Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood. • Hacker News Board

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#541

Post by waterlesscloud » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 12:50 PM UTC

pdelgallego wrote: post #520

Keyframe wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are three stages in production of movies and tv shows, roughly they are: Preproduction: - where screenplay is written or adapted, cost is usually low unless rights are to be managed for original content you're adapting from. - Production schedule and directors shooting script is done, sometimes a storyboard too (skilled storyboard artists COULD be somewhat replaced by software and there are attempts) - Sound de…

>> Marketing and distribution is a sizeable chunk of money in a project too How is a movie marketed and distributed in the film industry? >> - Camera and grip departement can get huge... I've done only a moderate size productions and my camera and grip dept. was 20-30 people (skilled labour that costs money) Could the team size be reduced by more/better technology? >> Sound designers start their work (sound design is…

The recent film The Devil Inside is a good example.

Independently produced outside the system. Shot in Romania, I believe. Reported budget "just under a million", but that's often code for "a few hundred thousand", which is what it looks like.

Acquired by Paramount Insurge for a million. Insurge is a brand formed after the success of Paranormal Activity to make very low budget projects.

But then Paramount spent $15 million to market the thing. So the cost of production was tiny percentage of the overall cost. It was the marketing that mattered in the end.

And it worked. Opening weekend box office alone brought the film to breakeven, even after you deduct everything else. $35 million dollars gross.

And it's almost universally thought to be an awful movie.

But that didn't matter.

Marketing. It's what the studios do best.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#542

Post by notahacker » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 12:55 PM UTC

rmc wrote: post #521

sanjiallblue wrote: post #516

It's an interesting proposition to kill Hollywood, but I don't exactly think it's going to be killed so easily, or that it's anywhere remotely resembling close to being "dead". Just examining the profit margins from this year alone paints a picture of a vibrant and healthy industry and overall employment in the industry is actually doing quite well considering the state of the economy. Although, full disclosure, I do…

You're attempting to derail the conversation by making the tech/start up/hacker scene sound like they are being immature and not listening. Tech and the internet have been in mainstream conscienceness for 15 years. They have had time to learn. They have already fired the first and second shot with numerous laws like SOPA, the DMCA and others. Rather than them being too busy, I believe they are too greedy. I owe them…

It doesn't really matter who fired first. What matters is whether you've got the ammunition to win. If you want to fight Hollywood you need to provide a more compelling replacement for its creative output and not merely a conduit for its delivery. Will Hollywood's legions of talent (and hacks churning out formulaic crap that sells extremely well) switch "sides"?

Well the book publishing industry could have been destroyed by now: its constituent parts have been replaced by digital distribution methods offering authors far better paper terms. But almost all top authors continue to accept big advances to do things the old fashioned way. And lumping Hollywood creatives in the "part of the problem" space isn't exactly the way to win their favour.

Similarities between hackers and painters notwithstanding, I'm not sure Ycombinator's skill in selecting the best engineers translates to disrupting the future of the arts. Which raises the possibility that throwing money at second-best alternatives is more likely to damage YC than Hollywood.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#543

Post by Keyframe » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:11 PM UTC

sanjiallblue wrote: post #532

sanjiallblue wrote: post #516

It's an interesting proposition to kill Hollywood, but I don't exactly think it's going to be killed so easily, or that it's anywhere remotely resembling close to being "dead". Just examining the profit margins from this year alone paints a picture of a vibrant and healthy industry and overall employment in the industry is actually doing quite well considering the state of the economy. Although, full disclosure, I do…

Okay, so some ruminations: To create a film/television show you are generally going to need these things: Script Time Reliably Available Crew No matter what you do, you will always need money to accommodate these three needs to produce a project in any kind of time frame that could allow such productions to ever turn a profit and allow you to keep making films. Even if everything is going to be CG and you don't need…

EP Scheduling and Budgeting could use an alternative - that's where a startup could make a difference, not a large one though. It costs $500 I think, that is a lot for indies, but not even a small dent in normal productions.

Final Draft is awful, but it's a standard, there are viable alternatives. I've bought 'Fade In' recently and am enjoying it, but I still have Final Draft and will continue to use it.

Largest contributing factor to cost is crew and set construction, equipment next.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#544

Post by evertonfuller » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:11 PM UTC

So you want to kill and industry that thousands of people love and live for, because you want to 'recreate' it for your own financial gain because you're 'tired' of it. Even though you have absolutely nothing to do with it. Just woke up one morning and went. "Oh, let's kill Hollywood because I have a new idea as to how I want it". Great guys...

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#545

Post by Gravityloss » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:12 PM UTC

sanjiallblue wrote: post #532

sanjiallblue wrote: post #516

It's an interesting proposition to kill Hollywood, but I don't exactly think it's going to be killed so easily, or that it's anywhere remotely resembling close to being "dead". Just examining the profit margins from this year alone paints a picture of a vibrant and healthy industry and overall employment in the industry is actually doing quite well considering the state of the economy. Although, full disclosure, I do…

Okay, so some ruminations: To create a film/television show you are generally going to need these things: Script Time Reliably Available Crew No matter what you do, you will always need money to accommodate these three needs to produce a project in any kind of time frame that could allow such productions to ever turn a profit and allow you to keep making films. Even if everything is going to be CG and you don't need…

Generally agreed. You need to pay for people's time. That is 100% certain. (There can of course be exceptions with lots of volunteer time like Iron Sky.)

Is equipment so expensive nowadays anymore? I don't think so. You can buy most with one month's median salary.

