LOS ANGELES — The Walt Disney Company agreed late Thursday to sell Miramax Films to an investor group for about $660 million, but the art film unit will not be out of Disney’s hair for another year.

In selling Miramax to a group that includes the construction executive Ronald N. Tutor, Disney agreed to distribute films from the studio and its library for as long as a year, said people who had been briefed on the deal and spoke on condition of anonymity to keep from disrupting it.

The distribution agreement promises to shore up the Tutor group as it completes financing arrangements — which include equity and bank debt — for a purchase that is priced considerably higher than other bidders were willing to pay.

Potential buyers as highly motivated as Bob and Harvey Weinstein — the brothers who founded Miramax three decades ago and sold it to Disney in 1993 — for months had argued that Miramax and its 700-film library, which includes “Chicago” and “No Country for Old Men,” was worth less than $600 million in the face of steadily falling home video revenue.

Neither Mr. Tutor nor Thomas J. Barrack Jr., the chief executive of Colony Capital, which joined Mr. Tutor in the purchase, responded to queries on Friday.

But one person who was briefed on the transaction said the group was relying on $50 million in cash that would come with Miramax and receivables valued at slightly less than half the purchase price. The price is about four times the company’s annual cash flow.

Disney said the transaction, which must comply with federal antitrust regulations, was expected to close between Sept. 10 and Dec. 31.

“Our current strategy for Walt Disney Studios is to focus on the development of great motion pictures under the Disney, Pixar and Marvel brands,” Disney’s chief executive, Robert A. Iger, said in a statement.

Mr. Tutor, who is the chief executive of the Tutor Perini Corporation, Mr. Barrack and their backers bought Miramax through a company called Filmyard Holdings.

A spokeswoman for Colony declined on Friday to say whether the buyers intended to restart Miramax as an operating studio — a daunting, expensive task when small film companies like Overture Films, Apparition and Senator Entertainment have struggled or folded.

Ron Burkle, an investor and supermarket executive, had been allied with the Weinsteins in their bid, which once led in a process that has gone on for months. Many potential buyers have kicked the tires, then walked away. The Burkle-Weinstein group had offered about $565 million.

As much as $150 million of the Miramax unit’s value, according to one person who was briefed on the transaction but asked for anonymity because the talks were private, remains tied to film franchises, including the “Spy Kids,” in which the Weinstein brothers have rights.

It was unclear how Mr. Tutor’s group planned to deal with the Weinstein presence, given the brothers’ chagrin at not having prevailed in the bidding. A spokeswoman for the Weinsteins did not respond to queries as to whether they planned to act to protect their stake in Miramax as the Tutor deal closes.

Miramax virtually created the art house boom in the 1990s by turning offbeat, inexpensive movies into mainstream hits. In recent years, as the economics of independent films shifted Miramax declined until Disney virtually shuttered it last fall.

On Monday, the UK Film Council – the body set up in 2000 to distribute funds to British movie projects – became the most high-profile victim in a cull of cultural bodies by the coalition government. What does the decision mean for the independent filmmakers of these rain-soaked isles? Reaction follows from some of the directors whose movies have been showcased on Indie.
For those resident in the UK, the word 'cuts' features heavily in the contemporary lexicon. Public spending is being shorn as drastically as the hair of all those recruits in the Full Metal Jacket title sequence, and if most laypeople are honest, the debate about what we should cut, when we should cut, how much we should cut and whether we even need to cut a great deal at all is as impenetrable to them as the cordon of security protecting the Google algorithm.

