Richard Brody writes in the New York TImes that ‘Our Dated Model of Theatrical Release Is Hurting Independent Cinema‘.

His thesis is that ‘part of the blame lies with a system of tacit complicity between critics and the industry that poses obstacles to the recognition of independent films’ because any film that has not played for a week in a cinema is considered not to have been released.

Therefore those films remain ‘unreleased’ and not worthy of reviews. Recognition, distribution and monetization then is harder to come by.

Meanwhile, say hello to the Internet. VOD and sVOD platforms effectively sidestep ‘real life’ exhibition.

Brody feels critics are ignoring independent film and asks them to change:

“It’s up to critics and editors to acknowledge what was already clear in 1969 — the realm of movies, their substance and their distribution, has changed drastically, and the practice of criticism needs to catch up with it. What’s both stressful and great about this prospect is that it vastly expands the pool of movies at hand. Critics can no longer keep their heads down and look at a fixed and stable list of releases; they have to do some research and some extra viewing to determine what constitutes, in their eyes, the day’s notable releases. This practice would shift power away from industry executives in determining what’s reviewed. Critics themselves would gain both the power and the responsibility; rather than responding to a pre-existing cultural agenda, critics would be setting it. Rather than interpreting the cinema, they’d be changing it — and that’s precisely the point.”

My take: I agree with Brody wholeheartedly. He’s describing the difference between a movie reviewer and a film critic. As people lose interest in Hollywood, they need guides to help them find their way in the mediascape to great indie films.