You can use still cameras nowadays, as their sensors and processors have sped up and they've overtaken traditional cinema cameras of a few years back already. They work quite well even in natural light. (Especially if you use a hack and enable high bit rate encoding.) You can edit with a normal computer. There are led lights etc. Cranes and dollies can be much lighter, simpler and cheaper with this modern technology too.

There's lots of possibilities of "lean" film making with this new technology.

I presume the revolution would happen in documentaries first as the technologically adventurous people wouldn't generally be those who have grand visions or are good at organizing the other parts like scripts, talent, sets etc the whole "running a play" thing.

Hell, there are character centric Dogma movies like Open Hearts that get rid of a lot of fancy technical stuff, and it never bothered me when watching them.

Look at what guys like Philip Bloom or Andrew Reid make with ordinary cameras. The freedom is already there, people just don't know how to use it.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#546

Post by egor83 » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:14 PM UTC

Keyframe wrote: post #513

wr1472 wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a way of opening up financing to the public? Ideas get pitched, and the public can invest - kickstarter for movies? We've had fan-fiction, this would fan-financing.

Yes, it can work. In most cases it works like this - you produce a trailer out of your own pocket and pitch the idea to investors and studios (or studios finance trailer and pitch to investors)... so you'd replace investors here with crowd. Studios bring security to investors because they have measurable projections of what would work what wouldn't and secure channels of distributions. But, tell me how could a kickst…

An experiment in this field is "Iron Sky"[1] - while most of their financing (EUR 6.3M out of EUR 7.5M ~ USD 10M) comes from traditional sources, they also tried to raise EUR 1.2M from the crowd. This financing would come in two parts: as investment (900k) and as funding (300k).

They managed to collect 67% of the goal as an investment, and they give no numbers for funding.

[1]: http://www.ironsky.net/site/support/finance/

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#547

Post by moshthepitt » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:19 PM UTC

Steko wrote: post #267

rdl wrote: post #207

Sometime over the past year I went from thinking YouTube content was insignificant compared to Hollywood, to the point where I'd happily give up all broadcast/cable/DVD/Netflix content for YouTube type user generated content. I suspect this will be more widespread in a year or two more.

What's really needed is the next level of authoring tools. Here's the startup I'd do: (1) buy up a near dead MMO, preferably one with impressively realistic character graphics. (2) retool it as a machima authoring tool (3) hook it into kinect for motion capture (4) leverage the userbase to crowdsource additions to the 3D library. With just this talented hobbyists and unfunded indy talents would begin to swamp Hollywo…

I live in Kenya. The quality of the local stuff we see on TV and in movie theaters is still a long way behind other places. To the point where more than 95% of what we consume (and enjoy) is foreign.

I think if someone could you use what you are suggestion to produce really well written movies/series for markets such as our would be very successful.

It would be: 1. Local 2. Better than most other local stuff.

You could theoretically make a lot of money going to various countries such as Kenya and making quality stuff based on the local culture etc.

You would also be profitable while gaining experience/momentum to later launch into other more developed markets.

Makes sense?

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#548

Post by jfno67 » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:36 PM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #484

ctwk wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that the question is limiting, but not necessarily wrong. By creating a new form of entertainment, one can take over a portion of Hollywood's revenue pie and that in a way will create havoc for Hollywood, but not necessarily killing Hollywood since there will be bound to be people who likes Hollywood productions (especially since Hollywood has the finance to fund multi-million dollar productions in a whim). W…

> By creating a new form of entertainment, one can take over a portion of Hollywood's revenue pie That's what the videogame industry has done, isn't it? Their total revenue is now actually larger than Hollywood's. It's not clear it's greatly harmed Hollywood, though; it's possible people are just choosing to spend more total money on entertainment, rather than videogame spending displacing film spending. It's possibl…

It's not the amount of money spent, it's the time available. They probably fear far much the time spent in Facebook, casual web games, youTube, etc... Those are only starting and they see what it means for revenue in the future.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#549

Post by Tichy » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:39 PM UTC

TomOfTTB wrote: post #388

pg wrote: post #9

Incidentally, Paul Buchheit deserves all the credit for this idea. The YC partners were having lunch yesterday and he suggested posting this RFS. Whereupon we all turned to Jessica, who is usually the one who talks us out of doing crazy things. I was kind of surprised she didn't try to talk us out of it.

You’re an ass. Pardon the bluntness of that statement but I’m home right now because this pissed me off so much. So my tone is less measured. Have you even contemplated all the things the industry you’re trying to “kill” does? Make note of something: Hollywood is one of the most unionized workforces in the United States. This isn’t a story of rich studio heads taking advantage of people. Actors, Writers, Stage Hands,…

We need to support the system so that there can be low level jobs like stagehands that poor writers can use to subsist while writing? Sorry, that argument is absurd. Apparently what those writers need is a low level job, it doesn't have to be in the industry. And who knows, whatever disrupts Hollywood might even make it easier for those writers to make money with their art.

That they even have to work their way up the system in low level jobs is perverted.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#550

Post by polshaw » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:39 PM UTC

MrScruff wrote: post #302

Disclaimer: I work in film. This discussion is very strange. Hollywood films are extremely expensive and difficult to make, do you think the studios would spend all that money and effort if they could get the same return of investment knocking out budget films shot in someone's living room with a DSLR? I'm quite sure film won't remain at the top of tree for mass market entertainment forever, but it's going to be repl…

You balk at DSLRs but (whilst not the go-to option) they are increasingly being used by the industry. This[1] is an article just about the use of cannon's 5d mkII. You can add Slumdog Millionaire and 127 hours to this list. If it's good enough for an oscar winner?

1. http://canon5d.wonderhowto.com/blog/canons-5d-mark-ii-invade...