The Sundance .com Festival

from the name-change dept

Despite the efforts of folks in Hollywood to lock down everything and put up tollbooths for all online content, it appears that some more independent film makers recognize that giving away content online can have strong promotional value. That’s why about two-thirds of the short films being shown at Sundance this year will also be viewable online. It sounds like it’s only streaming, which is a start — but they could get even more value out of offering it in really downloadable form, so that people could watch the video wherever and however they want, while also passing it along to friends to build up more buzz.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “The Sundance .com Festival”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Tyshaun says:

No Subject Given

I think having a streaming version is great, but the downloadable version seems like it would really limit the ability of the filmmakers to generate any revenue.
I’m all for using the internet without fees to help generate buzz for artists that don’t have large corporate ad budgets, but I also think it should be limited to giving enough of a “taste” to push people to purchase the product (maybe a video on demand offering or a more traditional online order service). At any rate, my basic point is that it’s nice for artists to use the net to get their stuff out there, but they should be able to be make a living from it too.

MsReason says:

Re: No Subject Given

I absolutely agree with Tyshawn. Independent filmmakers are trying to make a living. Downloading their films takes the revenue out of their pockets unless they charge “something”. Let the filmmakers show interesting clips to give a taste of their films which should encourage (or discourage)the viewer from wanting to go to the movies and see it for themselves.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: No Subject Given

I think having a streaming version is great, but the downloadable version seems like it would really limit the ability of the filmmakers to generate any revenue.

These are independent film makers who are trying to make a name for themselves. These are short films that are unlikely to be seen in anything other than a festival.

So wouldn’t it make a lot more sense to spread these films far and wide so that the filmmakers get recognition, and so that they can get a bigger paycheck on their next film?

Also, a smart producer would offer to sell the films with lots of extras, so that fans of the download still would want to buy. Just having it as downloadable in no way “limits” the ability of a filmmaker to generate revenue.

river says:

Re: Whoopee.

Wow, you’re… kind of an asshole. Even if you’re not interested in “gay love stories” and “leftist political screeds,” that doesn’t mean other people aren’t interested. If these were right-wing films, I’m sure you would be more than supportive. Not everything has to be about ideology, let’s keep the criticism to actually relevant to tech and internet issues.

Mike Liveright (profile) says:

Downloadable films

My thought was to use something like Movielink for films looking for distributers that were shown at festivals. The downloaded films would be time and copy limited so that if the film got a distributer the downloads would not take away from the theaters. Note: I would also suggest that they would be charged for at some reasonable rate.
On the other hand,
1) The films could gather an early set of comments, as the films could be charge less for if the viewer did review it.
2) The popularity of the film would be measurable by the number of peolle who did decide to download it
3) There would be some payback for the creator, though of course this would be minor, but at least the creator could get some of their money back before it was distributed by standard methods.
Thus, allowing the films to be distributed before they were sold to a standard distributor or got to theaters would it seems to me allow many independantly produced films to get a viewing without hurting their final profits and would allow them to gtenerate some “buzz” and money.
Of course, those of us who were interested in the films could view interesting films early.
So this seems to be a Win, WIn situation…

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...