Category Archives: Television

TV’s Revolution in Story

Called “the best script doctor in the movie industry,” John Truby serves as a story consultant for major studios and production companies worldwide, and has been a script doctor on more than 1,800 movies, sitcoms and television dramas for the likes of Disney, Universal, Sony Pictures, FOX, HBO, Alliance Atlantis, Paramount, BBC, MTV and more.

When I travel the world teaching story classes, writers and producers don’t ask me how to write a Hollywood superhero movie. They want to know how to write shows that come close to the incredible quality of the drama they see on American television in shows like Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Homeland, House of Cards and Game of Thrones.

Indeed, a revolution in story has been unfolding in American TV drama for the past ten years. It is as significant as the rise of the novel in the mid-1700s, the shift in theater to psychological realism in the late1800s, the development of film in the early 1900s and the emergence of the video game as a story medium in the 1980s and ‘90s.

What do the best-written shows on television have in common? Well, the first thing you notice is that every one is a serial. And that makes all the difference. Every revolutionary move in character and plot stems from the emergence of the serial form.

In the old days, TV consisted almost entirely of stand-alone episodes. Writers told a complete dramatic story in forty-four minutes. For example, the criminal committed a murder in the first scene, and the cops caught him in the last. The following week, they told the same story with slightly different circumstances. This guaranteed that the medium as a whole could be nothing more than a factory of generic story product.

With the introduction of the remote and cable, the serial form was born on television.

Now shows had multiple main characters, with their own weaknesses and desires, and they didn’t solve their problems at the end of one episode, or even fifteen. In story terms, this meant, above all, interweaving multiple story lines over many episodes. No longer confined to a forty-four-minute straightjacket, a writer could get to a deeper truth by using film’s unique crosscutting ability to compare and contrast characters and storylines.

This had a huge structural effect on the TV story, because it meant that the unit of measure of the TV show was no longer the episode — it was the season. The canvas on which the writer worked became ten times as long as a feature film, and ten times as complex.

So, it’s no coincidence that the revolution in story occurred hand in hand with TV coming into its own as an art form. But how precisely did the serial form revolutionize the TV story in both character and plot? Let’s begin with the main character of the show, since the first principle of great storytelling is that plot comes from character.

Much has been made of the fact that serials sparked a fundamental shift from hero to anti-hero. Anti-hero, as it is commonly used, is a bit of a misnomer, and it obscures the revolutionary nature of these characters. Technically, an anti-hero is simply the opposite of the classic hero in some way. He, or she, may be a bumbler, a holy fool or a rebel.

But the way most critics define the term when talking about the leads in the great TV shows since The Sopranos is that anti-heroes are bad guys. Not evil, but bad, and therefore unlikable in some way. He may be a killer like Tony Soprano (The Sopranos), a liar and philanderer like Don Draper (Mad Men), a meth dealer and a killer like Walter White (Breaking Bad) or a Machiavellian schemer and killer like Frank Underwood (House of Cards).

But these characters are not just bad — that’s simplistic and could not produce great stories for long. They are complex, which produces far better stories.

Now, the word complex is often thrown around in writing circles, and no one bothers to define it structurally. Most people think it refers to psychological contradictions, which all these characters certainly possess. But what it really means is that these characters have moral contradictions. So they all have a highly compartmentalized moral code that constantly tests them to the depths of their being.

Still, these complex lead characters, though crucial to the revolution in story, could not produce shows of such high quality over so many episodes and seasons. That comes from the character web of the story, probably the single-most important factor in creating a great show. Simply stated, the character web has to do with how all the characters in a story weave together as a single fabric, both connecting and contrasting. A show with a unique character web — in which each character is set in proper structural opposition to the others — is the only way writers can create great stories for several years.

When serials replaced stand-alone shows as the standard of television drama, they didn’t just deepen the main character. They radically increased the number of characters who could drive storylines, in effect showing the audience a mini-society.

Emmy-nominated shows like Game of Thrones and Downton Abbey can track upwards of thirty or more important characters. This places a tremendous burden on the show’s creators and calls up another critical point: the audience will become completely lost unless the character web is highly organized.

The necessity of organizing the characters increases the quality of serials because it means that each mini-society is determined by some kind of system that controls people under the surface and even enslaves them. In The Sopranos it was the Mafia. In Mad Men it’s a consumer culture that glorifies a false American Dream. In Game of Thrones and Downton Abbey it’s a rigid patriarchal class structure.

