A fest reacts to IFC/SXSW plans
IFC and SXSW announced they'll simul-preem Joe Swanberg's new film, "Alexander the Last," at the fest and on video-on-demand. IFC hopes the fest will bump sales, and SXSW hopes the channel will bump the fest. It's good news for filmmakers who want to capitalize on their festival preem.
But Tom Hall, who runs the Sarasota Film Festival, has some issues. And in my discussions with other fest directors, he's not alone.
Post-premiere festival screenings become the word of mouth/ marketing tool to drive business to VOD sales for films already sitting on the cable box (instead of, say, driving VOD sales for a film soon to be released on the cable box).SXSW's Janet Pierson with Joe Swanberg at the press conference. Photo by Tom Hall.
In some ways, this is a role festivals are comfortable playing (it echoes the traditional word of mouth function for upcoming theatrical releases), but it also represents an inherent tension for festivals who would now be showing a film in direct competition with an existing release in their own market.
And what if that local cable company is a sponsor of the festival? Now you’re directly competing with a sponsor’s revenue stream.
Michael Jones is the film festival editor at Variety.com. 
Does the big screen count for anything anymore? Or is the 3 inch iPhone screen good enough? If so, film festivals should count their days. (Don''t even get me started on the soundtrack issue)
Posted by: King | 1/22/2009 7:57:09 PM
Joe is an acquaintance of mine, so good for him - thank you to Jones for correcting the spelling of his name.
That said, I share Tom''''s concerns. If you were a fest-goer and had paid a couple hundred bucks for a pass, what are you going to choose if you have six films to choose from? One you can see on TV later, or one that you either might not be able to see again, or at least not for a few months?
I think this is a highly flawed model and is one that will NOT work for film festivals.
Ticket sales are still a vital part of the revenue stream. I would not program something that is available cheaper and at home for my best customers.
Posted by: Brian O | 1/22/2009 7:30:43 PM
Thanks. Corrected. Apologies.
Posted by: Jones | 1/22/2009 2:46:48 PM
swanberg. swa-n-berg. you got it wrong here. you got it wrong in the regular variety article too.
Posted by: soapey | 1/22/2009 2:12:13 PM