Save the Pic-a-Flic Video Collection!

SIGN THE PETITION NOW!

Roxanne Egan-Elliott reports in the Times Colonist that Victoria’s Pic-A-Flic Video is closing after 40 years:

Pic-A-Flic Video, one of the last places in Greater Victoria to rent a movie or TV series, plans to close its doors in September after four decades. Opened in 1983, Pic-A-Flic has more than 25,000 titles, from silent movies to new releases, most of which are not available on streaming services or anywhere else, owner Kent Bendall said.”

What to do with all those DVDs?

A change.org petition says: “We cannot allow this collection to be scattered to the winds without having a serious conversation about how it could be permanently housed by UVic and the Greater Victoria Public Library.”

My take: I have a modest proposal! How about the RBCM buy the collection AND hire Kent Bendall to continue operating a video store from Old Town or some other suitable space?

Is Ben Affleck a socialist?

Amos Barshad, writing for WIRED, reports Ben Affleck Has a Plan for a Fairer Streaming World. (Spoilers in trailer below.)

The article is fascinating because it briefly explores Capitalism, Socialism, and fair pay in an economic environment where streaming has vastly reduced the likelihood of residuals.

Of course, Affleck‘s new streaming project, Air, concludes with Michael Jordan becoming the richest athlete ever, due to profit participation. Spoiler: Jordan gets 5% of every pair of Air Jordans sold anywhere in the world. To date, this has amounted to over $1.3 billion.

He quotes Affleck:

“Air, in many ways, is critiquing that aspect of capitalism which historically has been exploitative or patently unfair because it’s rooted in a notion that says, well, if you invest the capital, you get the reward. That needs to change. That’s what I’m trying to accomplish, and that’s what the WGA is trying to accomplish in a much bigger way. If we are going to practice capitalism, which has led to real iniquities, at the very least we ought to recognize the human beings who actually do the work and create a better world. They should be rewarded at least as well as the investors.”

I know of at least three ways cast and crew can share in potential profits:

  1. Shares: own a slice of the production company that owns the project (and all the related corporate drama that might arise)
  2. Deferrals: accept less (or volunteer your efforts) in exchange for a promise of greater pay later when the project makes a profit (if it ever does)
  3. Points: own a percentage of the projects profit, subject to previous payouts in the “waterfall.”

All risky. (The UK seems to have a tax scheme similar to the one Canada used to have that mitigates film investment risk.)

My take: I’ll leave the last words to Ben Affleck: “It’s been the greatest pleasure to see people capture bonuses based on their own work, that reflects their merit — and to not have people feel like anonymous drones. I’ve worked in this business for a long time. I know that anyone who’s really good has put their work before their self-interest as a matter of course. But they want to be empowered.”

Movies: comparing old and new

Benjamin Dzialdowski lists on BuzzFeed 24 Things We Miss About Old Movies, And What We Can’t Stand About Modern Films. He writes:

“A lot has changed in cinema over the years. While, in some aspects, there have been significant steps forwards, there’s plenty people miss about old films and a fair amount of gripes they have about modern films too.”

His List of Pet Peeves:

  1. Movies that are product advertisements
  2. Remake after remake
  3. The use of big names over voice actors
  4. Animal deaths and jump scares in horror movies
  5. Movies being excessively crude just for the sake of being edgy
  6. Unequal marketing for movies
  7. Splitting up a movie into multiple parts
  8. The enemies to lovers trope
  9. Shaky cameras
  10. Barely being able to hear the dialogue
  11. The prequel, sequel, remake cycle
  12. Excessive and pointless vomiting…

What He Says We Miss:

  1. Good ole rom-coms
  2. Hand-drawn animation
  3. Non-spoilery trailers
  4. Old, less fidgety fight scenes
  5. Simple storylines
  6. The lighting (where you could actually see the film)
  7. Intermissions – we all need a break
  8. Practical effects
  9. Good erotic movies
  10. Campy action movies
  11. Joke credits at the end
  12. ???

