content to fill the broadband pipelines to homes and that process may offer new opportunities, though Hollywood will still be the dominant force.
We are entering the digital era. Do you think cinema industry benefit from it or will suffer some kind of damage?
There is a cliché used by digital advocates about digital change in publishing, which suggests that the Internet has been “good for journalism but bad for journalists.”
One might equally ask whether we are entering an era, which is good for film and bad for the film industry. After all, everyone these days has access to films that could not have been dreamed of just a few short decades ago, and most people now have access to low-cost, or even free, means of making and distributing film.
The problem for industry is that the new digital world undermines the foundations of its business model: the film industry makes money by selling rights for specific viewing windows in individual countries or regions, whereas Internet business is predicated on anytime, anywhere access without borders.
People still want to watch films. In fact, more films are watched these days than ever before. It is making money that has become so much more difficult as audiences fragment.
There will inevitably be casualties in this period of change. Despite pessimistic predictions, the victims will not necessarily be the traditional cinemas. Digital distribution, higher quality and greater choice, and new forms of alternative content, such as opera, may help the theatrical business thrive. The real revolution may come (as it did in music) in distribution – the link between content production and consumers.
The shape of this new industry is not clear but history and experience elsewhere suggests that the theoretical democratisation of cinema will not necessarily be a good thing for independent film. The big tend to get bigger and the small smaller and the number of record-breaking Hollywood blockbusters of recent years suggests that trend is already in play.
There will always be big film countries, which are always in the spotlight and small cinema countries, which have to struggle to break the “you are not interesting” shield? What do you think would be the ways to be noticed for the arthouse movies from the small countries?
Small countries start with the obvious disadvantage that they have neither the market, nor the public funding support, to sustain many productions each year. They also tend to be exporters of what talent they do produce.
Where film is popular, it tends to be dominated by Hollywood or releases from the bigger European countries. In terms of distribution, they tend to be lumped together with other countries to create and artificial “territory” or added like a footnote to release to a big neighbour.
This represents a serious issue for the creation of a local film tradition, through which the often rich cultural stories of a country are told. There are potential positives that arise from digital change. One obvious point is that small countries have less to lose in embracing change. They ought to be more adept and flexible.
Online, national boundaries are merely notional ideas, even if some divides such as language remain. Encouraging a digital wave of cross-media innovation may well become a means for smaller nations to encourage a new kind of film culture and to punch above their weight on the international stage.
The second key point is international cooperation. Co-production should be second nature but there are other forms of partnership that may deliver value, perhaps in the creation of lobbying groups, in training institutions and in new forms of distribution.
For small countries, it makes sense to embrace both digital opportunities and international partnership simultaneously. That old phrase about thinking global and acting local could be a good maxim.
