The Rise of the Robots

As reported by Jason Torchinsky on Jalopnik, Marci Robin was buying a car when the dealership passed her a piece of paper that gave her pause:

She explains to him:

“The sales guy was handing me paper after paper with a brief explanation of what each one was for, and then he handed me that page — with literally nothing else on it — and just mater-of-factly said, ‘And this one is just to ensure you’re not a robot.’ We both said, ‘Really?’ And I don’t know if he’s just done it so long that it was normal to him now or what, but he was just like, ‘Yep.’

In an another story, Johnny Lieu writing on Mashable asserts that Donald Trump does not write all of those wacky tweets.

He says:

“Some are penned by White House staffers, and according to a Boston Globe report, these tweets are composed with grammatical errors and irregularities, intentionally included to sound like they’re written by Trump. This comes from two sources at the White House who spoke to the newspaper, both of whom said staffers would copy Trump’s expression. That includes the overuse of exclamation points, the capitalization of words for emphasis, fragments, and loosely connected ideas. While grammatical errors are present, staffers reportedly didn’t intentionally misspell words or names.”

So is “The Real Donald Trump” fact or fiction? How can we tell if Trump is truly tweeting?

Luckily Andrew McGill of The Atlantic can tell us which tweets are real and which are “fake tweets.”

In part, he reveals:

“It’s fun to see the words the algorithm found were most helpful in attributing a tweet to Trump or a staffer. Most of them aren’t words at all, but quirks of spelling or punctuation.

“@realDonaldTrump” (Trump/staff ratio = 14 : 1)
Trump was 14 times more likely than a staffer to mention his own Twitter handle, probably because he frequently quotes tweets about himself.

“#” (Trump/staff ratio = 1 : 5)
Staffer Trump uses hashtags all the time, something Android Trump doesn’t bother with much.

“Media” (Trump/staff ratio = 5 : 1)
With a president who is obsessed with news coverage and the “dishonest media,” does this surprise you?

“@foxnews” (Trump/staff ratio = 3:1)
Trump’s preferred cable channel gets a bump in his own tweets.

” “  (Trump/staff ratio = 8 : 1)
The president is also far more likely to include extra spaces in his tweets.”

Follow Trump or Not on Twitter.

My take: I think we’ve crossed a line if humans can’t vouch for humans anymore. Of course, you could also claim humanity crossed that line on November 8, 2016.

NSFW: The Happytime Murders trailer

First reported last month by Bloody Disgusting, an R-rated puppet/live action movie will screen at the end of summer.

The Happytime Murders‘ stars Melissa McCarthy.

(You may need to log into Youtube to watch the trailer.)

From STX, the distributor:

“No Sesame. All Street. THE HAPPYTIME MURDERS is a filthy comedy set in the underbelly of Los Angeles where puppets and humans coexist. Two clashing detectives with a shared secret, one human (Melissa McCarthy) and one puppet, are forced to work together again to solve the brutal murders of the former cast of a beloved classic puppet television show.”

My take: folks in Canada may remember ‘Puppets Who Kill‘ from 15 years ago, which might be the first show with multiple murderous puppets. With the success of R-rated comic book movies, it’s not surprising that puppets also get the adult treatment.

Features shot on iPhones

First there was Tangerine.

Now there’s Unsane.

Director Steven Soderbergh has revealed that he shot almost all of his latest film on an iPhone 7 Plus.

Jay Pharoah says Soderbergh should have used a Samsung.

I believe Sean Baker actually used an iPhone 5S to shoot Tangerine. Here he spills the full beans.

He mentions the Moondog Labs anamorphic adapter lens and the Filmic Pro app.

My take: basically, lack of a suitable camera is no longer an excuse for not filming. But everything else stays the same, starting with a great script and a smart plan.

Projection error traumatizes children

As reported by David Allan-Petale in The Sydney Morning Herald, a trailer for a horror film was shown to a cinema full of families and their children waiting to see Peter Rabbit.