However, I think these are folks’ top three pet peeves with today’s Hollywood movies:

  1. Lack of originality: Many films are either remakes, sequels, or adaptations of popular books or comics, which can leave audiences feeling like they’ve seen it all before. Some people feel that studios are playing it safe by relying on familiar franchises instead of taking creative risks and developing new ideas.
  2. Overreliance on special effects: While impressive visuals can be exciting, some people feel that they can overshadow the story and characters. Additionally, some people feel that films are becoming too reliant on CGI and other effects, which can make them feel artificial and disconnected from reality.
  3. Lack of diversity and representation: From the lack of roles for people of color to the underrepresentation of women and LGBTQ+ characters, some people feel that Hollywood films are not reflective of the diversity of the real world. This can make it difficult for some people to connect with the characters and storylines, and can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and biases.

And these are the top three things I think folks miss most about movies from Hollywood’s Golden Age:

  1. Glamour and Style: The Golden Age of Hollywood was known for its glamorous stars and stylish films. Audiences were captivated by the fashion, elegance, and sophistication of films from this era, which offered a sense of escapism from the realities of everyday life. Some people miss the glamour and style of this period, as it represented a time of classic Hollywood magic and sophistication.
  2. Storytelling and Character Development: Films from the Golden Age of Hollywood often had well-crafted plots, memorable characters, and witty dialogue that were carefully crafted to engage and entertain audiences. Some people miss the sophistication and complexity of the storytelling from this era, which often provided more depth and substance than modern Hollywood films.
  3. Iconic Stars: Finally, many people miss the iconic stars of the Golden Age of Hollywood. Actors like Humphrey Bogart, Cary Grant, and Marilyn Monroe were larger-than-life figures who embodied a sense of glamour and charisma that is often associated with the era. Some people feel that modern actors lack the same level of star power and charisma as their predecessors, and that Hollywood has lost some of its magic as a result.

My take: my biggest pet peeve is barely being able to hear the dialogue. And I do miss rom-coms.

C-11 passes; future unclear

The CBC reports that Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act, was passed and received royal assent on Thursday, April 27, 2023Controversial bill to regulate online streaming becomes law.

“The bill makes changes to Canada’s Broadcasting Act. The legislation requires streaming services, such as Netflix and Spotify, to pay to support Canadian media content like music and TV shows. It also requires the platforms to promote Canadian content. Specifically, the bill says ‘online undertakings shall clearly promote and recommend Canadian programming, in both official languages as well as in Indigenous languages.’ The changes give the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), Canada’s broadcast regulator, broad powers over digital media companies, including the ability to impose financial penalties for violations of the act. The government says the legislation is necessary to impose the same regulations and requirements in place for traditional broadcasters on online media platforms. Right now, broadcasters are required to spend at least 30 per cent of their revenue on supporting Canadian content.”

The bill doesn’t prescribe how the CRTC should direct undertakings to do this: “But the government is expected to clarify many areas of uncertainty through a policy directive to the CRTC. A Senate amendment that the House of Commons accepted requires the CRTC to hold public consultations on how it will use its new regulatory powers.”

Michael Geist, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, is an outspoken skeptic of the legislation. He speculates that:

“The legislation will head to its next phase including a policy direction consultation that will seek to clean up at least some of the uncertainty in the bill (that Bill C-11 was subject to so much scrutiny yet still leaves so much unanswered is hard to explain), followed by years of CRTC hearings and appeals. Sometime in the future – best guess would be 2025 or 2026 – digital creators will have been forced to make multiple trips to Gatineau to urge a hands-off regulatory approach and the industry will find that the bill generates far less than it expected. Further, those modest benefits will be accompanied by revised Canadian content policies that will leave some doubting whether the trade-off was worth it.”

My take: I worry about the concentration of administrative power in an unelected government-appointed board. And the unintended consequences! For instance, will smaller streamers just forgo Canada if this will increase their operating expenses? Will the definition of Canadian content change so much that the domestic television industry is threatened? Will the government be able to censor Canadian UGC? Cannot predict now.

Vancouver offers alternative to film set generators

CBC British Columbia reports that Vancouver installs electricity ‘kiosks’ to draw film crews away from diesel generators.