For months, media outlets have been colonised by folks from both ends of the political spectrum and all the space in between, as they have laid out their lengthy, seemingly well-informed arguments as to why every course of action aside from the precise one they are advocating will result in the economy collapsing like a house of cards in a hurricane, us all losing our jobs and homes, and everyone being forced to go and live in one giant rabbit warren, where there's only one TV, and it's not HD. Not even HD-ready.
What isn't open to a great deal of debate is that the 10-week-old Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government are going to be making some mammoth reductions even to what are considered the core areas of public spending (schools, policing), so consequently those departments more on the periphery are really in for a walloping. And so it proved on Monday, when the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (the DCMS to its friends, of which it now has substantially fewer) announced, amongst other measures, that the UK Film Council was to be taken outside the metaphorical barn and given two shotgun barrels to the back of the skull.

A statement on the DCMS website reads, 'Jeremy Hunt, the Culture Secretary, has proposed a number of changes, including, abolishing the UK Film Council and establishing a direct and less bureaucratic relationship with the British Film Institute; this would support front-line services while ensuring greater value for money – Government and Lottery support for film will continue.' Hunt himself is quoted as saying, “The changes I have proposed today would help us deliver fantastic culture, media and sport, while ensuring value for money for the public and transparency about where the taxpayers' money is spent.” But then he would say that, wouldn't he?

The DCMS statement's reference to the British Film Institute offers succour to that body, which – according to a Deadline piece from January by Tim Adler – had been looking likely to come off the worse in the merger between it and the UK Film Council which had been demanded by the previous, Labour, government. Despite reputed resistance, the BFI seemed more likely to be subsumed by the UKFC than the other way round, and a further blow was dealt to the former in early June when it was announced that its flagship project - a £166m brand new film centre on London's South Bank, due to open in 2015 – was being delayed.

Written by Michael P. Connelly (and reposted here for educational purposes only)!

A creative mind is a low budget filmmaker’s most valuable tool. It all starts with an original thought; from there it is all about nurturing that thought until it grows to be a brilliant idea. After that it is a matter of getting that idea made into a movie using every ounce of energy and resources you can possibly muster up.

Most of the successful films that are showing at film festivals these days are movies that were made at a fraction of the cost that it takes to make a major Hollywood studio film. Advances in technology have made it so that just about anyone can make a movie. Film cameras, video cameras, sound recording equipment, and just about any other kind of equipment that one needs to make a movie can be purchased at very affordable prices these days. The equipment that is available these days can provide a very low budget movie with a production value that looks like James Cameron had something to do with the project. This professional look coupled with a unique story can help any film’s chances at being accepted into film festivals like Houston Worldfest, Cannes, Toronto Film Festival, Sundance Film Festival, etc…

Try as they might, the major Hollywood film studios will never have a monopoly on creativity. They spend millions of dollars on marketing research in an effort to figure out just what it is that the film-going audiences of the world look for when they go to the movies. Despite all of this effort, they still have not come up with a formula. The tastes of people who go to the movies are as hard to predict as an earthquake is, for the pattern changes all the time. Because of this fact, the door is left wide open for the creative types of the world to enter the game. All they need to do is come up with a unique idea that they can transform into a movie, enter their film in festivals like Sundance and then let the judges decide. While the big studios have tried to take over the film festival circuit in recent years, it is still the little guys with the small, yet creative films that are King in that realm.

It does not cost as much as you would think to make a movie that can be entered in contests like the Sundance Film Festival. Sony is about to release a line of High Definition camcorders that are perfect for anyone who wants to make movies on a shoestring budget. While movies made with these cameras will not be shot on “film” (like movies have been since the beginning), they will (almost) look like they were. These new cameras will be able to give a high quality image that is comparable to the image that film provides. The two camcorders are the PDW-F330 and the PDW-F350, and they offer all sorts of film production features that even the most film-loyal professional filmmaker must respect. Both cameras offer true 24P recording in both SD and HD, interval recording, and slow shutter recording to name a few. The F350 model also offers true variable frame rate recording capabilities which are also referred to as the “slow motion/fast motion” features. Features like these are very valuable to anyone making a low budget movie for it allows them to include motion effects in their films without the use of an expensive film camera or a high priced film lab. Both of these cameras will be on the market in March of 2006. The F350 will cost about twenty five thousand, while the F330 model will only cost about sixteen thousand dollars. A PDW-F30 deck will be available in June for about nine thousand. These are small prices to pay to be a self-sufficient independent filmmaker.

