From left, director Steven Soderbergh of 1989's ''Sex, Lies, and Videotape,'' with actors Laura San Giacomo, Andie MacDowell, and Peter Gallagher at this year's Sundance Film Festival. (Getty Images Photo / Andrew H. Walker)

First an Intro by Mitch Santell

My Great Uncle Alfred Santell was a teenager when he started in the film business back in 1914. If anyone had told him before the end of 1929 that the stock market would crash and would this would bring in a global depression, he might have said, "your nuts."

Now fast forward 2008. The decline of the film business I believe started in 2008 with the writer's strike. It has continued to shift as more and more studios are going on line. Studios can no longer afford to pay a single actor 20 Million Dollars when you could make five to ten pictures for the same amount.

In looking at the film business now, I so admire Steven Soderbergh for his willingness to take action and risk. His most recent film he is releasing on DVD at the same time he is putting it in movie Theaters.

Now onto our article which was originally written by Ty Burr at the Boston Globe.
PARK CITY, Utah - Two decades ago, a young, unknown filmmaker named Steven Soderbergh arrived in this mountain resort town with his first movie under his arm. The 1989 Sundance Film Festival transformed him into an overnight star of the American independent film movement; the critical and financial success of "Sex, Lies, and Videotape" established Sundance as the the white-hot center of the alt-movie universe.

Twenty years later, the festival has cooled to an uncertain ember, reflecting a business model that is slowly but surely dying. Soderbergh arrived at Sundance 2009 with a rough cut of his latest film, "The Girlfriend Experience," which follows an upscale Manhattan call girl as she negotiates a bleak new economic era. Like the film's New York City, the Sundance that Soderbergh returned to was a chastened affair. Night may be falling on the land of "Little Miss Sunshine."

The economy is in tatters, and the indie film numbers aren't adding up. A number of specialty distributors closed shop in 2008, and the big buys of last year's Sundance - "Hamlet 2," "American Teen," "Choke" - proved a bust when they were released at lower altitudes. Park City lodging was down 10 percent during the 2009 festival; the corporations kept their tents and gift bags at home.

While some films sold this year, the action was muted and the figures didn't stagger the sensibilities.

As if mirroring this uncertain landscape, few of the movies at Sundance 2009, which wrapped yesterday, connected with audiences or the zeitgeist. There were films that were well received - the dark "Sin Nombre" and the rollicking "Rudy and Cursi" from Mexico, the blaxploitation goof "Black Dynamite," an inner-city melodrama called "Push: Based on the Novel by Sapphire," which won both the Jury and Audience prizes for Dramatic Film when the awards were handed out Saturday night. There were more movies, however, that felt like business as usual, and business isn't what it used to be.

All of which begs the questions: Whither Sundance, and whither the American independent movie? In some senses, the festival returned to its roots this year. Hollywood star vehicles like the Richard Gere police drama "Brooklyn's Finest" and "I Love You Phillip Morris" (Jim Carrey playing a true-life gay con man as if he were Ace Ventura) were derisively received, while offbeat items like "Push" and the truly bizarre "The Immaculate Conception of Little Dizzle" (man gives birth to fish) prompted excitement and head-scratching. If you were seeking Big, you were disappointed. If you cherished the small, there were rewards.

Still, no film became the film - the one you just had to see at Sundance - even as, ironically, last year's festival was vindicated on Thursday when the 2008 entry "The Visitor" and Grand Jury Prize winner "Frozen River" received acting nominations from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.By far the festival's most galvanizing onscreen moment was the inauguration of President Obama. On Tuesday morning, crowds clustered around TV sets; deals and panels came to a halt, and the screening rooms of Park City were mostly empty. How could mere movies compete with a reality this historically and emotionally resonant?

By contrast, the coming-of-age comedy-drama - a genre pioneered and perfected at this festival - is showing its age, and if you're looking for what ails Sundance, Greg Mottola's "Adventureland" offered dispiriting evidence. Based on the filmmaker's college years and set at a tatty amusement park, the film is amusingly written and has the necessary hip oldies on the soundtrack, yet it says nothing that dozens of previous coming-of-age movies haven't already told us.