In many of the best serials, writers use another critical technique in designing the character web: they highlight and explore the moral element in life, both within and among characters. Starting with the central moral problem of the hero, they make all other characters some variation of that problem. They construct a field of fire where all the characters must traverse morally dangerous ground.

This gives a show two additional strengths. First, even the minor characters have complexity, so each is individually compelling, while collectively they produce knockout power. Second, each episode is packed with plot: the writers tease the audience with a moral challenge in the opening and then relentlessly turn the screws until the final scene.

Shows like Breaking Bad, Homeland and CBS’s The Good Wife (nominated in 2011 and 2012 for Outstanding Drama Series and, in my view, the best-written show on broadcast television) have put a unique twist on the moral character web, one that has consistently generated great stories, episode after episode, season after season.

The story world is, in some form, a Darwinian state of nature in which the characters are forced to make nearly impossible moral decisions. The fundamental question each week is: Can these characters remain human, and decent, while they struggle to survive?

Shows like Game of Thrones and House of Cards flip this technique. They are not about how to live a good life in a morally challenging world. They are about winning the game. In fact, the most revolutionary aspect of Game of Thrones has been its willingness to kill off its heroes — most notably in the shocking “Rains of Castamere” episode — largely because, in acting morally, they were also being stupid.

The move to the serial also expanded and deepened the plot of the TV story. Many observers have commented that this is a case of back to the future, to the serials of Charles Dickens and the tremendous plot density of the nineteenth-century French novel.

But the serials of TV drama have a fundamental difference from their predecessors: they are long-form narratives married to single event drama. The viewer enjoys both dense and surprising plot over the season as well as heart-stopping dramatic punch in each individual episode. The power of this combination to seduce and stimulate the viewer cannot be overestimated.

With the rise of the serial, the single biggest plot challenge for showrunners and their writing staffs became exponentially more difficult — and more compelling. It was no longer: How do you construct a tight and surprising episode? It was: How do you segment the plot and sequence the episodes over an entire season?

Again, the moral construct of the character web has often shown the way. The main technique top TV dramas like Breaking Bad and The Good Wife use to structure their episodes and seasons is to sequence the difficult moral challenges their heroes face. Breaking Bad’s creator–executive producer Vince Gilligan and writers like George Mastras and Thomas Schnauz are geniuses at this technique. By introducing Walt (Bryan Cranston) as a moral everyman, they were able to sequence the plot not just on the increased opposition he faced, but on his heightened moral challenges.

Each episode tracked both an escalation of trouble for Walt and a moral decision that was more complicated than the one that came before.

As this revolution in story plays out in television — and television takes over from film as the most influential and far-reaching entertainment medium in the world — we may see the revolution affect film as well. For years, Hollywood has made superhero movies for eleven months of the year, while releasing a handful of Oscar-worthy dramas in December. But no one is fooled anymore. Ten years of TV dramas telling the best stories in the world has the top acting, writing and directing talent clamoring to join the party.

Now it just so happens that in television, writers control the medium, and they are acknowledged to be the authors of their shows. So the astounding quality of writer-driven serials has quietly been exposing the absurdity of the auteur theory, which maintains that the director, not the writer, is the author of a film.

The best TV series — both within an episode and throughout a season — are all about story. The more a film or TV show is based on a well told story, as opposed to visual spectacle and detail, the more its authorship is based on the writer, not the director.

In the days of stand-alone TV, it was easy to distinguish the boring visuals of the small screen from the grandiose spectacle of film epics and thus depreciate television.

But again, things have changed. Television serials, in just one season, are far more epic than any movie, and they are filmed with just as much visual flair. With such great storytelling, no one would dream of claiming that the director is the author of a top TV drama. We can only hope that one day movies will see the light.

If you love story as much as I do, living through this revolution in TV drama has been an incredible ride. The lone drawback, of course, is finding time to watch all those great shows.

http://truby.com – July Newsletter

Leaked Paper Reveals Aussie Anti-Piracy Crackdown Musings

A leaked discussion paper has revealed Australian government musings surrounding a potential online piracy crackdown. Among them, changing the law to undermine a landmark 2012 court ruling which protected ISP iiNet from the infringements of its users, and new legislation to allow for ISP-level blocking of ‘pirate’ sites.

In common with all countries heavily involved with the distribution of U.S.-sourced entertainment products, Australia us under continuous pressure to do something about the online piracy phenomenon. Much of the negotiations have Attorney-General George Brandis at their core, with the Senator regularly being accused of lacking transparency. This week Aussie news outlet Crikey obtained (subscription) a leaked copy of a discussion paper in which Brandis and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull seek industry feedback on new anti-piracy proposals.

