Making Films Your Business- by Kirby Ashley

The definition de rigueur off independent film is something
called "final cut." That's insider baseball for the unfettered
ability to decide what ends up on the screen at theatres. As a rule,
distributors retain "final cut" on films they acquire or produce.
Most video and DVD aficionado's have heard of something called "the
director's cut" that's the film that never got released in theatres
because the distributor demanded changes for the theatrical run.
Most "independent films" acquired at festivals are re-shot, re-edited
or re-something or other before final theatrical release.

My Webster's unabridged dictionary defines independent as "not
subject to control by others: not subordinate." Since most so-
called "independent films" are constrained to alter their original
vision for the piece in order to secure distribution, "independence"
is virtually a misnomer. In her book "Shoot to Kill" the legendary
Christine Vachon, producer of such independent classics as "Velvet
Goldmine," "Happiness" and "Boys Don't Cry", makes several opaque
references to this fact. John Pierson in "Spike, Mike, Slackers and
Dikes," gives much more detailed descriptions of the battle between
the filmmakers vision and the distributors money. As Christine Vachon
explains, in the end the distributors are the one's footing the bill.

Film Festivals are affirmative action programs for economically
challenged filmmakers. They attempt to level the playing field for
filmmakers who lack the money or means to otherwise get their films
seen by audiences. As affirmative action programs, they tend to be
mired in the same kinds of problems seen with affirmative action
generally, problems of definition, standards, criteria etc. As Chris
Read pointed out in the previous issue of SAonline, many of the
criteria coming out of the mouths of festival heads, barely pass the
laugh test. Still, it must be painful for a festival chairperson to
acknowledge that George Lucas is more independent than most so-
called "independent" filmmakers.

According to Sidney Lumet in his book "Making Movies", it takes three
consecutive box office hits to negotiate "final cut" into the
distribution deal. Loosely defined, a box office hit is a film whose
domestic gross exceeds 100 million dollars. One of these will likely
qualify you as an "A-list" director. Which means that if you send a
script out to top agents, studios or actors, they'll read it and get
back to you promptly. The only other way to achieve independence is
to raise the money to make your film outside the U.S. This is the
route taken by the likes of Jim Jarmuch, John Sayles and even Stanley
Kubrick who's domestic distribution deal required only that his films
obtain a "R" rating.

I remember watching the "director's cut" of David aronofsky's "Requiem
for a Dream" and thinking to myself, "Christ, I could barely tell the
difference." I calculated that the total footage the distributor
objected to was less than thirty seconds in length, a few explicitly
sexual shots, that was it. Todd Solondz ran into a similar problem on
his most recent film "Storytelling" and according to celebrated
independent producer Ira Deutchman "he caved."

All this points to the difficulty of attempts to define independent
films as films financed outside the studio system, with unknown
actors, telling personal and unique stories. It's virtually
mpossible to make an independent film, since sooner or later the film
will come under the influence of the man with the money in his hand
(i.e. the distributor). This doesn't require us to abandon our belief
in independent film. Nor is the defense of independent film pure
snobbery, even if it seems that way sometimes. It merely acknowledges
that the goal of the truly independent filmmaker is to achieve "final
cut" in the distribution deal. Whatever concessions must be made
along the way, we must never lose sight of the ultimate goal; total
control over our art. That's the independent spirit.

*********************************

Kirby Ashley is a upcoming film-maker that has forecasted her talent
through her 2001 project Faithless, which has already graced the
winning stage at various events which recognize indie talent. The
movie has recieved standing ovations and raved reviews.

YOU CAN RECIEVE INSIDE INDIE FILM TIPS AND ARTICLES LIKE THIS TO YOUR
EMAIL BOX BI-MONTHLY FOR FREE! SUBSCRIBE TO CULTURE SHOCKER!

Simply email cultureshocker@... (no message needed) or visit
http://www.sexyamerica.net/cultureshocker.html