The Circuit

For filmmakers traveling the circuit – sometimes for a few years, attending dozens of festivals with a single film – the outcome in this process is now foggier than ever.

In the old days, filmmakers could build anticipation for an eventual theatrical run, or for the eventual DVD release, garnering kudos along the way. Film festivals served a specific curatorial function, elevating work worthy of special attention. Hopefully, sales agents and distributors would take notice, and this work would move into actual theatrical distribution, transitioning from a cycle of cultural celebration to commercial redemption.

No longer.

Nowadays, the majority of filmmakers – with or without sales agents – will see their films on the big screen only at film festivals. Film festivals have largely become the theatrical distribution platform for most independent films. But it’s never long before lucky filmmakers, gratified to be receiving dozens of festival invitations across a span of several months, start to gripe about the cost of servicing these engagements – shipping, promotional materials, time spent coordinating prints and schedules – it adds up.

Not surprisingly, film festivals are reluctant to take the lead on this issue. Many sales agents, indifferent to whether or not their film is accepted into any but a handful of major international festivals (read: the ones where the buyers are), are now asking for screening fees of $1,000 or more from most fests, if the chances for a US theatrical pick-up have dimmed.

Reactions from film festivals range from careful consideration to mild disgust. Some festivals feel their prestige precedes the demand for screening fees; many simply couldn’t afford it, or both. Film festivals are cultural events, their budgets tight, and new expenses, regardless of merit, are met with reluctance.

Nevertheless, sales agents are deluged with literally hundreds of film festival invitations and see screening fees as the only way to at least covering the costs associated with honoring them. This stop-gap situation is really just that: sales agents trying to find a way to make it work for fests, and indifferent if it doesn’t.

More and more, film festivals are populating their schedules less with the latest work from the more established international film masters (usually represented by sales agents), and more with submissions that have come over the transom. There’s been much speculation on whether this has been a blessing or a bane to the artist and the audience. There’s no doubt that it increases the curatorial responsibility on film festivals, and brings back to the forefront the role of film festivals in discovering new filmmakers. With that comes the welcome added pressure to provide a truly satisfying filmmaker experience, and any festival that’s doing less than constantly thinking about the filmmaker experience will not compete for too long in the crowded festival scene.

The bottom line is that if the theatrical film festival experience – still so desirable to audiences and filmmakers – exists almost solely in the context of film festivals, then a scaleable, economic model which benefits both festivals and filmmakers will eventually emerge. It won’t be long before the waves created by the demise of traditional theatrical distribution will wash over film festivals, changing yet again the way the game is played.

Consider this scenario from the not-too distant future: you scan the trades one morning and learn that a film – say the recently acclaimed work from an international master, fresh from a successful debut in official competition at the Cannes Film Festival – Atom Egoyan, Chen Kaige, Eric Khoo or Jean-Luc and Pierre Dardenne – has been “acquired for film festival distribution.” This film, one of several official selections also represented in the Cannes Market, has seen some brisk territorial theatrical acquisition but once again, the sales agent in question has found no distributor in the United States willing to take on this rewarding but challenging masterpiece.

Meanwhile, shortly after Cannes, the sales agent representing the film receives dozens, perhaps hundreds, of invitations from film festivals around the world, each with an eager built-in audience. In the old days, sales agents would cherry pick what in their estimation was the most practically relevant group of festivals.

In the new “Festival Acquisition” model a sales agent or producer might send a film on a six to ten month tour of sixty to eighty North American film festivals. Absent of commercial venues, if film festivals have become the ad hoc distribution infrastructure for these films - and the film in question might see 250 screenings - then a formal business proposition will emerge, one in which rights holders and film festivals each acknowledge the other’s challenges.

In this proposition, several things could start to happen: smaller and mid-size festivals that have previously been shut out of the possibility of securing quality international fare are suddenly back in the game. Quality goes up and regional U.S. audiences have a shot at seeing new works by the masters. Rights holders request a minimum guarantee versus a % of ticket sales (already nothing new), and festivals must weigh up their screening slots and total number of seats and figure out if the proposition makes economic sense.

It’s possible that ten to twenty films in the festival may be in “festival distribution” status; other films find their way into the festival because filmmakers are happy for the exposure, or distributors are developing word-of-mouth for a picture before the release.

This model encourages rights holders and film festivals to actually go into business with each other, for the sake of getting a great film seen by the audience that wants to see it. Getting hit with a screening fee following a formal invitation does not feel like a business proposition to festivals.

All kinds of variables would factor, including tracking, prints, marketing, publicity and filmmaker travel. It’s pretty obvious that this is more of a call to action than a blueprint, and no one’s claiming to have run the numbers.

But with a coordinated film festival effort, is it possible that many of today’s specialty films could have grossed more over time, cost less to release and been given time to really find and grow its audience?

If an anticipated new film by one of the worlds’ great masters can find another viable avenue within a “film festival distribution” infrastructure – then larger audiences will see the films they care about in the best screening environment; filmmakers will reach their audiences, and quality films will be offered the treasured dignity of being presented theatrically to their most appreciative and devoted adopters.

Christian Gaines (pictured left of helmer Alex Holdridge at AFI FEST) has worked on film festivals for over twenty years. After eight years as Director of Festivals at the American Film Institute, Christian recently joined Withoutabox, a division of IMDb.