Category Archives: Coming Soon

Forget Hollywood; brew up a craft beer indie film experience

Posted on by
Reply

Elliot Grove of Raindance says, Hollywood Doesn’t Need Saving: It Needs Ignoring.

His belief is that:

“The answer (to Hollywood) is beer. Because beer figured this out decades ago, while filmmakers were still begging studios to love them back.”

He explains:

“Craft brewers didn’t try to beat Big Beer at scale. They made Big Beer irrelevant to people with taste. You are not here to replace Hollywood. You are here to make it look boring. Big Beer lives in supermarkets and football stadiums. Craft beer lives in taprooms.

Taprooms do three things Hollywood hates:

  1. They put makers in front of consumers.
  2. They reward experimentation.
  3. They create loyalty, not just transactions.

Make films so clearly yours that ten thousand people would riot if they disappeared. That’s the business model. Do this: Shorts. Micro-features. Proofs-of-concept. Rough work. Ugly work. Fast work. Momentum beats perfection every single time.

Independent Cinema needs:

  1. Events
  2. Mailing lists
  3. Subscriptions
  4. Touring screenings
  5. Education
  6. Merch
  7. Community

Here are the Three Golden Rules for success in today’s brave new world:

  1. Own your IP.
  2. Own your audience.
  3. Own your escape routes.

Hollywood is the supermarket aisle. The future of cinema is poured fresh, by stubborn people, in crowded rooms, to audiences who know exactly why they’re there. And it doesn’t need permission.”

My take: I’ve quoted liberally because this is such a great article. The analogy truly holds!

 

Touring your feature with a carnival barker strategy

Posted on by
Reply

Aaron Strand posts on The Slam that Just Because You Build It, Doesn’t Mean They’ll Come.

He debunks the romantic notion that a great independent film will automatically attract an audience, emphasizing that modern creators must actively engage viewers through grassroots marketing and personal outreach.

Drawing from the self-distribution of his feature Withdrawal, Strand outlines a community-based “carnival barker” strategy that relies on personal presence, local partnerships, and direct audience connection rather than relying solely on the festival circuit.

He takes these concrete actions to market his film and attract audiences on his roadshow tour:

  1. Put a face to the project: He positions himself as the “star” and protagonist of the marketing story, sharing behind-the-scenes narratives and details about his personal background.
  2. Attend every screening in person: He travels to every tour location to introduce the film, participate in post-screening Q&As, and personally meet and shake hands with audience members.
  3. Establish local partnerships: He collaborates with members of the community in each city to have someone local introduce the film or moderate the Q&As.
  4. Host community lobby events: He invites local non-profit organizations to set up information tables in the theatre lobbies to turn the screenings into larger community events.
  5. Support other independent creators: He invites local filmmakers to screen their short films before his feature and helps others raise money for their own upcoming projects.
  6. Deploy promotional assets: He creates and distributes non-negotiable marketing deliverables, including trailers, social media ads, giveaways, and promotional videos.
  7. Send direct messages on social media: He tracks anyone who interacts with his film’s online content and sends them brief, unautomated, personal invitations via DM to clarify the exact date and time of the screening.

My take: kudos to Aaron! This is a ton of work!

To what extent does nepotism help movies get made in the industry?

Posted on by
Reply

Stephen Follows on Substack just asked What percentage of Hollywood film professionals are nepo babies?

He researched the top 100 movies of this millennium to find out.

He “counted someone as having family ties if a parent or close blood relative (i.e. a sibling, grandparent, uncle, aunt or cousin) worked in film or television before that person’s own entry into the industry.”

And there are a lot of key creatives with family in the industry already: 28% of top actors, 26% of directors and 18% of writers.

Crunching the numbers, Stephen concludes:

“Seven in ten of the biggest films of the past 25 years had at least one person with industry family at the heart of their creative team.”

The full post is worth reading because Stephen looks at the trend, if the films perform better and career impact. He finishes with:

“Family ties get you a modest start earlier, keep you in the game longer, and buy you another roll of the dice when a film disappoints. The surname is more of a safety net than some kind of accelerator or guarantee.”