The discussion paper

Dated July 2014, the paper begins by outlining the Government’s perception of the piracy threat, noting that all players – from content creators to ISPs and consumers – have a role to play in reducing the illegal consumption of content.

It continues with details of schemes operating in the United States (Six-Strikes), UK (VCAP) and New Zealand which aim to develop consumer attitudes through education and mitigation. Inevitably, however, the paper turns to legislation, specifically what can be tweaked in order to give movie studios and record labels the tools they need to reduce infringement

ISP liability

The 2012 High Court ruling in the iiNet case signaled the end of movie and TV studio litigation against service providers. With their dream of holding ISPs responsible for the actions of their pirating users in tatters, copyright holders would need new tools to pursue their aims. It’s clear that Brandis now wants to provide those via a change in the law.

“The Government believes that even when an ISP does not have a direct power to prevent a person from doing a particular infringing act, there still may be reasonable steps that can be taken by the ISP to discourage or reduce online copyright infringement,” the paper reads. “Extending authorization liability is essential to ensuring the existence of an effective legal framework that encourages industry cooperation and functions as originally intended, and is consistent with Australia’s international obligations.”

PROPOSAL 1 – EXTENDING LIABILITY

“The Government is looking to industry to reach agreement on appropriate industry schemes or commercial arrangements on what would constitute ‘reasonable steps’ to be taken by ISPs,” the paper notes.

Website blocking

Given several signals on the topic earlier this year, it comes as no surprise that website blocking is under serious consideration. The paper outlines blocking mechanisms in Europe, particularly the UK and Ireland, which allow for court injunctions to be issued against ISPs.

PROPOSAL 2 – WEBSITE BLOCKING

The Irish model, which has already blocked sites including The Pirate Bay and Kickass Torrents, is of special interest to the Australian Government, since proving that an ISP had knowledge of infringing conduct is not required to obtain an injunction. “A similar provision in Australian law could enable rights holders to take action to block access to a website offering infringing material, without the need to establish that a particular ISP authorized an infringement,” the paper notes, adding that such provisions would only apply to websites outside Aussie jurisdiction.

It’s likely that most copyright holders will be largely in favor of the Government’s proposals on the points detailed above, but whether ISPs will share their enthusiasm remains to be seen.

Stakeholders are expected to return their submissions by Monday 25th August.

By Andy – TorrentFreak – July 25, 2014

Screen Australia to axe 12 staff and support for industry training programs after budget cuts

Screen Australia has announced how it will save more than $5m this year with measures including lowering its maximum investment in films to $2m, cutting 12 full time staff members and shedding $500,000 from marketing support. The publicly-funded body which provides grants to Australian film and drama producers was handed a $25m cut to its budget by the Federal Government over four years in May’s budget, and has undertaken a review of its processes to find where it could make the savings.

Training funds are also set to be cut with $400,000 stripped from the Talent Escalator program, whilst there will be a “transition away” from direct funding for screen resource organisations, with a move to commission them to do professional development activities handled in house.

Staff cuts will see the body reduced to effectively half of its 2008 size, with 100 full time employees as opposed to 190. CEO Graeme Mason said the review had led to a “renewed focus on the core business of the agency”.

In a posting on the Screen Australia website today Mason wrote: “We are streamlining our operations and making processes simpler and easier for industry, and to the greatest extent possible we have tried to maintain funding for on-screen production. We have also had to make difficult decisions, including a further 10 per cent reduction in staff, cuts to professional development and marketing initiatives, transitioning away from funding industry training organisations, and a relatively small reduction in production investment and project development.

“There are challenges before us, but I also see great potential. We will back our creative talent to capitalise on opportunities and take more Australian stories out to the world. We will grow the pie for Australian production by facilitating international collaborations, using advantages such as our talent and our world class production reputation.

“We will reduce process as much as possible and step out of the way of industry, providing more funding as grants, with no copyright interest, so that producers keep more revenue from their productions. We will encourage new models of digital production and distribution that ensure our industry continues to evolve with its audiences.”

AS well as the cuts the review has changed some processes of the organisation, including making all funding up to $500,000 a grant and relinquishing copyright on projects with that level of funding, with a new online application system to be introduced.

The marketing and state of industry departments will be abolished and replaced with a business and audience department to place more emphasis on business development, whilst funding to send talent and producers to international festivals to support their films, which drew criticism last year, have also been revised.

