Indie Film 2.0 Goes Mainstream
Hollywood is finding real value in filmmakers that think like creators
I’ve had a draft of this newsletter in an open tab all week, and haven’t published because the premise seemed too simple and obvious, a bland retelling of several of my other posts: All filmmakers should think like creators.
Then, over the past couple days,
, and at published three great stories that framed the same point at the largest possible scale, and supported it with real data.First, Nicole’s piece about Eli Roth’s new crowd funded studio The Horror Section, tapped into the psychic benefits of making movies driven by a direct connection to the audience - a Freedom Premium, if you will. Roth is using the same platform that Robert Rodriguez and Sam Pressman have used to build their D2C studios — Republic.
Then, Jarvey outlined what we’ve known, but maybe haven’t seen so clearly laid out by the number: The Creator Economy is moving REAL MONEY, and entrepreneurial creators are finding multiple verticals to bring in revenue.
Finally, this piece about Sinners tells the story of the wake-up call that is Ryan Coogler’s megahit that had one of the smallest second week box office dropoffs of ANY film in HISTORY. It’s such a massive, largely unexpected success, that agents are starting to rethink the way they advise clients. And because of the way his deal is structured, a lot of the chatter has been about the relative value of the studio, against that of the once-in-a-generation filmmaker, his original idea, and his execution thereof.
Together, the articles lay the ground work for a larger, more tectonic shift than even the most optimistic of us could have imagined: Films applying creator economy principles to filmmaking – what I've been calling Indie Film 2.0 – is not just for small arthouse movies. It is now taking hold across the industry at all budget levels. As The Ankler put it, "Sinners" ($90M) and viral short "The Crossing Over Express" ($5K) represent "the two poles of where dealmakers see opportunities for original ideas in Hollywood right now." And with that being the case, the value of studio dollars to filmmakers is going to decrease, unless their approach to dealmaking, distribution and marketing dramatically changes.
From Micro-Budget to Mid-Budget Success
Studios and traditional financiers operate with specific accountability structures and time horizons. Increased private equity investment in recent years has only driven these companies more toward the kind of short-term decision making that tends toward minimizing risk. This means shying away from “mid-budget” films that are just expensive enough to upset a balance sheet, and completely abandoning low budget films that would seemingly require a 5x marketing budget. The adjustment has been toward fewer, bigger projects with the largest projected audience — like films that will appeal to teenagers in China, moms in London, and 30-year-old couples in Dallas. You know how to write that movie? You make it very easy to understand with big explosions, sexy people, and/or recognizable brands all over it. Set clear expectations. Deliver. Repeat.
But creator-driven film and tv models, whether through crowdfunding or proof-of-concept projects, offer a different relationship with time and audience. This isn't overnight magic – success is the result of compound interest on audience trust built over many projects and years. And with that long term trust built up, there is a safety to try new things, explore new territory, and challenge expectations. It is an iterative process, one in which the artist is not punished for unsuccessful experimentation, yet is handsomely rewarded for inspired discovery. I’m sure
could create a very simple diagram for this — the longer the relationship, the greater the trust, and the higher the ceiling in success.This confirms what Roth, Rodriguez ($1.5M raised for Brass Knuckle Films) and the Duplass Brothers (independently funding and distributing through Seed&Spark and Kinema) have already discovered: different financing models serve different creative goals, and the freedom to pursue your vision without compromise carries tangible worth. The power of these models comes from consistently engaged communities. How many other filmmakers could create their own crowd-funded empire, built on decades of audience cultivation and trust? Kathryn Bigelow or Alex Garland? Wes Anderson? Tarantino!?!
The Long Game Wins
So far, "Sinners" is the canary in the coal mine, offering "hope that Hollywood will chase a hit and greenlight more mid-budget original features…In today's dynamic environment, a hit creates a waterfall effect and you have to be ready to capitalize on those takeaways." And when agents are advising talent to "stop waiting for someone to give them permission" and instead "start making actual independent films and putting them out in the world themselves," you know something is up — agents know where their bread is buttered, and it is generally not by crowdfunded, user-generated platforms.
The key difference between creator-driven and traditional financing is time horizon. Studio financing demands immediate results, while creator-driven projects build audience relationships that compound over time. Creators are exploring new ways of connecting directly with their audiences, while the major studios are starting to catch up — Peacock just announced four new series developed from creators. The industry is validating what I've been writing about: Creator Economy principles are transforming filmmaking at every level, and the very top of the funnel is starting to take notice.