Film Strategy

Tomorrow I have the privilege of being on a panel at the International Puerto Rican Heritage Film Festival (IPRHFF) with 2 talented and experienced filmmakers and producers, Christopher Lopez and Sonia Malfa. It will be moderated by consultant, Roxana Colorado.  We will share our experiences and advice on effective and strategic ways to get your film or tv show across the finish line. Among a number of topics, I'll be focusing specifically on how to protect yourself when you pitch a film, why you should always use contracts and how to build a relationship of trust with your investors. Hope to see you there! IPRHFF Multimedia Conference: TV, Film and New Media  New Location : Hunter College 68th St. & Lexington Avenue, Southwest corner West Building Room 714  [ Please provide ID at Visitor's Service Desk at building entrance ] 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM (Six Panels)  22 Latino Thought Leaders in Media & Entertainment and Moderators  FREE ADMISSION  RSVP Mandato

Here's an excerpt of some advice I posted on Avvo , recently, in response to a filmmaker asking whether they should form a production company or continue working under their own name as a sole proprietor. It seems like a no-brainer and that the answer is yes but I would only say yes, it's worth the time and money if it meets your goals. Check it out: Basically, whether to form a business entity like an LLC, partnership or corporation or remain as a sole proprietor (which is what you are when you do business "just as yourself") comes down to what kind of goals your production is trying to meet.  You should form an LLC, partnership or corporation if your goals are any or all of the following:  1. raise funds from investors,  2. hire a team of independent contractors or employees,  3. work with business partners and co-producers, writers and directors,  4. avoid risky liabilities that can personally bankrupt you (especially if you are shooting a picture with actio

In a nutshell, "this [Lionsgate-Starz merger] deal is about increasing content and distribution." And mainly to the benefit of Lionsgate because it has and creates tons of content and now has a TV distribution outlet for all of that content at its control. It is (regrettably?) another step in the corporate consolidation of the media landscape and another sign of how difficult it is to make money while competing with other studios and other forms of entertainment. Many are saying this is changing the landscape  (since it will help compete against the streaming networks) and maybe it is, but I can't help just see this as just another step in a landscape that has already been changing since the DVD stopped making money as Netflix and YouTube started making money. For the business and legal heads out there, here's an in-depth analysis of the Liongsgate-Starz merger from the Market Realist .

Film is an artform. But it is also a business. If you want to keep making your art, you have to treat it like a business ( I am talking about the logistics of making film, I am NOT talking about the cinematic parts; please don't substitute artistic elements and creativity with financial ratios and marketing buzzwords ). Running a business well means asking the right questions. Here's an article meant for small to midsized business (which is what most film production companies are) about 5 questions they should ask regarding their intellectual property. Substitute "IP" or "intellectual property" or "copyright" with "film" or "pilot" or "media project" and it will make sense and be relevant to you.  So enjoy: Five IP Lessons for Small to Medium–sized Businesses Originally published on 6/29/2016 by Joseph Walsh, Jr. | Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC Intellectual property plays an increasingly significant

Here's a guest post I did for Script Reader Pro entitled " How to Copyright a Script and Other Legal Tips for Screenwriters ." Of course, this advice also pertains to filmmakers, in general, since so many of you wear multiple hats in your productions and are aspiring Tarantino-types.  I know I am biased but it's a really good article. Check it out. ~~Danny Jiminian, Esq  I am an entertainment lawyer at www.djimlaw.com . For help in getting permission from musicians and other copyright owners to use their stuff without getting sued, as well as, clearing the script, negotiating life story rights, researching public domain works, registering your script with the US Copyright Office, drafting collaborator’s agreements and dealing with copyright infringement/entertainment litigation matters, you can contact me at danny@djimlaw.com

I recently wrote an article about why it is a good thing for certain filmmakers making certain films to share the wealth with profit participation instead of deferred compensation. A caveat: that has a limited use. However, I wanted to revisit that idea and clarify what that means for a filmmaker looking to adopt a profit participation strategy to paying their cast and crew. The truth is that while paying your cast and crew with profit participation instead of deferred compensation can lower a producer's and investor's out-of-pocket production and postproduction costs and improve morale/motivation, it has limits. Here's why: A producer makes multiple contracts throughout the life of a film starting with the writer and ending with the distributor. Along the way, she decides to offer back end participation (or net/gross profits or profit participation) to the cast and crew and signs a contract with them promising to do so. When the producer meets with the distributor