At least "An Education," a glossy drama set in 1961 London that won the World Cinema Audience Award for Drama, introduced a new and buzzed-about star in the thoroughly charming person of 23-year-old Carey Mulligan. The British actress also appeared in the death-in-the-family drama "The Greatest", while "You Won't Miss Me," starring Stella Schnabel (daughter of painter/director Julian) and France's "Unmade Beds" spun grittier, less easily resolved, and more satisfying variations on the coming-of-age formula.

And, as usual, the documentaries were superb. Year in and year out, Sundance's nonfiction offerings are richer, truer, and more provocative than the narrative features, and a strong 2009 slate of environmentally minded documentaries like "Crude" (Amazon Basin damage), "The Cove" (dolphin depredation), and "Dirt: The Movie" (what it says) was balanced by other sharp observations. "Afghan Star," an unexpectedly touching look at a war-torn country potentially transformed by an "American Idol"-style TV show, was one of the few Sundance films this year that drew cheers from its audiences - and, on Saturday night, an Audience Award for World Documentary.

Yet the question hung there in the blue Park City skies: How do you sell a movie like "Afghan Star" or "The Immaculate Conception of Little Dizzle" in a hard new world? The festival's most crowded industry panel was not coincidentally called "The Panic Button," in which seven of the specialty film business's leading lights - including Soderbergh - argued over where it was all going.

Sony Classics copresident Michael Barker insisted that "There are silver linings here," citing "Frozen River" as proof that the process works. Focus Features head James Schamus, taunted by moderator Geoffrey Gilmore as "the fool that bought 'Hamlet 2,' " grinned, took it, and said, "If [the movie] came along this year, I'd do it again."

Yet there was a growing realization not only that the rules have changed but that they may not have been very good rules in the first place.

Everyone agrees that the standard models of indie theatrical distribution and exhibition are broken; everyone at Sundance and in the industry is grappling with how best to replace them.

Some are even sure they have answers. Consultant and panelist Peter Broderick touted a brave new world of "hybrid distribution," controlled directly by the filmmaker that combines website direct sales, video on demand, Internet and TV deals, cellphone distribution - and, yes, a theatrical release when and if necessary. Much of this is already in place, Broderick pointed out, and, in some cases, has proven successful. What look like microprofits to a studio can be extremely macro to an independent director.

The most unsettling thought, though - the real game-changer - is that the movie theater audience may have gone away for good. Said panelist Mark Gill, head of the independent production company the Film Department, "My son doesn't care what format [a movie] comes in. He cares how fast he can get it and if it can come to where he is."

That may be the hardest lesson to take in at the close of Sundance 2009: That everything learned in the past quarter-century means absolutely nothing going forward.

Ty Burr can be reached at tburr@globe.com. For more on movies, go to www.boston.com/movies.com.

 By Anjana Pasricha
New Delhi
17 January 2009
   
Hollywood studio Warner Brothers has made its first foray into film production in India with the release of a Hindi film, Chandni Chowk to China. Several big Hollywood studios are investing in India to tap the huge movie business in the country. The Hindi film Chandni Chowk to China, which was released Friday in nearly 30 countries, is the story of a simple, bumbling cook living in the crowded alleys of Delhi who is mistaken for the reincarnation of a Chinese warrior.The story is quintessentially Bollywood - the name popularly used for the Hindi film industry based in Mumbai.

The film is packed with breathtaking action, spectacular locations, bouts of laughter and heart stirring emotions which appeal to Indian audiences. It has a cast of top Bollywood stars.But there is a difference. It is the first Hindi film co-produced by Hollywood studio, Warner Brothers.Warner Brothers is among several Hollywood studios which have begun entering into joint ventures with Indian production houses.They are eyeing the huge movie audiences in a country of over one billion people, where watching Bollywood films is a passion which transcends its ethnic and linguistic divide. One of the producers of Chandni Chowk to China, Rohan Sippy, says India represents one of the world's big movie markets.   

