October 15, 2003

Okay… I’ve about reached the end of my whining rope on the screener ban. Yesterday, Kim Masters did an hour on L.A.’s KCRW on the issue. To give you an idea of how upset the people really affected here are, there was no representative from any of the companies involved with the ban – not the parent companies or the “dependents.” The one studio rep was Mark Urman, whose ThinkFilm is not being kept from sending out screeners. Not only that, but the company behind the kinds of films he cited as being hurt by the ban - Monster’s Ball and Affliction - Lions Gate, is free to send out screeners this year too. In fact, some would say that they have a competitive advantage.

Masters came up with a tech guy, who pretty much confirmed the fact that piracy is a real issue. Masters never asked, but the cost of marking the DVDs is prohibitive to exactly those companies who claim they can’t afford to set up extra screenings. Of course, the truly unfair thing would be if the MPAA asked the AMPAS to require that all screeners be “watermarked,” which would add a cost of around $100,000 per title, effectively limiting small companies’ ability to send out screeners.

Which brings me to the fourth guest (Gregg Kilday, editor of The Hollywood Reporter brought the news side up to date), a lawyer discussing the possible anti-trust issue stemming from the ban. Wait… stop laughing… you mean that a trade group agreeing to not give away product to an elite group so as not to promote piracy isn’t a monopolistic practice?

Now… I understand those who claim that I am not feeling the emotion behind the anti-ban push. (Keep in mind, I have never been for the ban.) And maybe that is what is making me so crazy about the insane hyperbole and propaganda coming from intelligent grown-ups. Somehow, the idea of what is happening has been completely separated from the reality of what is happening here. And even terribly smart people seem to have lost any perspective on the reality.

Last week, I tried to get to the dispassionate facts with the 10 Things You Need To Remember column. Here goes one more shot.

Listening to Mark Urman had a feel of the ironic, given that the two loudest voices left in all of this are his and Norman Jewison, who just happen to be the foreign distributor and director of The Statement, a rumored Oscar possibility film. Of course, with Sony Classics not able to send out screeners, this ThinkFilm co-finance is a little less financially viable. Nonetheless, it got me thinking, how many “indie” films are actually going to be effected by this ban?

I count, with the help of Greg Dean Schmitz’s Yahoo! section, Upcoming Movies, 67 films that have been in, are in, or are scheduled for release by the “dependants” this year. All other indies can send screeners freely.

So, let’s start by taking the really, really, really unlikely to ever be promoted for awards movies from the companies or were already pushed last year in a category that realistically precludes and effort this year or will only be pushed for foreign language or doc categories, which require in-theater viewing. This elimination round is so obvious as to be pretty much beyond arguing.

From Focus Features: Deliver Us from Eva, The Guys, The Shape of Things

From Fox Searchlight: L'Auberge Espagnole, Garage Days, Lucia Lucia

From Miramax: City of God, View from the Top, Dysfunktional Family, People I Know, Blue Car, Only the Strong Survive, Pokemon Heroes, The Battle of Shaker Heights, Duplex

From Paramount Classics: Till Human Voices Wake Us, House of Fools, Man on the Train, Northfork, And Now Ladies and Gentlemen

From Sony Pictures Classics: Big Shot's Funeral, Blind Spot: Hitler's Secretary, Winged Migration, Respiro, The Man Without a Past, The Cuckoo, The Legend of Suriyothai, Once Upon a Time in the Midlands, The Fog of War.

From United Artists: Dark Blue, Jeepers Creepers 2, Osama

And now the number is 34.

Now take a breath and think about it… this “the indie world is coming to an end because of the screener ban” screaming comes down to, at the max, 34 films from seven companies.

Now, let’s take a look at the next elimination round… movies that really are not in contention for any nominations, even though they may be very good and may be pushing for their distributors to make a push. Again, I am going to be fairly generous here.

From Fox Searchlight: Bend It Like Beckham, The Dancer Upstairs, Le Divorce

From Miramax: Jet Lag, Buffalo Soldiers, The Barbarian Invasions

From Sony Pictures Classics: All the Real Girls, Levity, Owning Mahowny

From United Artists: Assassination Tango, City of Ghosts, Together

Take a breath.

Now we’re down to 23 films that might be in the game and can’t send out screeners.

So in this round, let’s get down to brass tacks. Each film still left on the list will be noted as Clear, Realistic, or Unlikely in various categories. “Realistic” does not mean a sure bet at all… just a fight that might have a positive return. Even “clear” does not mean I think it’s a lock. But it is among the Top 20 or so candidates.