Sometimes when a no-budget filmmaker can't afford to pay a cast and crew what they are worth, then "profit participation" > "deferred compensation "     So many filmmakers struggle with the challenge of making their film because it is such a complex artform with a gaggle of logistical and artistic elements to it. One minute you are figuring out locations the next you have to decide on wardrobe then your DP is asking you about lenses and lighting (hell you might have to be the DP too) and your lead actor wants you to help him understand the crux of the scene. That's not even taking into account the budget and the legal and the food and the... you get the picture.  Filmmaking is hard work to do all by yourself which is why most don't. Filmmakers raise money to cover the costs of their cast and crew and those who can't raise sufficient money promise deferred compensation to their cast and crew. But even those who can't afford to pay cast

Filmmakers sacrifice alot for their art; their sleep, their bank account, their time, their family, their sanity, even their health. That is understandable to a degree since the need and desire to express yourself trumps the more rational necessities of life. But while filmmakers, as artists, might believe there is no limit, there really is and that is when you take someone's life in your hands. It feels morally repugnant to risk someone's life for art or money. But it happens in film. And the reality is that it has to happen. It has to happen because without taking risks you can't "get that shot" or "finish the film" or "make the fight scene look amazing." But because there are risks to making movies, the filmmaker has a sacred duty to do all within their power to minimize the risks.   What is truly morally repugnant is when a filmmaker risks someone's life without doing all in their power to minimize the risks. Accidents will alwa

Filmmakers have a frustrating love/hate relationship with money; they love spending it and hate the stress of getting it. The frustration is understandable as filmmaking is one of the most expensive art forms to pursue. In many other countries, filmmaking is not a purely capitalist enterprise . Instead, they are largely subsidized by the government because they find them culturally important. While some American filmmakers prefer a lack of government involvement, it's no secret that American productions are subsidized to some extent in the form of production incentives.   Production incentives are tax benefits provided by the states on state-by-state basis as a way to bring the film business to the states. These programs began as a response to Canada's cheap production incentives in the 90s that lured many film productions. As a result, the US states adopted progressively generous incentives to bring them back. Hollywood and government officials tend to be big boosters of

Among the many traditions that befall us throughout the month of December, the end-of-year-lists can not be avoided. Whether we read them or write them, lists are everywhere. Film magazines and blogs partake in that tradition by putting out their best/worst list of films for the year. I have nothing against them, personally, but I wanted to go deeper and probe the news and trends in the film industry for my own list which would be of strategic use to filmmakers and producers. However, my trip to Cuba for the Festival Internacional del Nuevo Cine Latinoamericano and the usual holiday fanfare put to sleep all that. Still, my Catholic guilt insists that I share something with you. Since I did read some really good lists that go beyond the fun but banal topic of what film was the best/worst in 2014, I have compiled them here.  The 14 lists below can either help you understand the industry better, give you a glimpse of where the industry is going, or deepen your love and knowledge for th

This is NOT what I mean when I say, "Put it in writing." The independent filmmaker is inundated with so much to do that even when she tries to do something right, she will make mistakes.  Mistakes are unavoidable and we learn from our mistakes so, in some sense, we learn to live with them.  For some filmmakers, mistakes actually force the director to make a creative decision that enhances the film.  But there are some mistakes that must be avoided at all costs or they will sink your production.  One of the mistakes a filmmaker must be sure NOT to make is failing to have a contract. In its simplest form, a proper film contract records in writing the agreement between the filmmaker and everyone else involved in the production.  It should define things like each parties' rights and responsibilities, compensation, length of service, and other matters important to protecting the parties and the production.  Those contracts then become a part of your chain of title which

My apologies for the temporary disappearance of the Monday and Midweek Mixers, I have been busy working with clients and developing projects for 2014 that rendered me unable to blog.  Although I love searching for informative and fun stuff to add to the mixers, it's time-consuming so I can only squeeze them in whenever I can.  Still, as busy as I get, I will do my best to continue to do so. And now without further adieu... Today in film history let's remember... 1919  –  Charlie Chaplin ,  Mary Pickford ,  Douglas Fairbanks , and  D.W. Griffith  launch  United Artists . 1933  – the birth of  Jörn Donner , Finnish director and screenwriter 1943 – the birth of  Michael Mann , American director, screenwriter, and producer 1948 – the birth of  Christopher Guest , American actor and director 1948 – the birth of  Errol Morris , American director Taking a cue from the formation of United Artists is a good reminder of the good work that can result when talented filmmak