The old cliche that “content is king” has been much bandied about in Hollywood the last few years. Michael Eisner, former CEO of Disney pressed the point in a speech at MIPCOM last week. The fact remains however that the films that get the wides exposure are often lightweight fluff pieces, or meaningless action films. (Two cases in point, Pirates of the Caribbean and High School Musical 3.)
This begs the question that if content was really king, why is the indie film industry in such turmoil, and why are the studio specialty divisions shutting their doors?
If content was king then the path to a better future would be to make better films. Yet better films do not guarantee that the audience will show up to see your product. Regardless of content, the delivery itself is the big issue.
Michael Gubbins in an opinion piece for Screen International argues that content may indeed be king, but it rules by the authority of those who control the delivery system. He goes on to say that “you can grow the finest vegetables but if you have no means of transport to market, you will fail. Even if you have a tractor, the supermarket shelves have been bought up by the retail giants. And that’s not too far-fetched an analogy for film in the current circumstances.”
What’s an indie filmmaker with a story to tell have to do? How do they reach audiences?
Read the Michael Gubbins article from Screen Internatinal by cutting and pasting this link: