The Think Tank
October 27th, 2008 @ 16:00 | by Timo Vuorensola
On the last day of the Power to the Pixel seminar in London we, the Internet filmmaking community, gathered together into a closed round table discussion about the future of what we are doing.
The main question was: what can we do to make what we are doing an acknowledged way to make films for the filmmakers, for those who fund filmmaking, and for the audiences out there. Also, we were there to share experiences, thoughts and beliefs on how should we, who already are “in there”, could proceed with what we are doing and maybe even join forces to help the something big take place.
I was expecting a bit more general discussion that would answer the basic questions every filmmaker has: how to do it and how to make money with it. The discussion kinda jumped around the topic a bit, but a bit surprisingly quite soon settled into an in-depth discussion on metadata.
For those who are unaware on what I’m talking about, metadata means information that’s inside a file, tied to it, giving you more information on the actual file. In Mp3 this means file info on the artist, name of the song, what year it was published – some metadata goes actually very deep, naming individual players, where it was recorded and by who etc. In film, there would be requirement for much, much more metadata, that could be filled in with WIKI apparatus to make it a community-embedded metadata.
Basically, it would mean we would have all the cast & crew info, filming locations, dates, websites, subtitles and all that embedded and easilly viewable by anyone watching the video. But what would make it more interesting are the two-sided functionalities of it: embedding a “pay”-button to the film, embedding a “buy a license for this film” -ability to it, and in general, embedding all the copyright information to each clip. With these functionalities, we would see propably much more commercially succesful films distributed via BitTorrent and other filesharing systems, when a viewer would have the possibility to download a film and pay for it if he likes it.
But metadata won’t answer to the problem of how to get filmmakers around the world start doing their films much closer to the Internet – how to make them understand than in order to survive in the coming changes, filmmakers need to start to understand what the Internet actually is – a huge community of communities – and how to find your community from there, and eventually, what good does it do to your film.
The last hour of the think tank was much more about trying to find answers to these questions. Even more, we were trying to find out how we, who already know what to do, could work together to educate filmmakers, film funders, distributors and government entities that they would be more willing to look at the alternative production and distribution options out there.
Personally, I think this is a very important question, because I believe that the only way the change will happen the way we want is working with both filmmakers and those with “soft money” for culture - government money, that is. If that happens, the distributors will follow, because they are dependant on content, and if content is going different way they are going, they’ll soon be out of business. Because, in the end, and even more nowadays, distributors are the ones who are clients of film productions, not the other way around. They are no more needed in order to get film distributed to millions of viewers around the world, and even less in the future – we can do that, we have YouTube and BitTorrent. The reason we want to use distributors still is that they are the ones who know how to get the film out there, people watching it and paying for it so that we would eventually get money for our next films. And if it seems – and it seems like that even more nowadays, when you are looking at how many distributors coping with “piracy”, that they have no clue anymore. The question remains, where do we need them? If that question strengthens too much, and too many filmmakers do “Radioheads” and find it more profitable than working with them, they are in deep shit.
So, they’d need to actually really hop onboard the wagon that’s already rolling onwards, try to regain the trust of the filmmakers and even more the trust of the new filmmakers – and, what’s even more trickier, because in the future it’s not just a filmmaker, but a filmmaker and his or her’s community of thousands of active people – and start to work the way they want.
The question a distributors and big studio heads need to ask in the future is certainly not “how to stop piracy”, but “how to make them want to pay”. (A tip to those pondering this: ass-rape is not a very good way to seduce.) They need to get over the fact that whatever they do, the films are out there, for free, and there’s nothing they can do about it. If you can’t beat them, join them, right?
Well, back to the Power to the Pixel. It was an awesome seminar that had gathered all the filmmakers with really good, fresh and brilliant ideas together, got them talking about their experiences to other people in the industry or outside the industry, maybe planting some new ideas there, and eventually got them talking together to help to find the better future.
I think that’s pretty much. An achievement not to be belittled. There’s a lot of work to do out there, but Power to the Pixel is


















