Monthly Archives: June 2011

New Media: Content Autonomy? [Film Friday]

Posted on by

This is the second post in my series, “Understanding New Media.”

Last week, I differentiated between “Casual Video” and “New Media.” We left off with the assumption that any content financed, produced for, and released exclusively on the web that only ever lives on the web could be dubbed “New Media.” But there are two big curve balls that sidetrack this definition: marketing content and spin-offs.

Releasing promotional content on the web is considerably cheaper nowadays than launching a campaign on television or billboards nationwide. Therefore, more and more companies are generating content tailored specifically for the web to promote their products. Commercials, movie trailers, and sponsored skits litter YouTube and the Internet beyond. These pieces are “financed, produced for, and released exclusively on the web.” So are they “New Media?” Or just advertisements released on the web? If you chose the ladder, you sit in the popular majority. Most would still call this “advertising.”

So, then, one would be inclined to append “narrative content” to my definition above. But we cannot be that myopic. There is plenty of non-narrative content online financed and produced for the web that drives considerable revenue. And some promotional skits or spots otherwise considered “marketing” are themselves “narrative,” so it would be far too general to affix a “New Media” definition with the word “narrative.”

What about spinoffs? Recently, several television shows and feature films have produced content for the web to build community, expand the scope of programming, and promote the source content. Ghost Whisperer is famous for this. Do these episodes constitute “New Media” or do they serve a greater marketing purpose? Very wide gray area. Expanding the canon of a larger body of work has been in practice for ages. I suppose it depends on, again, the producer’s original intent: was the content produced primarily to drive traffic to another program? Or was the content produced to expand the story or characters in a structure better-suited for the web?

I suppose one clear distinction between marketing or spin-offs and “New Media” is “autonomy” – whether or not the content online acts on its own, or serves a bigger product. The web series we produce are original intellectual property and do not play a role outside the web browser sandbox. They serve their own needs independently and do not require or serve content on other platforms. A movie trailer or blooper reel may air online, but they serve a bigger purpose beyond the Internet. Same could apply to a spin-off. What greater purpose does your content serve?

As it stands, our “New Media” definition goes a little something like this: “content financed, produced for, and released exclusively on the web that serves itself and no other.”

Next week, we’ll explore an industry-seeded counterpoint to content autonomy: what happens when a marketing promo or referential spin-off generates its own revenue online?

Do Not Bring Your Work Home

Posted on by

Hollywood is notorious for failed marriages. Why? To succeed in this town, you need to give it your all. Eat, sleep, breathe entertainment. Might sound fun on the outside, but it’s hell on the inside. In one year alone, I’ve seen families shattered, relationships severed, possessions seized, and health jeopardized. It’s the name of the game out here. When you’re working 14 hour days and competing with hundreds of extremely talented people and projects, how the hell can you do anything else with your life?

Outside the movie business, lifestyles are not nearly this extreme. Still, I hear horror stories of workaholics compromising their personal lives to submit to their jobs. Whether you are working 16 or 60 hours per week, it is important to separate your job from the rest of your life. If you do not, work can consume you. Depending on how you handle pressure, it may even destroy you.

When you come home at night, forget it. Stop thinking about your day. Leave it all behind. Worried you’ll forget where to pick up in the morning? That’s what to-do lists are for. Have a job where you are responsible for grading or reading or reports that need to be done outside of the workplace? Find another place to do them. Just do not bring them home. Do not bring your work home.

The level of stress work carries can hurt you, hurt your families, and hurt your friends. No one likes spending time with a wreck. And most people get bored with a wreck that drones on about his or her job. There’s more to life and the world than your job. You become really one-dimensional when that’s all you care about.

Don’t Cut Spending. Make More Money!

Posted on by

Many twentysomethings live paycheck to paycheck. Very rough riding. Most people in this situation try to spend less and make do with what they have. Ramen noodles, no nights out, no entertainment purchases. I think this is the wrong attitude. Instead of protecting every little dime you have, invest your energy into making more money. Side projects, tutoring, part-time work, surveys, leveraging a raise, finding a higher paying job. The opportunities are endless. There’s a limit to how much you can cut from your spending, but no limit to the amount you can make.

