
The longer the 2012 Sundance Film Festival deal-making stalemate continues, the more VOD-centric deals will take center stage as they did in Toronto. A lot of the movies that came in with visions of theatrical releases are considering overtures from bidders who intend to emulate the Margin Call model where video-on-demand is equal to or more important than theatrical.
If VOD is to become a viable business that leads films on the margins to being widely seen, some obstacles have to be worked out of the system. The biggest: convincing actors accustomed to seeing their work play on 2,000 movie screens that the VOD model doesn’t mean their careers are on the downswing and that they’ve been relegated to pay-per-view. The only real equivalent actors have had for this was when they made a stinker that went straight to video obscurity. Will those actors spark to the potential of VOD riches and embrace the idea of promoting films to cable delivery systems instead of the ego-boosting traditional selling system of commercials and print ads? This is a psychological hurdle for stars. When Margin Call sold at Sundance last year with the Lionsgate/Roadside Attraction distribution VOD deal, veteran actors like Kevin Spacey had to be convinced this wasn’t necessarily a step down from a traditional theatrical release.
Another consideration is Oscar eligibility. The Academy rule has been that a film that premiered on television prior to theatrical was ineligible for an Oscar. Several major talent agents I spoke to said they weren’t exactly clear how this works. For example, the distributors behind Margin Call and Melancholia protected their movies and talent by booking “stealth” qualifying runs in a theater, just in case. On the Oscar front, the Academy tells me that as long as a film opens in an LA County theater for seven consecutive days either before or at the same time it is released VOD, Oscar eligibility is preserved. If the film makes its commercial debut on VOD, it cannot be considered for an Oscar. So a VOD revolution will likely lead to a lot of unadvertised runs in LA theaters.
“As long as there is a clear line on how to retain Oscar eligibility, actors are going to have to get used to this, because this is the way that adult dramas are going to be seen,” said one senior agent. “The practical reality isn’t as bad as the perception. The people who watch these kinds of films usually have great sound systems and large-screen TVs, and most Oscar voters already watch eligible films on video in their homes. We’re all just going to have to get used to this. We’re already having those conversations. Isn’t a movie that’s seen by millions across the country on VOD better than a few people watching in ratty arthouse theaters, which are uncomfortable and screens that aren’t that much bigger than large TV screens? Enough actors have made projects they thought would get on the screen, only to see them get dumped. You hear about movies with stars that never came out theatrically and grossed $5 million VOD. This is a process that will evolve, but it will enable these movies to get made.”
Another talent agent said that convincing actors will get easier when more test cases like Margin Call overachieve on VOD. “It’s all about the economics and distribution modes and how a film reaches an audience,” said the rep. “These conversations happen after a movie has been shot and is trying to find a life. It will take a few wins and maybe a breakout success to make it easier, but it’s coming.” Also coming are the Sundance sales. Films like Beasts Of The Southern Wild, Arbitrage, The Surrogate, Lay The Favorite, Celeste and Jesse Forever are rumored to have offers, and buyers are turning out in force tonight for Bachelorette. The expectation coming in has been that after seeing the bulk of the big titles by tonight, that the deals will begin flowing.


Invariably, the market is changing. And those that go along with the change sooner rather than later, will be the winners.
VOD to Theatrical is what Talkies were to Silent Films.
Embrace the change and adapt!
Oh, actors. They fail to bring people to the theaters and then whine when their movies don’t premiere on 3,000 screens.
MARGIN CALL was never going to play on 3,000 screens, I know people are pretending like the VOD was an “alternative” to a platform-moving-to-wide release but that is a joke. Kevin Spacey in a supporting part in a financial drama is going to bring them out in droves in Peoria and Columbus? He needed to be “convinced” VOD was OK? Please…
Actors who don’t get on the bus will whine their way into obscurity.
Actors are the lifeblood of this industry. no one pays anything to see a screenplay being read.
you need actors to bring it to life whether it’s 3,000 or VOD.
actors are not whiners. they are the artists you have wished you had the talent and courage to be like your entire life. respect is in order.
This is great. VOD rules.
VOD is the inevitable future.
If so, much is lost when audiences no longer gather together in a dark room. VOD turns dramatic films into an a la cart version of high-quality TV, but without the compelling advantages of serialized story-telling. It’s ironic that acquisitions execs come to a film festival to watch movies with an audience in order to buy titles for a new version of TV.
If VOD makes actors more money by either delivering more dough in residuals or in back end, or by allowing more movies (presumably more jobs for higher rates over time), than actors (smart ones) will be fumbling over themselves to jump on board. If VOD doesn’t deliver more money then no one will want to jump on board anyway.
Even in new school it’s all a out the benjamins baby!