From the Screen Australia announcement:

Key changes 2014/15

In the context of reduced funding, Screen Australia has reviewed its programs to sharpen the focus on where we add the most value. We have also reviewed how these programs are delivered to find greater efficiencies, reduce overheads and simplify processes. Resulting changes are outlined below.

Processes

New terms, effective for applications received from 24 July 2014, will benefit producers:

• All funding up to $500,000 (except P&A loans) will be a grant. This will provide more equity for the producer as well as simplify the contracting process (previously the grant threshold was $200,000, and limited to documentary and some other programs).

• Screen Australia will also relinquish copyright in favour of the producer for all projects up to $500,000, retaining a 1 per cent share only in projects for which we provide recoupable investment.

• These policies will be reflected in revised Terms of Trade, and in program guidelines going forward.

Funding management processes will continue to be streamlined:

• Turnaround times shortened wherever possible

• Feature film Letters of Interest now approved by the CEO

• Applications to be submitted in two stages where possible, requiring fewer initial application materials to limit the burden on applicants

• An online application system to be introduced to make it easier for applicants as well as improve the efficiency of application processing.

Programs

Sharpened program focus is reflected across the agency:

• Greater emphasis on business development through the establishment of a Business and Audience department (replacing the previous Marketing department and the State and Industry programs)

• Enterprise funding to target industry attachments, high-level screenwriting development and industry capacities through new business models and ambitious business plans

• Production funding to sharpen its focus on stories that matter: innovative risk-taking projects that identify and build talent; culturally significant, intrinsically Australian stories that resonate with local audiences; and high-end ambitious projects that reflect Australia to the world

• International festival and market support programs revised to consolidate travel and materials funding, allowing producers to better leverage success at international events as part of release strategies

• Guidelines for the International Co-production program to be revised to better facilitate international partnerships.

Savings

Overall, funds will be retained on screen as much as possible, with the following adjustments:

• a further 10 per cent reduction in staff to 100 FTE personnel (112 at 30 June 2014, down from 190 in 2008), saving approximately $1 million • a $2–3 million reduction across production investment and project development programs, with the cap on Screen Australia investment in an individual feature project lowered from $2.5 million to $2 million in order to spread funds further

• a decrease in funding for traditional prints and advertising (P&A), saving approximately $500,000

• savings of around $400,000 in Talent Escalator professional development programs, avoiding duplication with the new Enterprise: People program, and from consolidation of short film programs

• transition away from direct funding of screen resource organisations, while exploring the potential to commission them to deliver professional development activities currently managed inhouse, creating savings of approximately $1–1.6 million

• small savings across other programs.

Aaddendum: The executive director of Screen Producers Australia, Matthew Deaner, said Screen Australia had done everything possible to minimise the budget’s impact on production levels, reports the SMH. ‘‘They’ve spread those changes across both their programs and internal operations, which was critical,” he said. “And they’ve done their best to minimise the impact on production output.’’

Alex Hayes – mumbrella blog – July 24th, 2014

‘The Shield’ Creator Shawn Ryan: Industry Consolidation Hurts Writers, Consumers

The showrunner for “The Unit” will tell a Senate committee that the Comcast-TWC merger should be blocked and net neutrality should not allow priority access.

Shawn Ryan, creator of The Shield, The Unit, Lie to Me and other shows, will blast the trend toward media consolidation next Wednesday in testimony before the U.S.

Senate committee on commerce, science and transportation, speaking on behalf of the Writer’s Guild of America West.

Ryan, who is a writer, producer and showrunner, says that while there are more ways to distribute shows than ever before, the “disturbing truth about American media” is that it “is controlled by only a handful of companies through monopoly power,” he says.

“These large corporations profit by underpaying those who are actually responsible for content creation and by overcharging consumers who have few alternative video choices.”

Ryan recalls the era before the Financial Interest and Syndication Rules were repealed in the early 1990s, when in 1989, he says 76 percent of the fall primetime schedule on broadcast was independently produced. Today, according to a WGA survey, only 10 percent is independently produced, and almost all of that is lower-cost reality TV shows.

“This excessive concentration has benefited the bottom lines of Fortune 500 companies at the expense of actual content creators,” Ryan will tell the senators.

“With tight control over both production and distribution, the vertically integrated media companies possess all the power as employers of talent.”

Yet, adds Ryan, “the writers who are the R & D of this industry bear all the risk of developing new creative works while the media companies, through their control of distribution, reap the rewards. If a television series creator and a network experience creative differences, it is the writer who is replaced, not the network.”