Ramit Sethi is a strong proponent of this train of thought. While I find his advice verbose, he makes several great suggestions.

Before you can set out to bring home extra bacon, you need to ask yourself one really important question: do you think you are worth more in the first place? If you do not believe you are, then no one else will either. But if you truly believe, then the money will come. I was frustrated with my work last year and felt I deserved more. I modestly outlined my needs to continue providing the same level of value to my company and was met with a 33% raise.

Believe you are worth more. Act like you are worth more. Life will sort itself out.

The Unspoken Rules of Dining Leftovers

Posted on by

Your meal, your leftovers.

If dishes were shared, whoever picks up the bill wins the leftovers.

If the bill is split, split the leftovers.

If the leftovers will not split easily, award them to the paying party that ate the least.

If both parties paid and ate the same amount, volunteer to surrender the doggie bag under the condition that you will irrevocably win the leftovers next time.

Really important, I know. Far too many people skirt the issue, and I wanted to set things straight.

Real People, Real Conversations

Posted on by

The two most common icebreaker questions in Los Angeles are “where are you from” and “what do you do (for a living)?” Understandable, because few people actually grew up here and most relocated for their industry. A quick, cordial method to find common ground (if any) or extract details enough to build a full conversation.

The problem? These questions assume that work or geographical heritage define a person’s individuality. While some levels of personality and culture can be inferred, there is so much more to a person than his or her job or hometown. Furthermore, with jobs being the core topic (because jobs are more current and relevant than where you grew up), conversations tend to become networking events. Work sneaks out of the office and slips into your Saturday night cocktail.

I cannot argue the value of building professional relationships, but oftentimes adults forget that it is important to have other types of relationships as well. I find it extremely difficult to meet new people in Los Angeles. Worse, I find it impossible to develop relationships with people outside the film industry. I blame a lot of it on these icebreaker questions. “Oh, we’re not in the same industry? We cannot work together, so, I guess … have a good night!? Nevermind that there are so many other levels we can connect on!”

My best friends here can carry on conversations about things other than work and the movies. Makes a big difference when you’ve been on film sets all day and need a mental break. And it makes a big difference when you need to feel like a human being, rather than a workaholic robot. Science, discovery, politics, love, perspective, health, the world, philosophy … the list is endless.

Every conversation does not need to be a networking event. Try to steer your meet and greets away from conventional topics. Pay close attention to people who bring more to the table than their resume.

Digital Silence

Posted on by

So much of our daily lives rely on phones and computers. We’re connected at every turn, every minute of the day. And most of our entertainment and hobbies now pipes through the network. We never get a break.

Want to truly relax? Need a real vacation? Then turn off your phone and close your laptop. Set everything aside and step into digital silence. For a week, weekend, afternoon, or for even five minutes – you will be surprised how great it can feel. Afraid people will miss you? That’s what voicemail and vacation email responders are for.

Set yourself free.

Tower Defense

Posted on by

Tower DefenseAll I can say today is “Tower Defense: Lost Earth.” A friend from USC, Joe Spradley, and a team of guys in Korea authored this amazing, addicting, and challenging iOS mobile game. I’ve been playing it all day and cannot stop.

For all you iPhoners, download this baby, support these guys, and play it to your heart’s content. You won’t regret it.

New Media: Producer’s Intent? [Film Friday]

Posted on by

This is the first in a series of posts I announced last week called “Understanding New Media.”

One argument I’ve heard from filmmakers trying to define “new media” favors a producer’s original intent for the material. If the story being told was meant for web and first launches online, then it (by definition of producer’s intent) should be considered “New Media.” I suppose that’s fair – if it was made for web and only ever lives on the web, what else do you call it? Well, I call 99% of it “Casual Video.”

YouTube is the biggest marketplace for “Casual Video,” where users upload literally anything they can capture. Most YouTube videos have no revenue agenda, are authored by individuals arbitrarily, and lack front-end logistics or financing. For a video to transcend “casual” status, I think it must first have at least a little foresight, structure, and craft tied into its execution. “New Media” is a film industry term, so there should be a certain level of “industry” to the content being produced. There is really no “industry” to my friend Jim skateboarding off of a cliff. It’s merely pure, casual fun.