My take: this is a new spin on, “It’s about who you know.” But it does go far in explaining why Hollywood seems slow to adapt to new trends. I just wish @stephenfollows would break out these stats for Canada, the UK and Australia.

How to adapt the Direct-to-Fan Playbook for indie movies

Posted on by
Reply

musicben released “The direct-to-fan playbook in 2026” on STVDIO+ earlier this year.

Benjamin identifies four levels of musical artist by reach: New Independent, Mid-Size Independent, Large Independent and Megastar.

Let’s explore the first level, the one I think maps best to the indie filmmaker experience.

He says,

“It is extremely important to start collecting emails and offering basic digital products. This is your foundation for owning your audience from day one.”

Bandcamp, Substack and Printful are the three services he suggests to beginning musicians.

What might the equivalent services be for indie filmmakers?

MUSIC SERVICE FUNCTION INDIE FILM SERVICE
Bandcamp Rudimentary Distribution, Email Collection, Album and Merch Sales Vimeo. YouTube? Gumroad?
Substack Newsletter, Email Collection Substack?
Printful Merch Fulfillment Sellfy?

Where is the Netflix for Short Films? Itch.io perhaps?

Filmmakers, what’s working for you?

My take: hey musicben, how is SIX doing? We need something like that for indie films, especially shorts that mostly have zero commercial potential. Does thinking about shorts as tracks and feature films as albums spark any ideas for you?

The Audience First Playbook

Posted on by
Reply

Randy Greenberg of The Business of Entertainment: Unfiltered has posted “Creators and Filmmakers: You Don’t Need Permission” on Substack.

In it he analyzes the recent successes of Kane Parsons (Backrooms), Curry Barker (Obsession) and Mark Fischbach (Iron Lung).

He then extrapolates their trajectories to outline his “Audience-First Pipeline” ladder with these four rungs:

  1. “Build the audience through short-form content.
  2. Escalate the format progressively as the craft develops.
  3. Prove the concept at feature length.
  4. Walk into the negotiation with leverage, or skip the negotiation entirely.”

“The job in Phase One is not to make money. The job is to build the audience that funds everything that follows. Short-form content on these platforms is your audience acquisition infrastructure, dramatically cheaper than any traditional marketing budget. [Phase Two] The eight-minute floor on YouTube is the first structural breakpoint. Mid-roll ads unlock. [Phase Three] This is where the filmmaker stops renting the audience to platforms and starts owning the relationship. [Phase Four] When you arrive at a distributor with a built audience and a proven concept, you are not pitching. You are negotiating.”

In summary, “Short-form builds the audience. Mid-form pays the bills. Long-form is the revenue engine. Direct-to-audience is where you own the business.”

This post is so great you really owe it to yourself to read the whole thing!

My take: this is a great breakdown that codifies and quantifies the creator economy playbook. What’s so intriguing about this is that technology and digitization made it possible. Previously, the means of production for analogue media involved so many people and was so expensive that “success” was almost always granted by gatekeepers. Now your audience anoints you.

An Open Letter to Minister Marc Miller and Cineplex, Landmark and Guzzo

Posted on by
2

On Canada Day 2026, I have one modest question and one modest proposal.

A modest question:

Where is Canada’s National Cinema?

Why did we let the cultural and commercial success of the 1970’s and 1980’s wither? Why has the box office revenue for Canadian features consistently been dwarfed by that of foreign movies, in spite of millions in government funding?

Or, are we truly content to simply sell the labour of our film craftspeople to foreign producers, like Canada exports its raw materials (crude oil, auto parts, gold, copper, iron, natural gas, wood and lumber) to the world?

One answer, as Don Shebib told me in 2008, is that Canada doesn’t have the, um, back-bones.

We can do better, and we can start here.

A modest proposal:

Let’s legislate a Canadian presence on all the movie screens in Canada, starting with a Canadian short in front of every movie.

