Thanks so much for this DB and I hope we get more posts and analysis from you in the weeks and months ahead. Thoughtful, accurate, and fuel for the future.
I love the idea of a FilmCamp. The hard-to-find problem would probably resolve itself if critics were incentivized (small royalties?) to create their own lists of movies to watch.
Also, when you mentioned Bandcamp allows people to upload movies, they've got a 500mb size limit, so that precludes features. :(
Great article. But I think the analysis is only correct for right now. I don't really see a world where AI hasn't completely taken over content generation in the next few years. I agree that IP and uninformed consent are things that need serious overhaul, but we are seeing the birth of a completely new medium and there may not be a clean path from here to there. When the digital tools give you better control and end-result why go with the alternative? That include creating made up people. Why have the baggage associated with a real life actor, even scanned, when you can generate exactly the look you want and adjust as needed for the task at hand. That leads to the even bigger change of completely generated, and immersive, worlds that AI will be able to build on consumer hardware within the next few years. All sides in this issue are about to see a totally new world of content and I don't think any party right now fully accepts or understands where things are about to go.
We'll see where AI really goes; I suspect you're correct that there will be major innovation on the high end, blockbuster level movies in order to both cut costs and also quickly export / update alternatives for worldwide distribution (swapping out ethnicities, languages, specific topical jokes, etc) and also quick re-edits and replacement on streaming services. Tons of A/B testing and so forth.
But no matter what large studios do, independent filmmakers are gonna make their stories with real people and practical means, so the real question is what screens and platforms are available for them to find audiences on.
Incredible analysis, DB. One question I have, somewhat related: do you feel that loss of revenue from piracy sparked the rise of streaming at all or had any impact? I assume people still use Torrents, etc to access some movies and TV but I have a theory that streaming may have reduced piracy through ease of use - I'm thinking within North America mainly. Any thoughts on this?
I declined to discuss piracy because of the length, but one advantage streaming has is it's difficult to copy and redistribute relative to DVD/Blu-Ray. However after that initial piracy surge in the Aughts, I think concerns about piracy declined in favor of the development of DCPs and streaming protocols that feature strong DRM software. Even in making a DCP, you have the option to encrypt it.
I strongly believe the reason why Disney, Warner Bros, NBC Universal etc have created their own streaming platforms has more to do with owning both production AND distribution, so that they don't have to share profits the way they would have to share with theatres for box office, television for syndication, stores with home video sales or rentals, or third-party streamers like early era Netflix.
"Exclusivity" in both production and distribution used to be illegal but like most things Internet related, was overturned in the past few decades under the following three arguments: 1) that it's cheaper for the consumer ("consumer welfare". See Matt Stoller's Substack for more information), 2) that Internet companies are new and the old rules unfairly kept them out of competition (now they ARE the competition) and 3) that the Internet is open and massive and so it's more difficult to monopolize channels of distribution (now with subscriptions, paywalls, and algorithms restricting channel access Internet-wide, plus countries getting into banning swathes of Internet, I do not believe this argument remains valid).
A personal history of this is simply that pre-streaming, I was open-minded about piracy of any older movies *not released on DVD* because basically if a studio argued they should get paid for it, they should make it possible for the customer to pay. Now I am against piracy because it forces studios, distributors, and even indie filmmakers to double-down on hoarding and protecting their work.
Great article DB. You would probably love Curzon in the UK (plush cinemas and home streaming service of art-house/indie movies). They also serve great pizzas!
Thanks so much for this DB and I hope we get more posts and analysis from you in the weeks and months ahead. Thoughtful, accurate, and fuel for the future.
Thank you for your kind comment!
I love the idea of a FilmCamp. The hard-to-find problem would probably resolve itself if critics were incentivized (small royalties?) to create their own lists of movies to watch.
Also, when you mentioned Bandcamp allows people to upload movies, they've got a 500mb size limit, so that precludes features. :(
But, I still think the idea as a concept is good.
Great article. But I think the analysis is only correct for right now. I don't really see a world where AI hasn't completely taken over content generation in the next few years. I agree that IP and uninformed consent are things that need serious overhaul, but we are seeing the birth of a completely new medium and there may not be a clean path from here to there. When the digital tools give you better control and end-result why go with the alternative? That include creating made up people. Why have the baggage associated with a real life actor, even scanned, when you can generate exactly the look you want and adjust as needed for the task at hand. That leads to the even bigger change of completely generated, and immersive, worlds that AI will be able to build on consumer hardware within the next few years. All sides in this issue are about to see a totally new world of content and I don't think any party right now fully accepts or understands where things are about to go.
We'll see where AI really goes; I suspect you're correct that there will be major innovation on the high end, blockbuster level movies in order to both cut costs and also quickly export / update alternatives for worldwide distribution (swapping out ethnicities, languages, specific topical jokes, etc) and also quick re-edits and replacement on streaming services. Tons of A/B testing and so forth.
But no matter what large studios do, independent filmmakers are gonna make their stories with real people and practical means, so the real question is what screens and platforms are available for them to find audiences on.
What a fantastic read! Thank you for so much to think about.
Thank you!
Incredible analysis, DB. One question I have, somewhat related: do you feel that loss of revenue from piracy sparked the rise of streaming at all or had any impact? I assume people still use Torrents, etc to access some movies and TV but I have a theory that streaming may have reduced piracy through ease of use - I'm thinking within North America mainly. Any thoughts on this?
I declined to discuss piracy because of the length, but one advantage streaming has is it's difficult to copy and redistribute relative to DVD/Blu-Ray. However after that initial piracy surge in the Aughts, I think concerns about piracy declined in favor of the development of DCPs and streaming protocols that feature strong DRM software. Even in making a DCP, you have the option to encrypt it.
I strongly believe the reason why Disney, Warner Bros, NBC Universal etc have created their own streaming platforms has more to do with owning both production AND distribution, so that they don't have to share profits the way they would have to share with theatres for box office, television for syndication, stores with home video sales or rentals, or third-party streamers like early era Netflix.
"Exclusivity" in both production and distribution used to be illegal but like most things Internet related, was overturned in the past few decades under the following three arguments: 1) that it's cheaper for the consumer ("consumer welfare". See Matt Stoller's Substack for more information), 2) that Internet companies are new and the old rules unfairly kept them out of competition (now they ARE the competition) and 3) that the Internet is open and massive and so it's more difficult to monopolize channels of distribution (now with subscriptions, paywalls, and algorithms restricting channel access Internet-wide, plus countries getting into banning swathes of Internet, I do not believe this argument remains valid).
A personal history of this is simply that pre-streaming, I was open-minded about piracy of any older movies *not released on DVD* because basically if a studio argued they should get paid for it, they should make it possible for the customer to pay. Now I am against piracy because it forces studios, distributors, and even indie filmmakers to double-down on hoarding and protecting their work.
Thank you for this. An excellent read!
A follow up essay from Matt Stoller about the crisis of vertical integration in Hollywood: https://open.substack.com/pub/mattstoller/p/make-hollywood-great-again
Great article DB. You would probably love Curzon in the UK (plush cinemas and home streaming service of art-house/indie movies). They also serve great pizzas!