So I’ve raised a little money and produced something for the web. “New Media,” right? What happens when that content syndicates on television? Or premieres on the big screen? Is it still “New Media?” Or has it become more than that? On the flip side, what happens when a feature film, originally intended for the big screen, first ends up online out of failure to platform in theaters? Is it still a “Feature Film” or has it become “New Media” in spite of the producer’s original intent? Tough call.

Moreover, what happens when our televisions and movie theaters are networked through the web? Is a cable show broadcast on Google TV “New Media” or “Television?” I stream Netflix and South Park the same way I stream YouTube antics. Don’t you? So what’s the difference? Well, there is no difference to the consumer, except perhaps the quality and duration of content. The lines between web and other platforms are blurring. Just because something plays online does not necessarily make it “New Media.”

I suppose the “original intent” argument can stand for now concerning content that was financed, produced, and distributed exclusively for the web. But there’s much more to it than that. Does the content play as part of a greater whole? Is it a spinoff or tie-in to another intellectual property on another distribution platform? Should the content then be called “Bonus Material” or “Marketing” instead?

Tune in next week for a discussion on web content’s autonomy.

Want Your Art to Be Timeless?

Posted on by

Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman in a romant...

Then avoid referencing contemporary pop culture in your work. Lady Gaga. Transformers. Charlie Sheen. Rickrolling. Twilight. Chewbacca. Bieber. Game of Thrones. Clay Aiken. Metal Gear Solid. Parachute Pants. Stop! Just don’t. I’m sorry, did I distract you from my post?

If possible, avoid referentiality altogether. References divert audience attention away from you and toward the things you reference. Heaven forbid the viewer is not familiar with your reference, or he or she will be alienated further. Drawing attention to anything outside your movie, book, painting, game, etc. does little (or absolutely nothing) to help you connect with audiences and tell your own story.

Want to be timeless? Stay within the world of your story. Do not risk incorporating or drawing attention to a pop culture trend that may fade tomorrow. The teenies of today do not remember musical group Hanson – and that was hardly a decade ago. Do you? If you need to draw attention to something beyond the immediate world of your story, then mention something that has matured and continues to survive public memory. Timepieces like war films are at an advantage in that they can reference authentic trends that continue to stand the public awareness test of time. Steven Spielberg can get away with a James Bond reference in Catch Me If You Can through a scene set in 1963 because three generations now have connected with the character and the 007 phenomenon exists in the world of the character’s story. No inside jokes, just straight history.

Do not let your jokes, characters, or narrative depend on other works that future generations may not understand.

Bootlegging Yourself (Marketing Controversy 101)

Posted on by

A few days ago, a bootlegged version of a red band trailer for David Fincher’s latest film, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, hit YouTube with a vengeance. Before Sony Pictures pulled it for “a copyright claim,” the video had nearly 2 million hits after only two days. There is speculation that Sony launched the trailer themselves to kick-start a viral marketing campaign. Whether or not this is true, the video’s premature release certainly did not hurt Sony or the film. The leak was awarded widespread coverage in press and online. If audiences were not aware the hit novel trilogy was being adapted for the American screen, they definitely are now.

I find the entertainment industry’s preoccupation with piracy amusing. Sure, I am a filmmaker and can appreciate revenue lost to piracy. But as veteran studio executive Bill Mechanic once pointed out to me, “Pirating means that people want to see your movie.” As I see it, stolen entertainment media suggests one of two things: your content is not good enough to pay for or too difficult for the average consumer to find. Both problems are your fault and worth solving. iTunes rivaled music piracy by promoting easier access to music: it became easier to buy a song on iTunes than steal it from a torrenting site. With bandwidth evolving and platforms like Netflix and YouTube on the rise, movie studios are running out of excuses not to open their libraries. Simple: help audiences consume the entertainment they want to consume. Most people will gladly pay for that. And pirates will help spread the word in the meantime.

But I digress. In a world saturated by media noise, it has become necessary for marketing materials to have unique stories wrapped around them. The Dragon Tattoo leak promoted three levels of discussion: the bootlegging of the trailer in the first place, whether or not Sony released it on purpose, and finally the irresistible quality of the content presented. Trailer discussion spread the word and inadvertently spread the message: “She’s coming.”

Movie studios should bootleg themselves more often. And you should too.