Across the Internet: A Collection of the Internet's Effect on Film

As with a few weeks ago, I have decided to peruse the internet looking for a collection of websites that a reader could look to for useful insight into the film world. Using the Webby and IMSA criteria that serve as guidelines to a well-made website, I have added ten links to the Linkroll of this blog, this time with emphasis on more peripheral parts of the internet's relationship to film, such as technology sites and interactive games. First up is the oddly addicting Fantasy Moguls, a movie mogul's twist on the Fantasy Sports idea. The aspiring movie maker invests fantasy money into upcoming theater releases, in the hopes of getting the best returns based on box office profits. An ingenious idea, Fantasy Moguls is arguably the internet's best tool for an aspiring moviemaker, because it puts all of one's instinct and theory into motion. For research into movies and to look at the buzz surrounding a movie (usually a prime indicator of how well a movie does), the blog First Showing comments mostly on trailers and ads, but also on casting and marketing. While it can be a solid resource, it tends to be overly positive towards what it covers. For those seeking out the next big thing in movies, Director's Notes showcases directors and films from film festivals all over the world. While the movies may be hit or miss, many of these films would not be available to anyone outside of these festivals. The internet has also been a major center for numerous subcultures, and that is nowhere more apparent than the Anime News Network. By far, the absolute most extensive site about anime on the internet, ANN contains reviews (anime reviews, for some reason, are rare in most other review sites) and coverage of conventions and news in the Anime world. For anyone looking into this subculture, (such as, say, the Wachowski brothers) ANN is a must. Similarly, Horror.com prides itself on representing the horror film community, sporting interviews with filmmakers and insights into new horror films. As this type of film is wildly popular in the United States, Horror.com can be an effective tool to read into this world. A solid tool for anyone looking into marketing in general, Advertising Age is a sharply critical look at marketing ploys and ads on television and the internet. It often spotlights movie advertising, like the Dark Knight's ad campaign. For residents of the Los Angeles area, LA Weekly is an offbeat resource for everything from the best underground food to the latest concerts. Their "Film + TV" guide explores a counterculture-esque view into the film world, though that may not be for everyone. CampusCircle provides a listing of advanced screenings from movie studios. Given that studios screen these films in order to get buzz and feedback, a one-stop listing of these screenings is a welcome idea for both the excited consumer and the movie executive alike.
Movie executives and consumers don't always agree, however, and nowhere is this more evident than in the context of movie downloads. The MPAA's website has scores of information about how piracy, as they call it, is destroying the film industry. For anyone looking for the complete view on the issue, that stalwart, official position is always posted on their website first, even if it is found to be incredibly factually inaccurate. On the other hand, the Electronic Frontier Foundation specializes in free speech and intellectual property rights in the internet's domain, and sits in direct contrast to the MPAA and its sister association, the RIAA. While informative, the site has an obvious anti-corporate leaning, and as such, must be taken with a grain of salt.

The Five-Year Checkmate: The IFC's Myopic Deal with Blockbuster

The Independent Film Channel has made a name for itself as a premiere source of independent and foreign films for more than a decade. Its film wing, IFC Films, has distributed movies as diverse and critically acclaimed as Transamerica and The Wind that Shakes the Barley. As such, when indie film enthusiasts learn that IFC Films has decided to release a movie under its label, there is usually quite a bit of support. After all, the movies in question are actively looking for any distribution, be it from IFC or from the independent wings of major companies such as Fox Searchlight or Sony Pictures Classics. However, due to a deal made this weekend, support for IFC film may become drastically muted.

IFC signed a two-year deal with Blockbuster, allowing Blockbuster a surprising amount of exclusivity on IFC titles. Upon a film's release, Blockbuster will have exclusive distribution for 60 days, in every possible format -- digital distribution, rentals, purchase, etc. After these sixty days, the movie can be purchased outside of a blockbuster store, but remains exclusive for the purpose of rentals for three years. Considering the time frame of the agreement, this means that some films distributed by IFC Films will not be available for rent outside of Blockbuster until the year 2013. This, of course, is an incredible deal for Blockbuster, since the company has now secured sole rental rights from a highly respected film distributor. This simultaneously strikes a blow to online competitors such as Netflix and brick-and-mortar rental chains such as Hollywood Video. Unfortunately, the deal is exceedingly short-sighted for IFC Films.

For the filmmaker, wide audience accessibility is a must. While Blockbuster may tout the fact that it has 6,000 retail stores and a vast online distribution service, these numbers do not paint the whole story. Blockbuster only plans to open an "indie films" section in 1,000 of their 6,000 stores, and it is unknown if the other 5,000 will have any IFC films at all. And though they are an incredibly large and recognizable name, they are not the only rental source in the United States, and are certainly not the majority. Audiences that subscribe to Netflix or prefer to go to small business movie rental stores (both staples of independent film enthusiasts) now have no access to the rental of these films, unless they go out of their way to go to a local Blockbuster, subscribe to their online service, or wait for an entire three years. In film terms, that time frame is an eternity. Crash, for instance, is three years old. Had that film not been widely available on video, it's unlikely that audiences would start to watch the film now, had it been suddenly unleashed on the indifferent public. Simply put, this decision will likely result in a large reduction in the potential audience for a film.