A low budget filmmaker can invest in a relatively low-cost HD camcorder and deck and have everything they need to make as many movies as their mind and body can crank out. All they will need after that is a creative mind, a few thousand dollars, a few ambitious friends for their actors and crew, some script writing software like Final Draft, and an iron resolve to make a movie. They do not have to worry about the high costs of film stock, film processing, or film-to-DVD transfers. All they will need is their camera and a $30 disc (23.3GB) and they will be set to film an entire movie. Buying discs for a camera is a lot cheaper than buying film and all the financial baggage that comes with it.

Once they shoot their movie with one of these cameras, a low budget filmmaker can go right to their computer with the disc and start editing it using one of the many affordable editing programs that are available these days such as Final Cut Pro. They can do all of the post production work for their movie on their home computer, as long as they are willing to shoulder a mother load of work responsibilities.

Technology has allowed independent filmmakers to bypass many expensive steps in the filmmaking process. Instead of paying a bunch of people hundreds of dollars an hour for film services that are only available in cities like Hollywood and New York, they can now do all of these steps in the comfort of their own home on their own computer.

For anyone who has ever had a dream of making their own movie, there is no better time than now to make it happen. The playing field has been leveled in terms of technology, but you still need a creative story to get anywhere on the film festival circuit. The affordable equipment can get you on the field, but you must bring a good game to win. A creative mind is your best player in this game, so if you have that part taken care of you are halfway to making your film vision a reality. Nurture your creative idea until it becomes a unique script and then dedicate your life to making this script into a movie. If your idea is as good as you think it is you will do quite well on the film festival circuit. If this happens it could lead to a decent distribution deal for your movie. If you stick with it and continue to make films you may even find that you have made yourself a career as a professional artist who makes independent films, and that dreams really can become reality.

Usually I am asked on a regular basis about motion picture soundtracks and the role that they play in getting your independent film completed. Recently I spotted this article from an independent filmmaker Sid Kali. Check out what he has to say about getting your music done. Our team went through a similar process to secure the music for Real N' Raw. In our csae, the key was linking the film to a charitable trust, Fruit For Our Children.


A majority of indie filmmakers, myself included, do not have the flush production budgets to hire a well known music supervisor or professional composer to score their movie. Let alone can we afford to license or pay royalties to top musicians to use their songs or tracks on the soundtrack. I had produced a urban action movie, Consignment, that had a very limited amount of money to spend on music. Turns out after some additional post-production expenses I had even less than expected.

Movies need music. There really is no way to argue against it. Good music adds impact, emotion, and mood to a film. Tartantino has made amazing use of music in his films. Many viewers have commented that the music is like a character itself.

I was faced with the choices of putting the completion of Consignment on hold indefinitely until more money could be raised for the soundtrack or trying to find quality music that I could get for free or as close to free as possible. Not wanting to put the movie on hold I set out to shake some trees for music that moved me. It was a gamble I hoped would work.

I checked out some companies on the internet selling royalty free music in all types of genres from rock & roll to world beat for very affordable prices. Type 'royalty free music' into a search engine to listen and shop around. I listened to tons of sample tracks. Most didn't fit the feel of the urban action movie Consignment. A few tracks I did like were out my budget.

A cool thing I did discover is there are some filmmaker friendly sites that will allow you to download free original music to use in your movie. All they ask is that you properly credit the creators behind the music. Sonny Boo offers this on his website. I did not end up using the free downloads, but I think it's good karma they put it out there.