Ryan says it is not just the writers who suffer: “Consumers fare no better in this equation, as monopoly power restricts creative expression, limits content choices and drives up prices.”

Now online content is being consolidated as well, warns Ryan. “The promise of vibrant video competition is threatened by incumbent control of distribution. Our nation’s largest ISPs [content creators] are also MVPDs [operators of cable systems and other distribution platforms].

“These companies,” says Ryan, “which include Comcast, Time Warner Cable and AT&T, have both the means and incentive to stifle emerging online video alternatives.”

Ryan calls on Congress and the government to stop the merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable, as well as that of AT&T and DirecTV. He also calls for an open Internet with no priority access because no matter how the rules are written, it will ultimately lead to independent voices being squeezed out.

“What is good for these [big media] companies is not necessarily good for society,” says Ryan. “We need a video marketplace that more closely embodies the American values of free speech, fair competition and the rewarding of creativity and innovation.”

In calling on the Justice Department to block the Comcast-TWC and AT&T-DirecTV mergers, Ryan says, “There is a fundamental political and economic question raised by mergers, concentration and the resulting monopoly power. Are they good for society or not? The answer in economic theory is a resounding no. Every economic textbook makes clear that the result is a misallocation of resources and an unfair distribution of income.

“What will the result be of further mergers and market concentration?” asks Ryan rhetorically. “Writers will be paid less to create and innovate, even though our national political rhetoric exalts the importance of creators and innovators. And consumers will pay more, just as economic theory and history have made clear they will.”

18/07/2014 by Alex Ben Block – THR

Hollywood director: piracy is necessary, and doesn’t hurt revenues

Lexi Alexander has called out the industry for ‘bullshit’ claims about the cost of piracy, and says Pirate Bay founder Peter Sunde should be released from prison

Hollywood director Lexi Alexander slams MPAA anti-piracy war and demands Hollywood director Lexi Alexander has criticised the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and its war on piracy claiming that kids hacking film security is more entertaining than most Hollywood movies.

Alexander said she thinks piracy is necessary because of country content restrictions, and that while the wealth piracy begets for the pirates isn’t right, the freedom of access to content is.

Sweden free Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde “For every IP block, DRM and who-knows-what security feature Hollywood spends thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours on, some piracy kid will undo it for free and within a couple of minutes,” says Alexander on her blog.

“And this is my favourite part: I am 100% certain that the hacking of entertainment industry’s security features provides better entertainment for these kids than the entertainment we’re trying to prevent them from stealing. Let that sink in for a second, then try not to bust up laughing,” she said.

Region-locking content forces piracy

Alexander explains that as a German living in the US it’s difficult to get German news, and while in Germany it’s difficult to get US shows – so she resorts to piracy, and says many people in the film and TV industries rely on it to get content.

“Like many people in the film and TV industry, sometimes I find myself in pirate waters,” said Alexander. “As an expat household, with three paid Amazon Prime memberships for three different countries, a paid Netflix membership, a paid ACORN membership, a ridiculously high DISH [pay TV] bill and an Apple TV box, we still can’t watch most programs from back home, even though we’re willing to pay good money for it.”

“I’ll go on the website of a German public TV channel in hopes of catching up on some (objective) news and up pops the message: ‘Sorry, the copyright for this program does not extend to the country of your current location’,” Alexander explains. “Of course when I’m over there, trying to catch up with a US show sets off even more alarms.”

Hollywood piracy loss statistics ‘are bullshit’

Alexander also hits out at Hollywood’s insistence that piracy is causing massive losses within the industry.

“You know what statistics are bullshit? The ones stated by the MPAA about losses due to piracy,” she said emphatically. “Piracy has NOT been proven to hurt box-office numbers – on the contrary, several studies say it may have boosted the bottom line.”

Large sums are spent combating piracy, according to Alexander: “Money spent by Hollywood to fight piracy: Hundreds of Millions of dollars. (It’s almost impossible to find out the exact numbers, but given they spent $91m lobbying for Sopa [Stop Online Piracy Act] in one year alone, we can all assume what the total comes out to.)”

Alexander concludes that she isn’t endorsing piracy, because she sees people like Kimdotcom lining his own pockets rather than being Robin Hoods. But she says that she is willing to “at least reach out to the other side” and demands that Pirate Bay founder Peter Sunde is freed from prison in Sweden.