"This is the one market which is a successful cinema market in the world, so they would obviously like to be a part of it," he said. "We have got a great cinema culture, we have loyal audiences, and great filmmakers of many, many years, it is such a prominent part of our culture, it is very healthy and vibrant, and hopefully will sustain for a long time to come."Hindi films do good business not just in India. They are also popular in other Asian countries, and with Indians living overseas.From left to right, actress Deepika Padukone, Warner Bros. President Alan Horn, and actor Akshay Kumar arrive at a screening of 'Chandni Chowk To China' in Burbank, California, 7 Jan. 2009From left to right, actress Deepika Padukone, Warner Bros. President Alan Horn, and actor Akshay Kumar arrive at a screening of 'Chandni Chowk To China' in Burbank, California, 7 Jan. 2009Warner Brothers plans to produce six more Hindi films in the next few years. Like Chandni Chowk to China, these films will be based on Indian stories, and be locally produced.

Film producer, Rohan Sippy, says it is important that the films appeal to an Indian audience. "Most important whoever is working on it, we must satisfy an Indian audience first, that is always the priority when we are making Hindi films, and then if we can extend that beyond to new markets that expand, that's wonderful," he said.For Hollywood studios the investment in India is relatively small. Bollywood productions are modest by Hollywood standards - the $15 million budget of Chandni Chowk to China is considered lavish in India.Warner Brothers is not the only Hollywood studio to invest in India. Sony Pictures, Walt Disney, and Paramount Pictures are also collaborating in film production in India.

This is very cool. Recently saw a blog sharing the true story of making the film Dream Awake. Check out the below the lessons learned through the process.

Looking forward and backward at the same time ...

Guess it's that time of year once again, resolutions and all that?  I'll certainly toss out a few here, but more importantly I'd also like to throw out what I'd do different when I shoot my next film.  In other words, what lessons did I truly learn from this one?  Now some of us might call this listing our regrets, but I prefer taking that in a more positive stride.  I mean, aren't we all here to learn, life being quite a demanding school and all that? ...

Lessons Learned
(I'm sure there are more)

1) Hire the 1st AD sooner -- Scheduling a low budget indie and then logistically pulling it off is paramount in the low budget realm.  A good 1st AD is essential to making that happen.  We had him, but he came aboard awful late in prep.  That did handcuff us some, but it wasn't deadly.  However, next time that will be higher on my priority list ...

2) Hire an editor for the shoot -- I now see the logic of that.  Having someone doing a rough cut when we were shooting certainly would have helped, not only to see what we had but to insure that we go after what we didn't ...

3) Hire a publicist before, during and after the shoot -- Is there such a thing as too much publicity?  For indies like us I doubt it, but when it's very minimal you're starting out of the gate behind the curve.  We didn't hit this one right ...

4) Hire someone to really control the budget -- Since we didn't do #1 on cue, that put us behind the momentum of the shoot in keeping track of cash, cash flow and cash reserves.  Having someone experienced and aware of this should help close that gap ...

5) Be more competent -- This one I direct directly at me, being the director and all, and everything else I was, or still am.  As a perfectionist at heart, I was sometimes disheartened at how thin I had to spread myself out.  I knew sometimes I had to set certain priorities of the moment and let other things drop by the wayside, always hoping others could pick up the slack.  Sometimes that happened, sometimes not.  But no matter what, I was (am) always responsible in the end ...

6) Fewer challenging locations -- Yeah, let's go film a feature on a high mountain and bring up a lot of people and equipment where no motorized vehicles can go.  And then let's do it in the heat of the summer and go where there are no facilities for everyone.  And let's do it all low budget under the regulations of the federal government and local Native American tribes.  Right ...

7) More prep time -- Don't we always want this luxury?  Yeah, but I only want a couple more days. Just a couple more, can't I?  It may seem that upfront more prep time will add to the budget, but properly managed more prep time can certainly save you time (and money) on the back end ...