An eyewitness said:

“Very quickly you could tell this was not a kid’s film. Parents were yelling at the projectionist to stop, covering their kids’ eyes and ears. It was dreadful. A few went out to get a staff member but she was overwhelmed and didn’t really know what to do. Some parents fled the cinema with their kids in tow. Eventually a senior staff member came in with a walkie talkie and he shut the screen off. To his credit he apologized and offered us complimentary movie passes to make up for it.”

Watch the trailer:

My take: back in the day, when I was a repertory cinema manager I used to order trailers for upcoming films and play them sight unseen before the nightly films. However, I think all the trailers were made for general audiences. Of course, who can forget The Tale of Peter Rabbit has Mr. McGregor who chases the rabbits with murderous intent, so maybe the horror film trailer is not so far off the mark after all.

CanadaScreens.ca gets CAVCO nod

Once upon a time if you were making films in Canada, you needed to get a theatrical release or a television deal to qualify for production tax credits, as administered by the Canadian Audio Visual Certification Office, or CAVCO.

No more.

Online distribution now qualifies and the newest approved service is CanadaScreens, owned and operated by the First Weekend Club.

Posting your film on CanadaScreens.ca will now trigger tax credits, providing eligible productions with fully refundable tax credits on their qualified labour spend.

First Weekend Club’s executive director, Anita Adams, says:

“This is exciting news for the organization as it puts us in a position to be of much greater service to the Canadian film community, providing them not only with a platform for their Canadian content, but a platform that will enable them to recoup costs through the tax credit program.”

In an email to me she goes on:

“We work directly with whoever holds the digital rights to the content — so we work both with filmmakers and distributors equally. More filmmakers are now choosing to go down the self-distribution route and are reaching out to us directly. In some cases, we may help release these films theatrically by offering promotional services, and then launch their films on our VOD platform. This is a model we quite like actually.”

Please read the CAVCO regulations carefully; I’m not clear if they require a Canadian distributor deal, or if self-distribution qualifies. See Section 30 above.

Here’s the full list of acceptable online services.

My take: this is great news for filmmakers in Canada. Keep up the great work, First Weekend Club!

del Toro and Besson make deals

Two interesting developments in the realm of auteur filmmaking to report today.

Firstly, Adam Epstein writes on Quartzy that Guillermo del Toro is “getting his own film label at Fox Searchlight, the studio where he directed this year’s best picture winner, The Shape of Water.”

As quoted by The Hollywood Reporter, del Toro says:

“For the longest time, I’ve hoped to find an environment in which I can distribute, nurture and produce new voices in smart, inventive genre films and channel my own. In Fox Searchlight, I’ve found a real home for live action production — a partnership based on hard work, understanding of each other and, above all, faith.”

Secondly, Charles Barfield writes on The Playlist that Luc Besson‘s company is in talks to be bought:

“According to French media outlet Capital.fr , EuropaCorp is in advanced talks to be purchased by none other than Netflix. There’s no terms to the agreement, and honestly, the report is very heavily leaning on unnamed sources, but the structure of the deal is clear. EuropaCorp, founded in 2000 by filmmaker Luc Besson and Pierre-Ange Le Pogam, would be purchased by Netflix, with Besson to stay on to oversee the creative side of the company. The goal is to have the deal worked out by the summer.”

My take: once upon a time, this might be considered selling out. Now it’s monetizing your celebrity in exchange for a promise to keep moving in the same direction. It shows just how much money mini-majors and Netflix have to invest in building up their artistic credibility and aligning with like-minded creatives. That’s the short play — the long play is betting on which streaming service will rule them all.

Industry Veteran Brings Blockchain to Hollywood

Dawn C. Chmielewski, writing on Deadline Hollywood, reports that a Blockchain Network is coming to Hollywood.

“Veteran entertainment industry marketer Amorette Jones joined with technologist Matej Boda to build a blockchain-based platform for the film industry. Their new venture, Treeti, would seek to harness the disruptive power of blockchain to create a new way for filmmakers to distribute and monetize their creative projects.”