“In an effort to lessen the film industry’s dependence on loud, diesel-burning generators, Vancouver has installed several “clean energy kiosks” to provide electricity to crews working on productions near the waterfront. The city said in a statement Thursday that it had installed three of the kiosks in the False Creek area, where it said crews use more than 200 generators for power every year. The new kiosks will instead allow film sets to plug in and draw energy from the city’s power grid. The statement said council’s goal is to eventually have a citywide network of kiosks so crews can access electricity at the popular citywide filming spots by 2030.”

This City of Vancouver initiative dates back to at least 2021. Make that 2019.

Daily Hive‘s Kenneth Chan has way more coverage.

My take: this is a great idea! By the way, those power cables are heavy! Did that job for one day only.

Streamers shift focus from market share to profit

Dominik Dorosz posted a new video on FilmStack claiming YOU Lost the Streaming Wars.

He reviews the chronology of online streaming:

  • Mid-2010’s: Netflix‘s golden age
  • 2019: the launch of the streaming wars with Disney+ and Apple TV+
  • 2022: price hikes and content cancellations on all platforms

He posits that:

“The real loser of this war is us, the consumer. The over-saturation of services, the splitting of catalogues, and the constant price hikes are just a few of the problems we’ve experienced and, with Netflix’s latest password restrictions, we are now starting to see the worst of it all, as all streaming platforms are shifting their focus from market share to profit.”

His evidence is compelling and he concludes with a strategy to combat rising streaming costs:

“The best option (and it’s a problem streaming services are trying to tackle) is rotating subscriptions. Most people don’t need to have access to every service for all 12 months of the year. What you can do instead is wait until you have a decent backlog of things to watch on one platform and then subscribe to it to catch up. While catching up on this backlog, your backlogs on other services will grow and you can rotate to another afterwards.”

My take: Brilliant analysis! I love the Rotating Subscriptions strategy to lower your subscription costs.

Can a leaner Netflix still rule the world?

Mia Galuppo reports in The Hollywood Reporter that the Exit of Netflix’s Lisa Nishimura Marks the End of an Era for the Streamer.

She writes:

“Nishimura’s 15 years at the company have spanned the streaming boom, Oscar wins and multiple restructuring efforts. Noted one industry veteran that has long worked with Nishimura, ‘It’s a signal that the most thoughtful, taste-driven era is being driven out.’

Meanwhile, Scott Mendelson at The Wrap reports that Rival Executives Weigh In on Netflix’s Movie Strategy: ‘They’re Suffering in the World They Created’.

He begins: “Netflix shocked the industry last week with the news that two respected film executives, Lisa Nishimura and Ian Bricke, were leaving the company in an apparent nod toward austerity.”

For reference, this sort of thing has happened many times at Netflix. For instance, Kim Masters of THR dished on the streamer’s corporate culture one year ago: Netflix’s Big Wake-Up Call: The Power Clash Behind the Crash.

My take: In Lisa’s case, it’s always sad to see a member of underrepresented groups fired from a position of power. I wonder where each of these two well-connected executives will land, and how the mediascape will shift.

Exploring No-Budget Indie Feature Film Making

In a long article on Esquire, Max Cea says Welcome to the No-Budget Era.

In an era of superheroes and much hand-wringing, he posits that:

“Film’s unlikely hope? A quirky, brilliant wave of directors who are churning out microbudget features that are pushing what’s possible with minuscule funding.”

What about streamers saving the day? He quotes Riel Roch-Decter, co-founder of an indie production company:

“From a producing perspective, if you’re trying to pitch a project to the four or five streaming platforms who actually are able to pay for things, they want what the algorithm is telling them they want. That means more true crime, more Emily in Paris, and not anything that challenges.”

Max digs deep into the DIY filmmaking ethos: can’t get invited to the cool party? Host your own!

He profiles Kentucker Audley, his excellent indie film review site NoBudge and their bi-monthly live screening series in Brooklyn, New York.

And then he explores the unintended potential consequences of making unique, funny, thoughtful indie films:

“At the moment, the ability to make a $50,000 feature that rivals the quality of something made for $5 million is an exciting democratization, but it’s easy to imagine how that advancement might be exploited. ‘The second you tell people who finance movies that they’re paying five million dollars for something they could be paying fifty grand for, we’re just going to continue to erode at the idea that anyone could ever make a living doing this,’ says Free Time director Ryan Martin Brown.”