Sunde was confined for his role in “assisting in making copyright content available” through the Pirate Bayby a Stockholm district court in 2009 after two years on the run.

Samuel Gibbs – theguardian.com, Friday 11 July 2014

Movie piracy: threat to the future of films intensifies

Almost 30% of Britons are now watching movies illegally online or buying counterfeit DVDs, costing the industry £500m a year

‘There’s a perception it’s a victimless crime, but it’s not,’ says Mark Batey of the FDA. The movie industry excels in selling dreams. But since the dawn of the digital revolution, there is one narrative they’ve consistently and conspicuously failed to sell: that piracy is theft and consumers who indulge ought to feel guilty about it. Recent research by Ipsos suggests that almost 30% of the UK population is active in some form of piracy, either through streaming content online or buying counterfeit DVDs.

Such theft costs the UK audiovisual industries about £500m a year.

Given such scale, why has that the message failed to sink in? “There’s a perception that it’s a victimless crime,” says Mark Batey, chief executive of trade body the Film Distributors’ Association. “But it’s not. There are just a handful of super successes every year among hundreds of movies that are brought to market. And when a film is copied or made available online, it reduces the value of that film around the world.”

This, says Batey, can be particularly detrimental to the independent film-maker who may have spent years raising money for the film and may have had to remortgage their house.

Former lobbyist and US senior government official Jean Prewitt agrees. “The impact of piracy tends to play out differently and arguably more immediately on the independent sector than it does on the studios,” she says. “The indies are totally dependent on local distributors in all countries to take risk and invest in the making of a film before it is made. This is how these films get financed.”

Prewitt, who now heads the Independent Film and Television Alliance, points to its members who go to markets at festivals such as Cannes, Berlin and the American Film Market in Los Angeles (which is produced by IFTA) to present their project to buyers, who pre-commit to the film and then take it when it is finished, guaranteeing a minimum level of royalties to the film-maker.

These pre-sales are then taken to a bank and used as collateral to finance the film. If the pre-sales aren’t secured, the bank won’t loan the money and the film doesn’t get off the ground.

“Distributors are not able to take the risks they used to. What this means to the consumer is not that some producers don’t get rich, it means the product doesn’t get made.”

Each year, a huge number of these independent films are lauded at the Oscars: Dallas Buyers Club, 12 Years a Slave, American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street all went to market to seek independent financing.

This reduction of revenue caused in part by piracy has also resulted in studios and production houses making less adventurous choices when it comes to films – just think of the prequels, sequels and remakes hitting screens this summer. Similarly, streaming television content illegally has a huge effect on the business, says Gareth Neame, executive producer of Downton Abbey.

“Broadcasters will pay us money upfront, but it’s not sufficient to cover the cost of the whole production, so we look at the long-term value of our product and, based on all the ways we can exploit this, we cashflow against anticipated revenues,” he says.

“If it comes to pass that the show doesn’t make those revenues because of illegal downloads, we don’t recoup the money, and we have to be more cautious.

“Long term, movies and TV and other content simply won’t be created in the first place. One may think an individual act of piracy doesn’t matter, but if that becomes a way of life then the value of intellectual property becomes eroded, shows like Downton Abbey won’t get made.”

Phil Clapp, chief executive of trade organisation the Cinema Exhibitors’ Association, says that cinemas are losing about £220m a year at the UK box office due to piracy, representing about two months’ income in an average year.

“We recognise that the vast majority of illegal content starts its life in the cinema, and because we remain the key source we have put a huge amount of effort into making our sites more secure and training staff and giving them the ability to take action,” he says.

Clapp adds that the financial impact is felt most acutely by the long list of people you see on the credits of a film. “Makeup artists, costume designers,, studios and facilities, even box office staff – they are the ones who are greatly affected by this loss of revenue.”

According to a 2010 TERA report, up to a quarter of a million jobs will be at risk if nothing is done about copyright infringement in the UK by 2015.

Alex Hamilton, managing director of eOne Films UK, which has brought films such as the Twilight saga and 12 Years a Slave to British theatres, agrees with that assessment.

“The audiovisual industry supports hundreds of thousands of people’s livelihoods and if the industry has trouble supporting itself, it’s going to put people out of work,” he says. “People aren’t pirating to make themselves better or put food on the table; they are doing it for recreational purposes. An individual has to acknowledge that their actions don’t exist in isolation.”

There are a number of ways to consume content legally, says Hamilton, from cinema to video on demand subscriptions such as Amazon Primeand Netflix, and the cost is relatively low. Another crucial point pirates should understand is that nothing is free.