One short, five to ten minutes long. In front of every movie.

Let Canadians decide online which shorts, by audience vote, to create genuine discovery and stakes.

Playing these winning shorts in front of features will build audiences who feel Canadian cinema belongs to them. Soon this will become a talent development pipeline, not just a programming slot.

My take: I wrote this post because I truly believe Canada deserves a national cinema. Look at South Korea. They’ve had mandatory screen quotas from 1966, scaled them intelligently, and built enough domestic production volume that Korean cinema developed and eventually broke into global markets on pure quality. Canada’s problem is it never committed to a quota mechanism seriously enough or long enough to generate any meaningful effect. The actual competitor for audience attention isn’t Hollywood. It’s indifference. Quotas force a confrontation with indifference that subsidies alone never do.

YouTube to save Indie Film?

Posted on by
Reply

Jonah Feingold recently posted An Open Letter to YouTube: Give Independent Filmmakers a Rent/Buy Button on Substack.

His core belief:

“YouTube should be the home base for independent film distribution.”

All he’s asking for is:

“A rent/buy button that creators can add directly to their own uploads, on their own channels.”

He outlines current distribution strategies and their limitations.

He then delves deeper into YouTube’s model and concludes with:

“YouTube, you’ve already changed how the world watches. Now change how independent filmmakers distribute. Give us the button. We’ll do the rest.”

Behold! It seems YouTube is listening….

My take: this is a great idea! The 30% Google / 70% Filmmaker split would be okay. The YouTube Partner Program eligibility thresholds would be challenging, if not impossible, for most filmmakers (who are not weekly content creators) that release one film a year. Ads interrupting films would be a non-starter too, as would pre- or post-ads, for films viewers have rented with the new Rent/Buy Button.

AI Feature Film at Cannes, sort of

Posted on by
Reply

Isabelle Bousquette of The Wall Street Journal exclusively reported that: “‘Hell Grind,’ a 95-minute fully AI-generated film, premieres this week at Cannes“.

Well, sort of.

Frank Landymore of Futurism quickly countered with: “Cannes Film Festival Says the Wall Street Journal Is Wrong: It’s Not Debuting an AI-Generated Feature Film This Week“.

He quotes a Cannes representative:

““We can confirm that ‘Hell Grind’ was not screened as part of the official Festival de Cannes program.””

Davide Abbatescianni of Screen Daily elaborates:

“The 95-minute feature cost under $500,000, with most of the budget going on computer costs. The first 25-minute segment required 16,181 video generations to produce 253 final shots, a 64:1 curation ratio. The film was produced by a team of 15 directors, cinematographers and editors, most of them working in person from Almaty, Kazakhstan with some collaborators joining remotely. Alex Mashrabov, CEO and co-founder of Higgsfield, explained that the execution phase took around two weeks, although the under­lying idea and script had been developed by the filmmakers over several years.”

Back to the WSJ for some technical details:

“Every prompt had to be extremely long and detailed. Each one would typically start with a prefix that defined requirements like style (8k IMAX, photorealistic), lighting (natural light only, “contre-jour” backlight, camera on shadow side) and the type of camera it should look like it was being shot on (“cine lens,” 180-degree shutter motion blur). The lighting was key to avoiding the AI sheen that typically gets branded as “slop”. AI-generated video tends to over-light scenes in an unnatural way. That prefix would also have to remind the AI to obey the laws of physics with wording like: “gravity and inertia respected—mass has real weight, correct contact shadows, no floating props.” The individual prompts were, on average, 3,000 words each.”

My take: It seems Higgsfield made a 22-minute short a month ago and then decided to extend it to feature-length. Seriously impressive — no wonder they decided to go for it.

How to fix Canadian Film, Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

Annelise Larson of Veria has just released a report called Navigating the Shifting Screen in an Era of Policy Reform.

The core of her thesis is that:

“Canadian film policy cannot be future-ready unless audience strategy is treated as core infrastructure.”