Max concludes with a hope:

“The sense I get, though, is that the solution — if there is one — will involve theaters. There’s been a lot of hand-wringing over the past decade that streaming has killed the theatrical business for everything other than Marvel movies. Programmers, distributors, and independent studios though, say that that’s not totally true. Evenings like the one I witnessed with The Civil Dead or at NoBudge screenings were doing well, too. In other words: Events. “People really enjoy when there’s a live component,” says Future of Film Is Female Executive Director and longtime programmer Caryn Coleman. ‘I like showing short films before features because you get their whole audience to come in.'”

My take: same as it ever was, to reference the Talking Heads. People need to discover they like the taste of indie film to stoke their appetite and then crave a diet of non-Hollywood film. However, the bottom line is the bottom line. Show business is a business and budgets need to be minimal if a film can only gain exposure. I believe the rule of thumb in old Hollywood was that only one in ten films made money and needed to cover the losses of the other nine. Looking at you, A24 and other indie distributors!

Help define CanCon by March 31, 2023

Telefilm Canada invites the industry to participate in the Canada Media Fund’s newly launched national #CanConDef survey focused on the Canadian audiovisual sector’s views on how the current definition of “Canadian content” could evolve and contribute to the conversation following the passage of Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act.

The 10-15-minute survey is open to all individuals who work in or aspire to work in Canada’s audiovisual production and broadcasting sectors. It’s designed to be widely accessible, regardless of role, level of experience, or knowledge regarding Canadian content policy.

The survey will close on March 31, 2023. Click HERE to fill out the survey.

My take: please fill out this survey as it has the potential to shake up the film and TV scene in Canada for decades to come. Just ask all the Canadian Music Icons who owe their careers to MAPL, also known as CanCon, established in 1971, over 50 years ago. It’s a long survey so have a drink nearby.

How the most-awarded film in history did it

Hilton Dresden tallies in The Hollywood Reporter 2023’s Oscar Wins By Film: ‘EEAAO’ Leads With 7 Statues.

They write:

“As expected, Daniels Kwan and Scheinert’s Everything Everywhere All At Once has come out on top at 2023’s Oscars ceremony, with the most wins of anything nominated. The A24 multiverse dramedy, only the second feature film from the directing duo, took home seven awards: best picture, director, lead actress for Michelle Yeoh, original screenplay, editing, supporting actor for Ke Huy Quan and supporting actress for Jamie Lee Curtis.”

Alex Stedman analyzes on IGN How Everything Everywhere All At Once Went From Intriguing Indie to Awards Juggernaut.

She plots out this timeline:

  • Dec. 14, 2021: Trailer Debuts and Picks Up Steam
  • March 11, 2022: Everything Everywhere All At Once Opens SXSW to Rave Reviews
  • March 25, 2022: Everything Everywhere Opens in Limited Theaters
  • April 16, 2022: A24 Doubles the Theater Count, Continues to Expand, and Cashes in
  • Jan. 24, 2023: Everything Everywhere Scores 11 Oscar Nominations and Begins Awards Sweeps

To date, the film has made almost $108M worldwide on a budget of $25M.

Guy Lodge explains in The Guardian how ‘A24 finds the zeitgeist and sets the trend’: how a small indie producer came to dominate the Oscars.

He writes:

“With 11 nominations, Everything Everywhere All at Once leads the Oscar field; A24, likewise, is the leader among studios, having also secured nominations in various categories for its films Aftersun, The Whale, Causeway, Close and Marcel the Shell With Shoes On. And this kingmaker status has been achieved with surprisingly few concessions to the mainstream.”

He traces the company’s 10-year history and quotes filmmaker Lulu Wang as saying:

‘A24’s brand is intertwined with the identities of the artists that it works with, and [is] known for championing unique voices. At the same time, they just have a really incredible ability to identify the zeitgeist before everybody else has. They set the trend…. The world has changed. Our industry has changed. And who is saving cinema? We have to draw people to theatres. And we don’t want the tentpoles to be the only things on offer. If A24 are able to continue getting independent films made, and protecting the voices that make those independent films, I don’t care if it has to come with a mug.’

My take: Great work, A24! This is evidence the tide has turned and more interesting films are in vogue once again. I guess we’ll know for sure in 12 months.