Sony Pictures Classics

Laurel Canyon – Unlikely Frances McDormand

Masked and Anonymous - Clear shot at a Best Song and/or Best Score nomination

My Life Without Me - Unlikely Sarah Polley – likely IFP nomination

The Statement - Unlikely Michael Caine/ Unlikely Norman Jewison – no traction, not shown at Toronto, no sex scene with a top starlet

The Company – Unlikely Robert Altman – film not very well received – is likely to be well attended at screenings because of subject and Altman cache.

United Artists

Pieces of April – Unlikely Patricia Clarkson/Unlikely Katie Holmes – IFP nods for both

Paramount Classics

The Singing Detective – Unlikely.

Miramax Films

Dirty Pretty Things – Unlikely Chiwetel Ejiofor/Unlikely Stephen Frears/ Realistic Original Screenplay Steve Knight

The Magdalene Sisters – Unlikely in all categories

The Station Agent - Unlikely in all categories – Sure IFP multi-nominee

Kill Bill Vol. 1 - Clear potential for Robert Richardson as DP/Unlikely in all other categories, emphasis on the “gory”

The Human Stain - Unlikely in all categories, despite high profile players – sure to be well sampled at screenings

Cold Mountain – Clear multi-nomination candidate – will be one of the most awards voter screened films of the year

Fox Searchlight

The Good Thief – Unlikely Nick Nolte on sobriety issues

28 Days Later – Unlikely

Thirteen – Clear possibilities in acting and writing

In America - Clear possibilities in all categories

Focus Features

Swimming Pool – Clear Ludivine Sagnier/Realistic Charlotte Rampling

Lost in Translation - Clear Bill Murray/ Realistic across the board

Sylvia – Clear Gwyneth Paltrow

21 Grams – Clear across the board

Fine Line Features

American Splendor - Realistic Paul Giamatti / Realistic Adapted Screenplay

Elephant – Unlikely.

Take a breath.

Films with “realistic” or “clear” chances –

American Splendor
Cold Mountain
Dirty Pretty Things
In America
Kill Bill Vol. 1
Lost in Translation
Masked and Anonymous
Swimming Pool
Sylvia
Thirteen
21 Grams

11 films. All this really comes down to 11 films.

But we can make a few more cuts. Cold Mountain and Kill Bill Volume 1 both have marketing campaigns of over $30 million. These are not underdogs. It is in Sony Classic’s best interest for voters to vote on Masked & Anonymous, considered by many to be one of the worst studio releases in all of history, without seeing it and only hearing the album, which they can send.

We’re down to 8.

Fox Searchlight has moved forward with aggressive plans to screen both In America and Thirteen on and off the Fox lot constantly between now and the nominations.

6.

And so, we must ask ourselves, can Fine Line - A Division of Time-Warner, Miramax and Focus Features do Oscar pushes for their respective 1, 1 and 4 movies without screeners? Is this really where we draw the line of indie credibility?

A great made-for-HBO budgeted movie, a great Brit flick already pushed hard by Miramax all summer, Bill Murray, Sofia Coppola, Oscar-winner Sean Penn, Oscar-winner Benicio del Toro, Oscar-winner Gwyneth Paltrow and a tiny European-minded film that managed to make over $10 million domestically this summer.

That’s the bottom line. Those are the movies struggling for survival in the horrible screener-free universe.

And one last thing for those of you protesting too much about the idea that studios should trust Academy members with pristine digital copies of their films. Ladies… gentlemen… you are talking about a distribution of a minimum of 5000 units and more realistically, about 20,000 units of each movie. Can any of you, with a straight face, tell me what group of 20,000 people you would trust with your wallet?

Let’s not be coy… would any of you leave a gold watch in the lobby of the Academy or any other public place as a large group of people file through and expect it to be there a few hours later?

There will be an ad with hundreds of signatures going into the trades today, pushed by the IFP. Again, this puts me in an awkward position of writing what everyone already knows, but here I go.

I am thrilled that the Independent Spirit Awards exist. I love the IFP. I believe in them and their message. However, the Independent Spirit Awards are infinitely more damaging to the Oscar chances of indie movies than any screener ban ever could be. True, they are the good guys and the studios are evil. Nonetheless, Oscar voters write certain great movies off as “ISA movies” every year. The likelihood that Scarlett Johansson will get an Oscar nomination for Lost In Translation is significantly less if she is nominated for an Independent Spirit award. Bill Murray’s nomination will require getting over the “Let them give something to him” hump. And that’s the truth.

One line in this trade ad will be “Restore integrity to our business and the Academy Awards." Yeah… screeners bring integrity to our business and the Academy Awards. Uh-huh. And condoms bring integrity to prostitutes and their johns.

Bad artists blame their tools. Great artists do what they need to do.

This is about art, right?

E ME: Am I crazy?