Further she says,

  1. The audience is in charge.
  2. Hyperlocal community matters more than ever.
  3. We need to redefine market demand.
  4. Data transparency is non-negotiable.

She rightly believes that:

“If we want Canadian films to succeed, we need to recognize the many ways audience demand now shows up before, during, and after release. We need policies and programs that sustain and help grow real audiences across the full life of a film. That means strengthening independent exhibitors, community screenings, impact dissemination, discoverability, data collection, audience research, and flexible release strategies.”

Read more here and download the 62-page report.

My take: Recall I called out Annelise’s decade-old dire prognosis for Canadian Film on this blog recently. My six-point strategy to fix Canadian Film remains the same, eh.

How Filmmakers Can Survive AI

Posted on by
Reply

No Film School shows How Indie Filmmakers Can Survive AI: 9 Insights from the Pros

The insights are from a SXSW 2026 panel titled Creativity, Commerce & Chaos: Tech & Indie Filmmaking that featured Lauren Oliver (co-founder of IncanterAI), Shaked Berenson (founder/CEO of Studio Dome), and Gregory Jensen (Accenture’s Media lead) and hosted by GG Hawkins.

The highlight? They view AI as a:

“disruptive toolkit designed to level the playing field for creators who don’t have Hollywood-sized bank accounts.”

The nine strategies, from the article, are:

  1. Training your “Digital Eye”: Cinematography Knowledge Still Matters
    Because AI doesn’t know the emotional difference between a high-angle and a low-angle shot your knowledge about filmmaking is your greatest asset.
  2. The “Micro-Problem” Strategy: Build Your Own Pipeline
    Look at AI as a series of specialized assistants, rather than a single “creative partner”, and use it to solve niche problems such as Audio Issues, Localization and VFX Generative Fill.
  3. AI-Native vs. AI-Assisted: The Gap in Decision-Making
    The panel highlighted the growing divide between “AI Native” creators (who often lack traditional film training) and “Filmmakers using AI.” Filmmakers don’t just prompt; they curate.
  4. Personalization vs. The Shared Experience
    One panelist floated “Dynamic Content“; the idea that a screen could generate a version of a film tailored to the viewer’s preferences (e.g., skipping gore for a sensitive viewer or emphasizing a certain subplot).
  5. The “Dishes” Principle: Using Tech to Buy Back Time
    The ultimate goal for the indie filmmaker isn’t to let AI do the “fun” part (the writing and directing). It’s to let it do the “chores” like organizing a scene list, budgeting with predictive models, or building a character-tracking app.
  6. The “15-Minute Wall”: Understanding AI’s Memory Problem
    One of the most practical “craft” takeaways for filmmakers is the current technical limitation — AI models have a “short-term memory” problem. So don’t try to “generate” your whole movie yet. Use AI for shots, textures, or cleanup, but rely on your principal photography to maintain the “scaffolding” and continuity of your characters.
  7. The “Signal Through the Noise”: Curation as a Creative Act
    With the barrier to entry dropping, the sheer volume of “content” is exploding and the role of the filmmaker shifts toward being a human gatekeeper. Your job is now curating.
  8. Directing for “Dynamic Viewing”
    Personalized Exhibition: AI could allow for versions of a film that adapt to the viewer so when shooting, consider capturing “excess” coverage.
  9. AI as Your “Marketing & Advice” Department
    AI can act as your business consultant or Creative Producer. Feed it your script and ask: “What is the most marketable 30-second hook for a Gen Z audience?” or “What film festivals have a history of programming films with these specific themes?”

The article concludes with a warning:

“The intersection of AI and indie film isn’t about the technology—it’s about curiosity over fear. If we leave the tools to Silicon Valley, they will build a “push-button” industry. If we engage with it as filmmakers, we can build a more accessible, disruptive, and human-led future.”

My take: art is always an abstraction of reality. Cinema, and by extension TV and screen-based media, use a vocabulary and grammar that is barely 130-years old. I predict most viewers will accept the new tools in time, like they did animation and Computer Generated Imagery.