When a consumer streams illegal content, these sites are making money, either through advertising or subscription costs.

“It’s straightforward plagiarism for profit,” says Prewitt. “Every consumer click is driving legitimate dollars out of the legal industry and into the pockets of these criminals.”

The Federation Against Copyright Theft (Fact) works with law enforcement agencies to prosecute piracy but also works to educate the public on the consequences of copyright infringement.

“One message that is key is that, whether you’re pirating physical copy or streaming, you are putting money into the hands of a criminal,” says Kieron Sharp, director general of Fact.

Many pirates who produce counterfeit DVDs on a large scale can be traced to organised crime rings in the far east, he says, who then reinvest that money in other strands of criminal activity, such as prostitution, drugs and dog-fighting. “Our view is that most of these people [who stream illegally] are film and TV fans and we want them on our side, not on the side of criminals, who will profit from their consumption.”

Fact general counsel Byron Jacobson says the organisation has also been working hard to prevent companies from advertising on infringing websites. There seems to be evidence, he says, of a significant decrease in the number of high-street brands doing so.

And while Fact has proved to be a strong backbone for the entertainment industry when it comes to copyright infringement, support from outside the business has waned.

The UK coalition government has moved slowly in implementing the Digital Economy Act, which addresses policy issues related to digital media, including copyright infringement, and it has been an uphill struggle to get internet service providers to help combat the issue.

However, there is light at the end of the tunnel. In the UK, BT, Sky, Virgin Media and TalkTalk have reached a deal with the Motion Picture Association and the BPI, which represents the British music industry to send “educational” letters to customers who have downloaded illegal content. The process is expected to come into effect in 2015.

“The difficulty is there is no end point,” says one industry insider. “It’s not really going to divert or stop even medium-level or hardcore pirates. Maybe it will quash the nervous teenager, but that’s about it.”

And it’s not just the entertainment industry that will suffer if the value of copyright is not respected, says Neame. “IP businesses and learning-based business industries are hugely increasing in the west,” he says. “The erosion of IP will have an increasingly large impact on the global economies and economies in Europe. It’s important that we try to educate people to behave like responsible citizens and to be honest and understand why copyright matters.”

Diana Lodderhose – theguardian.com, Thursday 17 July 2014

A Deluge of New Summer Programs Has TV Marketers Scrambling

The promotion of the 2nd season of the Showtime series “Masters of Sex” includes a video clip on YouTube titled “Undress Me,” created by the filmmaker Tatia Pilieva.

FOR the marketing executives whose job it is to round up eyeballs to watch television, the summer is turning out to be hazy, crazy, anything but lazy.

A deluge of original programming is replacing many of the reruns that typically dominate schedules this time of year, offering viewers perhaps the most new summertime series since the early decades of the medium, when so-called summer replacement shows filled in for 13 weeks when the networks’ premier programs finished their seasons and went on vacation.

By one count, broadcast networks and cable channels are introducing 88 shows from late May, when the 2013-14 season ended, through late September, when the 2014-15 season will begin. Add the new series on websites like Hulu and YouTube, along with new episodes of streaming video series like “Orange Is the New Black” on Netflix, and “the choices are bountiful,” said Marc Berman, editor in chief of TV Media Insights. “That once-proverbial ‘Gone fishing’ sign in the summer is now a memory.”

“The growing trend of programming on a year-round basis” not only produces “larger tune-in” in the summer, which benefits advertisers, he added, it also “translates into a stronger promotional platform for the fall,” when the television season starts again.

The need to find viewers for all that fresh summer fare is generating a flood of advertising campaigns, in traditional media as well as in newer realms like social  “It’s challenging in a culture with a lot of noise to get attention,” said Don Buckley, executive vice president for program marketing and digital services at Showtime Networks. “You have to find unique ways to reach people.”

For instance, among the commercials, print ads and posters to promote the second season of the Showtime series “Masters of Sex,” which is to begin on Sunday, will be a video clip on YouTube . titled “Undress Me,” created by the filmmaker Tatia Pilieva. “First Kiss,” her video promoting a small clothing line, Wren, has generated almost 85.8 million views on YouTube since March.

In “Undress Me,” 20 strangers are paired, undress each other down to their underwear and go to bed. The action is meant to evoke the research conducted in the 1950s by the main characters of “Masters of Sex,” William Masters and Virginia Johnson, as is the principal artwork for the campaign, which is styled to resemble the racy men’s magazines of the era that were often sold in plain brown wrappers.