The anxiety and stress of not finding the right music was becoming a mental drain. Nothing worse than the thought of your movie not getting done. I decided to try a different approach to getting the soundtrack squared away. I was going to contact independent bands, artists, and musicians directly with the chance to get exposure on a independent films soundtrack. Indie artists from the music and movie arena collaborating sounded like a win-win.
There's many places to find independent artists and record labels looking to get their music heard. What better way than to be featured on a movie soundtrack? I religiously set aside hours everyday to listen to music from up and coming artists. After I had a narrowed down list of the tracks I wanted to use on Consignment I tracked down these artists and record labels contact information.

My independent music campaign was launched. I emailed, phoned, and faxed my pitch to the people on my list. I was excited about adding music I believed would add tremendously to the overall viewing experience of the movie. It was a tougher sell than I thought to get independent artists and record labels to contribute to an indie movie soundtrack.

My pitch was truthful about only offering credit for their music. My advice is not to BS people. Be upfront. I let them know this was a indie movie without big names or a Hollywood budget.

Here's the rundown of how it played out for me using this approach. I was able to land the music of two artists I felt was perfect. Another artist was interested, but was honest enough to voice their concerns about not knowing how the movie would look when it was done and decided not to contribute to the soundtrack. After Consignment was done I sent them a DVD. They liked it and agreed to compose an original track for my next movie for free.

Most of the record labels ignored my requests or said no money meant no go. I respect that. One record label representative took the time to speak with me at length and made a point that stuck with me. He basically said until you have a name or a movie you've done to show your work people will be skeptical about lending their music to your indie movie. There not against cross-promotion and exposure. There against being associated with terrible movie and bad exposure. That made a lot of sense.

With a few tracks secured that I liked I decided to go directly to the people to find the rest of the music. Consignment being a urban action movie I wanted some hot hip hop tracks. I started hitting websites that had hip hop forums where people could list links to their demos, post beats, and battle other hip hop artists. I posted open calls for artists to submit their tracks for an urban movie.

I got a huge response, but it was chaotic dealing with the amount of tracks that came in. Plus their were obvious copyright infringements and looping done by some contributers. Last thing you want is music on your movie that causes legal problems for your movies release when you sign on with a distributor. I wasn't making a bootleg underground movie to sell out of the trunk of my car. I was going for mainstream rental and retail outlets. I took the time to get all the releases, clearances, and paper work on the movie. I was going to do the same for the music.

After seeing my post I was contacted by the fellas at Jackin4Beats.Com about helping me out. They streamlined and organized the submission process. They posted calls for music on their website for free. Their efforts increased the quality of the submissions ten fold. They only forwarded me tracks that were free and clear to use on the soundtrack with no legal worries. All music clearance forms were signed on the dotted line.

The buzz was there. Next a rising independent music label specializing in West Coast hip hop wanted to be on the soundtrack. They headed into the studio with the synopsis of the movie and cut an original track with the same name as the movie. This song brought and hit hard. I used it on the opening and closing credits of the film. Then I got some tracks from some emerging East Coast rappers with a latin edge that put the soundtrack over the top. These talented artists music rounded out the soundtrack. They understood it's about exposure.

I wanted to touch on my experience and they way I got the movie soundtrack done. There's a lot of avenues for you to land the right music for your movie. Obviously the more money the more choices, but money doesn't have to cut you at the knees making you put bad music on your movie.

There's talented artists and upstart record labels in the same boat as you grinding it out to make in the entertainment business. Everyone is looking for a break. Sometimes you can get it together to make it work and sometimes you can't. Just keep fighting to get what you want. Never settle for music you hate for the sake of completing your movie. You will regret the end product. It won't be easy to secure music you love, but isn't your movie worth the effort? You're damn right it is.

About The Author:

Slice of Americana Films was launched in 2005 by Sid Kali to produce red-hot urban movies that are gritty, intense and fiercely genuine in the portrayal of strong subject matters. In 2006-2007 Slice of Americana Films completed the powerful urban drama CONSIGNMENT and stylish crime thriller IN WITH THIEVES.