In addition, Blockbuster follows a philosophy of "family-friendly" that can amount to purchasing "edited" versions of films or refusing to stock the films outright. For independent filmmakers, this amounts to little more than an absolute betrayal. Many times, objectionable content is instrumental in the proving of a film's point. (Ang Lee's Lust, Caution is a prime

example) It can also be the used as a method of censoring a film. This Film is Not Yet Rated, a documentary distributed by IFC, is a strong critique of the MPAA, the association that gives films their ratings. The very same MPAA rated the film NC-17, citing "objectionable content," and since Blockbuster does not carry films above an R rating, this means that the film is unavailable at any Blockbuster. Unfortunately, with this agreement between IFC and Blockbuster, if this film were to be released today, it would not see rental distribution for an entire three years.

What does this deal mean, then, for parties other than Blockbuster? For IFC Films, it can only mean a loss of respect. The film company will most likely be seen as a way to reach a drastically limited audience, and one that may force the filmmaker to limit what Blockbuster would deem "objectionable content." Through most other outlets, filmmakers will have access to powerhouse rental sites like Netflix and GreenCine, whose audiences easily comprise a large part of the rental population. What's more, both Netflix and GreenCine stock NC-17 films, which is a great bonus to the independent filmmaker. Given the alternatives, IFC films will look, at best, like a losing option.

For consumers, this deal is equally unfortunate. Moviegoers may have to wait years to rent films they want to see. And while it is true that they can buy the films and see them, that is of limited comfort. This is effectively limits the consumer to a single rental company or a $20 purchase. In the end, chances are that the consumers will end up pirating the films they want to see, rather than going through the far more inconvenient route of changing from the rental service they are comfortable with. This, of course, would be a setback for all parties, Blockbuster, IFC Films and filmmakers alike, though, when faced with a three-year wait or a $20 'rental,' piracy may, ironically, be the most convenient option for the consumer.

Drinking from a Hose: A small collection of the Internet's Best

While I enjoy the ability to use this blog as a way to express my views and arguments about the film world, I must recognize that the internet itself has much more information than I could possibly hope to convey. As such, I have provided, in my linkroll, a list of websites that I have found useful in my traversal of the internet. Some of these are more useful than others, due to varying levels of professionalism (while the internet may have a very wild-west appeal, guidelines such as IMSA criteria and awards such as the Webby Awards do signify the usefulness of professionalism on one's website) and, of course, because of their aims.

Blogs, for instance, are often more useful as insights to public opinion, as many of them (in fact, most of the sites at the Large Association of Movie Blogs) are simply reviews of films, and while I applaud their attempts at critiquing what Hollywood has to offer, the blogs themselves offer little insight outside of that of an aspiring critic. Still others are blatantly biased, and really offer little to no insight other than what is obvious from a static viewpoint. That said, there are a few insightful blogs that offer more than film reviews, such as the popular /film, which often contains well-researched looks into licensing and artwork relating to films. Furthermore, while it thinks that it is cooler than it really is, Ain't It Cool News is often a resourceful site for previews of many nerd-based film happenings (anything about Star Wars, Aliens, or by J.J. Abrams, for example.)

On the other hand, websites of newspapers dedicated to film tend to have a broader depth of information, and, though they tend to have reviews as well, these reviews are also almost always well-researched, if not always on the mark. For instance, the New York Time's section on movies chiefly looks at movie reviews by renowned critic A.O. Scott, but also looks at film's effects on the world, as well as how the world affects film. As the film world's biggest newspaper, Variety is a constant source of reliable coverage of nearly all of the film world's news. It also gives reviews of films released in theaters and film festivals, reviews that also analyze the film's marketability and reach. In my mind, however, the film world's most famous critic is also the best. Roger Ebert's website contains an incredibly extensive collection not only of movies, but editorials and insights into film festivals, the nature of films, and reflections on past film's influence. Numerous editors affiliated with his site also provide extensive commentary on all parts of the film world.

For a comprehensive listing of reviews, however, the best way to look is aggregate review sites, such as Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic. Both sites don't review films, but rather collect other reviews and create an average review based on these numbers.While Metacritic may have a larger collection of reviews to base its numbers on, Rotten Tomatoes also has information on box office numbers and interviews with people of the industry, making it a valuable site for more than the reviews. Don't make the mistake of many moviegoers (see picture) and base your decision on these aggregates, however - low scores can mean a movie is 'love-it-or-hate-it' as often as it can mean that it is poor.

Some of the provided websites stand as more encyclopedic resources. The darling of the internet movie enthusiast, IMDb is a community-run listing of movies, along with their casts, and technical aspects such as running times, languages and taglines. And, of a special note is Kids in Mind, which rates movies according to three categories - sexuality, violence, and language, and methodically details every instance of these potentially harmful effects on the youthful mind ("a husband and wife hug" is regularly counted in 'sexuality.') However, the website has another inadvertent use - the detailed descriptions of what is seen, what is heard, and what is implied allow for detailed research into controversial materials, giving readers a reliable way to critique sensationalizing reviews. These websites can be a substantial resource for a blogger to base arguments on, for market researchers to analyze audience reactions, or to gauge critical response to everything in the film world.