8) Less post time -- This is only so because ours has gone on longer than normal, and certainly longer than was ever intended.  If we had done things normally, this probably wouldn't be here.  Anyway, next time we will have a real Post Supervisor, as I've shockingly realized this is not my forte ...

9) More $$$$$ -- Ha, no brainer, huh?  Cash dough, we can always stand to swim with more.  The trick is taking those extra dollars and stretching them out better than before, since this is where the rubber will always meet the road.  Good luck doing that in this economy.  You may have to hit up that rich eccentric Uncle, or learn to count cards in Vegas ...

10) Less hats to wear -- As a low budget indie filmmaker this is usually difficult to avoid.  But, please forget about the romance of being a filmmaker, because just being in love with the idea of being a filmmaker can never sustain you when you have to actually do the hard work.  On the other side of that coin, when those hard realities do set in, don't try and to do it all.  You may harm the project beyond what you can repair.  In other words, get out of the way of your ego and don't fall in love with yourself ...

11) Relax & have more fun -- At the heart of it all.  Always keep your vision and grow with it, but let go, relax and have fun within it.  There were times I got so caught up in the frenzied moment that I didn't savor it enough before it passed.  Each day slow it down a bit and take it all in, because who knows, you may never get to make another film again ...

Have a film you want to make? Go independent. See the two most recent casualties
within the major movie film system which as we know it is over:

Item 1:Spielberg caught in the 'Jaws' of credit squeeze
By Guy Adams

He is impossibly rich, uniquely powerful and boasts a copper-bottomed CV that includes dozens of the most influential blockbusters of modern times. But even Steven Spielberg's career is stalling in the face of the global credit crunch. The legendary movie mogul, who recently "divorced" Paramount Pictures to turn his production firm, DreamWorks, into an independent company, finds himself struggling to raise enough money to get his ambitious new project off the ground. Ironically, given his unrivalled reputation for producing some of the most lucrative films ever made, such as 'Jaws', 'ET', and the Indiana Jones series, Spielberg seems unable to raise $750m(€525m) of the $1.2bn (€841m) needed to underwrite DreamWorks' forthcoming movie productions.

Collapse

Spielberg's problems date back to October, when an Indian company, Reliance Big Entertainment, agreed to put up $500m (€350m) to take his company independent, provided he could raise an additional $750m in loans to finance a total of 17 proposed films over the next seven years. But the collapse of AIG, which was due to provide a portion of the cash, and the tightening of credit markets left Spielberg unable to secure the cash and his bankers, JP Morgan, have delayed efforts to raise more money until the New Year. The Hollywood newspaper 'Variety' carried a front-page report that the company's cashflow problems had left an important distribution deal with Universal Pictures "in jeopardy". Its report noted that Spielberg's firm is being forced to "limp along" on $75m (€53m) in bridge financing and must find another $20m (€14m) by mid-January to compensate Paramount Pictures for its departure.


Item 2:

Disney Dumps Narnia
by Monika Bartyzel Dec 24th 2008 // 8:02AM

Can you imagine a world where The Chronicles of Narnia only made it through two installments? Can you imagine no Dawn Treader, or Silver Chairs, or Horses, or Nephews, or The Last Battle? It's come to be, at least where Disney and Walden Media are concerned. The Hollywood Reporter posts that the companies have chosen to not co-produce and finance the next Narnia installment (The Voyage of the Dawn Treader), citing "budgetary and logistical reasons." (And also declining to elaborate on these reasons.)

The plan was to get the film in production soon, to be released in May of 2010. But without a company and deep pockets to finance the fantasy, there's a decent chance that this will all go up in smoke. The key cast were attached to the third installment, but there's no telling if they'll wait around for a new bank. However, Walden does plan to shop the film around in hopes of finding someone willing to fork over the money. I imagine that it will be a pretty hard sell -- the second only pulled in close to half what The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe pulled in, so it's far from a sure bet, box office-wise.