Evaluation - Question 3 - Sam McLeish

Question 3: What kind of media institution might distribute your media product and why?

When it comes to distributing a low-budget thriller, produced by a independent film company, you have two choices after the film's production;

1. Have the film distributed for you through an independent film distribution company. - They are more likely to secure a exhibitors screen at a independent cinema.
2. Distribute the film yourself via modern platforms for home viewing - i.e. DVD, TV, On Demand, YouTube, Vimeo ect.

Analogue to the Digital Age 

Post-2000 Data compiled from
http://www.launchingfilms.com/research-databank/ 

Pre-2000 Data compiled from
http://www.launchingfilms.com/research-databank/uk-cinema-admissions

Since the beginning of this century, the way that films have been delivered to their audience has changed significantly. Previously, before the rise of streaming on the Internet, the main place for an audience to watch films was at the cinema. For example, as shown in the graph, the overall attendance at the cinema has never been consistent after 2000, despite the fact that this is back on the rise. This is in comparison to before the economic slump of the 1980s where attendance at the cinema was at an all time high. These results are significant because it shows that how an audience will watch a film has significantly changed prior to the millennium. However, what should be noted is that cinema attendance is now on the increase, meaning that the cinema is in no way an outmoded medium. 

Netflix's daily consumption has increased
since 2009, showing the rise of popularity

VCR sales pre-millennium

However, the main other way that an audience would be able to watch a film was through home viewing. Due to the format war between Sony's Betamax and JVC's VHS, regardless of which system you used, you were now able to watch films at home in comparison to waiting for a film on one of the three TV channels. This concept has been carried into the modern day through the use of Video on Demand (VOD) services on platforms like Sky and Virgin Media, in which an audience will be able to download the content, or through streaming platforms such as Netflix or Amazon Prime. This has proven to be a success because even though VOD films will not arrive to the audience until six months after the release in the cinemas, it is clear that an audience will prefer not to pay extra for the film because it comes out of their TV package. Finally, the audience would be able to own the IP of the film if they bought the hard copy DVD/Blu-ray of it but this isn't the case for streaming platforms because you're viewing it with the producers permission without directly buying the content. For example, if a service offers a download option, it is in the producer's right to delete the content after it has expired. This is then revolutionary because it is shown that the IP doesn't belong to the audience after the content has been viewed. This is why these modern platforms are more accepted by newer companies because it reaches their audience in a way that ensures their content is secure, which is the method I would prefer to use.

Cinemas

Cineworld

Cineworld

Odeon

Screenings at Vue

The main issue with cinemas is that the mainstream franchises, such as Vue, Odeon and Cineworld are highly unlikely to screen small-scale independent films. For example, the current films at Cineworld Crawley are all from large-scale production companies and do not feature any independent films. This is the same for Vue on the Purley Way in Croydon and the Odeon in Brighton. All of these brands do have 'Event Theatre', but they only focus on broadcasting plays from theatre production companies. This means that it is highly unlikely, if not impossible, for a small-scale theatre production company to get their film into a mainstream cinema.

https://www.picturehouses.com/cinema
/Duke_Of_Yorks/Whats_On?filter=Seasons%2C%20Festivals%20%26%20Events

However, it is not impossible for a small scale company to get into a independent cinema. For example, The Duke of York's cinema in Brighton is offering to show films in co-operation with the Brighton Festival. Film Festivals are a good way for independent producers to get their films out to an audience but the problem is that if it's not ready for then, it wouldn't be broadcasted at any other time in the year. Therefore, it would still be good if our film was given to the audience at one of these events, but it would be time dependant.

Distributing the film

If a small production company chose to advertise with an independent company, it eases the workload off of themselves. This is done through licensing, where the producing company will allow for the distributor to use the film in order for financial return. This means that the producer will get a percentage of the total revenue but there is still a chance that neither parties will make any money because the film could be a failure. A film distributor on this scale is more likely to get the film exhibited at a film fest or an independent cinema, as shown above. 

Axiom Film's logo

If I was to choose a distributor, it would be Axiom Films. This is because "Axiom has steadily built a reputation for taking creative risks, working with new talent and original ideas" which shows that they have experience with other companies in our situation. The company further boasts "each film project that the company has been involved with has been both a critical and commercial success, frequently winning awards, sold for distribution in most key markets and, without exception, selected to screen at the major international film festivals". I feel that this would be effective because it would allow for our audience to connect easier with the content because they are more likely to get into a film festival. This then provides the film with publicity which is needed in order for it to be a success. 


The technological revolution; YouTube, Vimeo and distributing yourself

Since the rise of YouTube and it's creation in 2005, the social media platform has allowed for small, independent producers to spread their films for no money and gives them the chance to make money. This is unique because it cuts out the middle man of hiring an distribution agency and then saves your company money, which would be needed for a independent film because it is likely that they'll have a tight budget. 

YouTube Vs Vimeo

Advertising on YouTube is what makes you money; "Users will probably watch at least 30 seconds of your video. YouTube tallies up the revenue they make from ads (before the video and banner ads), and then splits that profit with you. Thirty seconds of the video doesn't make you any money, but 30 seconds of a preroll advertisement will". Although this principle is a good one, it is a risk because if the film flops and the channel doesn't receive many viewers, you are under no guarantee to make money. Also, a channel needs around 1,000 subscribers before YouTube will offer you any money so if your channel is empty, even if it has lots of attention, you will make nothing. Therefore, although YouTube can allow for a company to make money, it is a risky venture and it could be the cost of the business. 

However, a more underrated platform that is also used in the industry is Vimeo. The main difference between the two is that Vimeo works on a pay-monthly basis rather than adverts. This then allows the user to make money regardless of amount of viewers and is therefore better than YouTube. Also, Vimeo's "modest size creates an intimate and fully engaged community. It's a network of people who are genuinely interested in film quality, too, so you know your work is being seen by people who will appreciate it". This is useful for a small film company because they can then use what they've learnt from professionals, apply it to their next project and then hopefully make more money as it would be of higher quality.

Out of the two platforms, I would most likely use Vimeo because it guarantees you money if you have already have a fanbase who are willing to pay to view your content. The issue is, however, if it is possible to engage with a new audience; the film will most likely fail if no one is willing to pay to watch it because if it's your first film, your audience may not want to pay if they feel that it could be a waste of money. Therefore, each platform is not without risk for a small company, it just depends on if you have been successful or not beforehand with previous content. 

Conclusion

In my opinion, regardless of what you choose, you always run the risk of your film not being a success. That is why I would personally hire a small distribution company to distribute the film because they would have experience. As a small film company, it would be too risky to do it yourself, although it has been proven to work, but with a distribution company they are more likely to have useful contacts, despite the cost to a possibly tight budget.