VOD is another way to get your film out there …are these people that stupid that they can’t see the market potential ..???..the real problem is that the major studios have huge investments in theater chains & distribution ..& have stakeholders who are advertisers that right in there with them …they need to move on this quick ..or they will be sitting on the sidelines trying to get into the market spending tons of money …your film has to make money or the relevancy of your film is lost …as noone will see it …they should be looking at the widest possible viewing markets …all of them ..
VOD is the new normal…we need charts for VOD “box office” just like music business has digital sales charts…because that’s where indie film is going
It’s akin to the indie scene in the late 80s early 90s. It will be the domain of a kind of hipster film, there will be buzz on a few certain titles a la sex, lies and videotape that will contrast as a success against some studio box office disaster. This will pave the way for both a new type of indie actor as well as lead some feature actors to this water. Then there will be a Pulp Fiction type movie that becomes truly iconic and resurrects the careers or establishes the careers of several actors. And VOD is legit. And then the studios/money people will find a way to corrupt it.
The point that people seem to be missing in all these articles about the so called ‘Margin Call Model’ is that it was the theater owners that stopped this model from being fully tested. Margin Call was doing strong enough business in week one and two that it probably earned an expansion beyond the 199 screens that had been negotiated prior to the opening. Let’s call it the 300-600 Art house expansion version. Once the theater owners saw that the film was overperforming theatrically WITH the day and date VOD in place they panicked and didn’t allow Lionsgate/Roadside to chase. Of course Roadside won’t admit this because they don’t want to make it seem like they left money on the table. But the fact is many people still want to leave their homes and have a nice dinner and go see movies in theaters but MOST people want to sit in front of their 60 inch tv’s and watch it there. For a movie like Margin Call that was never going to play on 3000 screens this 500 screen model COULD have been the breakthrough if the theater owners would have let it happen. The movie did 5.5 mil theatrical on 199 screens and 5.5 mil first run VOD in the US. Let’s say it went to 500 screens with decent (meaning a hell of alot more than Roadside spent) P and A. If it held it’s $5000 PSA from week two that would have put the film in the 15-20 mil theatrical for the entire run. If you match that with 15-20 mil from first run VOD you start to get a very viable model for making adult oriented films in the 10-20 mil budget range because this of course doesn’t take international into account at all. Margin Call for instance looks like it is going to earn close to 10 mil in international theatrical alone once it opens in all markets. The thing that Margin Call seems to have shown us is that people who live near theaters and love movies will still get off their couches even if they have another option. But for the film business to essentially give away all those viewers on their couches when these Margin Call type of films have their most awareness in the marketplace (little films only get one shot at the press, editorial, and P&A window) is no longer a sustainable model. This should be viewed as the savior of the art film business if handled correctly. If properly marketed many people will watch these films in their home theaters instead of falling asleep on their couch watching the 2000th episode of some horrible retread crime investigation show that they’ve seen too many times before.
I’m not sure why any actors would have had a problem with this so called ‘Margin Call Model’. The film got a 200 screen release and made good money. It was better off than almost all other films from Sundance last year.
Most actors probably don’t. Kevin Spacey is a smug and self-aggrandizing blowhard.
A BIG reason for the expansion of VOD is simply because distributors aren’t willing to spend on P&A.
While they may see a market for the film and wish to buy it, more and more movies are on that margin where it is just too risky for a distributor to spend the millions in P&A.
So hey… why not put them on VOD. Effortless!
Great timing on writing this subject and article. I’ve just incorporated VOD to my film production project.
If memory and film history recollections serve, every major technological or distribution evolutionary advance since the Lumieres has been initially feared as a death knell of the motion picture business, industry and art form. Sound, color, television, computer graphics, video cassette, Pay Cable, DVD, digital image capture and now VOD have all been the a hooded, scythe-holding figure upon arrival, only to then manifest as a boon to both creative and business bottom lines. In the end, the audience calls the shots, and with the advent of home theaters and the shrinking chasm between the theater experience and the home media room experience, the delivery method should again be relegated to the backseat. The greater attention and focus should remain, as always, on the stories being told and workable efforts to get them in front of every possible set of eyes that might have otherwise enjoyed the experience. I suspect I will always prefer a night in a proper theater to watching at home, but I’d prefer audiences watching at home as opposed to wandering away from film and further into the arms of other home-based pursuits such as video gaming and internet pirating. This is most likely a change that cannot be successfully fought, and rather than suffer the embarrassment of the demise of newspapers and the harsh evolution of a significant number of books from paper to digital, why don’t we embrace this change as new and broader opportunity? Will things be different in the future? Yes, but the always are. Television didn’t sweep theaters from the landscape; it is unlikely VOD will either. Was is likely is that any new format or medium that keeps our people working and creating is most likely a good thing.
I live in a small market where independent films are rarely released. I hear about loads of great small and foreign films on the internet that I’d love to see but have no access to and VOD would be a great option. I wish more of these films were available that way.