Amorette Jones has a long history in Hollywood and can claim to have made the first big splash online with marketing for The Blair Witch Project.

Treeti.com is short on details right now. Their promise to creators is:

“Our platform is designed to make it easier to distribute, market, and monetize your content with an engaged global audience. Sophisticated data connects you to fans who are most eager to discover and promote your content.”

My take: I so want this to take off. There is tons of potential in the blockchain. Unfortunately crypto-currencies are giving it a bad name right now.

180 Options Multiply

Get ready for an onslaught of new immersive video cameras.

Youtube launched the VR180 format last year and parent company Google has just partnered with Lenovo to make the world’s simplest point and shoot camera, the Mirage.

180 is the shorthand for VR180, which is the moniker for 3D VR180. The two front-facing lenses approximate your eyes, creating depth.

Lenovo has published the camera’s specs but the biggest drawback I see is the lack of a view screen. It truly is a point and shoot camera, although you could use the onboard WIFI to send the picture to your smartphone for viewing.

David Pierce, writing for Wired, says:

“VR180, like most things in VR right now, is the simple-but-usable version of what will someday be much cooler. It exists for a few reasons: because 360-degree video is actually really complicated to do well, because there aren’t many great ways to watch 360 video, and because even when they do watch super-immersive footage, viewers don’t tend to look around much. With VR180, your camera can look and operate more like a regular point-and-shoot, and viewers get a similarly immersive feel without having to constantly spin around.”

Digital Trends did a review at CES 2018.

You can pre-order the Mirage Camera now from B&H.

There’s also the YI Horizon VR180 coming soon and it includes a view screen, higher resolution and HDMI out, I believe. See Think Media‘s review:

My take: I’m a big fan of 180 and can’t wait to play around with both of these cameras. (Also, I wish the ‘VR’ label would just go away since this technology is not “virtual reality” but basically “reality”. Virtual Reality to me means computer-generated environments; video games are a prime example. 180 is as close as we’re going to come to reality other than actually being there.)

SVOD leaders differentiate themselves

Statista reports on a Hub Entertainment Research release that the leading SVOD platforms have differentiated themselves.

Netflix leads the pack in subscribers and its original shows attract the largest segment of its audience.

Amazon Video on the other hand attracts the largest segment of its audience to movies.

Hulu does neither.

Recode has compared content budgets of streamers and traditional broadcasters. Forbes has compiled viewership numbers.

My take: When you do the math, it appears that Netflix spends the least, per viewer, on original content, and that Hulu spends the most. However, it also appears that all of them are spending more than they earn from those viewers. I wonder how long that’s sustainable.

How to Choose the Best Picture Oscar

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences held the 80th Oscars last Sunday.

The Creature from the Black Lagoon

Guillermo del Toro‘s “The Shape of Water” won Best Picture.

Going in, I thought “Dunkirk” and “Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri” were the front runners, with “Lady Bird” a close third. “Get Out”?

But can the winner be predicted?

Youyou Zhou, writing on Quartzy, offered The Ultimate Statistical Model for Predicting the 2018 Academy Awards Best Picture.

She rated the nine nominations on four scales:

  1. Buzz and fanfare
  2. Prior awards
  3. Money talks
  4. Critic reviews

She then asked the reader to weigh each category to produce a prediction.

Of course, we now know the actual winner, so we can reverse engineer this to gain some insight into what’s important in winning Best Picture.

I played around with the sliders and came up with:

  1. Buzz and fanfare = 15%
  2. Prior awards = 70%
  3. Money talks = 10%
  4. Critic reviews = 22%

I know it adds up to 117% — hey, I didn’t build this.

The biggest predictor was Prior Awards. In fact, “The Shape of Water” wins with all the categories at 25% and Prior Awards at 100%.

This graphic illustrates the favourites on each of the four scales.

My take: This just begs the question, how do you predict the other awards shows?