A campaign to promote “The Strain,” a new series on the FX cable channel, includes  “It’s probably more important than ever to have the right creative platform,” Mr. Buckley said. “We don’t take anything for granted.”

“Masters of Sex” is one of two series that Showtime, owned by the CBS Corporation, is bringing back on Sunday for a second season, along with “Ray Donovan,” with Liev Schreiber in the title role. Another cable channel, USA Network, is running campaigns for four series that returned for the summer — “Covert Affairs,” “Graceland,” “Royal Pains” and “Suits” — and two, “Rush” and “Satisfaction,” making their premieres on July 17.

“I joke that as a marketer I wish I’d appreciated five years ago, even three years ago, how much easier it was to launch and sustain a show,” said Alexandra Shapiro, executive vice president for marketing and digital at USA Network, part of the NBCUniversal division of Comcast. “To stand out, you’ve got to zag while everyone else is zigging.”

“ ‘Satisfaction’ is a great example of what we need to do now, and will need to do, for all our shows,” she added. To promote that drama, about a couple trying to make marriage work, USA Network has teamed with two nontraditional media companies, HowAboutWe and Vice Media, for efforts like online video and events.

“This is one of our first television-related projects,” said Eddy Moretti, chief creative officer of Vice Media, which also creates content that advertises movies and brands.

He described the three-episode web series that will promote “Satisfaction,” about “sex and relationships in the modern world,” as “additional storytelling inspired by the storytelling of the show.”

“The TV marketing departments are saying, ‘Let’s do something different,’ ” Mr. Moretti said. “I think that’s really cool.”

As appealing as unconventional promotional tactics are, Mr. Buckley of Showtime said, they are “part art, part science.”

Although “we have analytic tools we didn’t have even five years ago to help us find people with the propensity to watch a show,” he added, “we’re flying a little blind because we don’t always have the metrics.”

The result is sometimes two steps forward and a step back. For instance, complaints in Los Angeles about some billboard ads with startling images of a worm in an eyeball — promoting “The Strain,” a horror series that the FX cable channel will introduce on Sunday — led FX to replace them with other ads for the show. Although “we’re not out there looking to upset people,” said Stephanie Gibbons, president for marketing and on-air promotion at FX Networks, part of 21st Century Fox, the series is “not for the faint of heart” and the images “are signaling some people that it’s not for them.”

“When you’re breaking rules,” she added, “there can be some glass on the floor.”

“The Strain” is one of five series FX will introduce this summer, along with “Married,” “Partners,” “Tyrant” and “You’re the Worst.” Television is “definitely a 365-day-a-year business now,” Ms. Gibbons said. “There’s no break, no cycle; it’s a wheel of continuous content.”

“Sometimes,” she added, laughing, “you feel like the hamster within that wheel.”

By Stuart Elliott – New York Times – July 6, 2014

Australian branded content drama The Horizon hits 21 million online views

Australian brand funded online drama series The Horizon series has hit more than 21 million views on YouTube.

The show which depicts the lives of a group of Sydney gay men hit the number following the US launch of its fourth season. The third season has claimed four awards at the 2014 LA Webfest following a successful run online.

The show is averaging 40 – 60,000 viewers daily say its creators, and now boasts 73,000 ongoing subscribers to its YouTube channel. Brands behind the series include General Pants, NSW health promotion agency ACON, and DNA Magazine.

The series is produced and directed by former Packed to the Rafters writer Boaz Stark, and is backed by producers Brian Cobb and Jacob Inglis and Executive Producers Tania Chambers and Rob Cannella.

Series 4 features a number of Australian stars including Belinda Giblin and Barry Quin with cameos from Gretel Killeen and Jonny Pasvolsky as a vivacious nurse and a caring Priest.

“We have found some great ways for people to be involved with The Horizon series five and six, through pledges towards the production costs, which will then enable us to offer various opportunities like a walk on role or name your own character, as well as executive producer titles to those wanting to pledge” said Cobb. “Pledges can be made from $100 offering fantastic opportunities at every level”.

Robert Burton-Bradley – mumbrella – July 1st, 2014

www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e6bf2OkQKA&list=UUrkkQ0gp5biGP7K0mixrdyQ

States ponder responses to Film Vic initiative

Film Victoria’s switch from equity investment to non-recoupable funding of film and TV productions has prompted other state screen agencies to review their funding policies to remain competitive with the Vics.

Screen Queensland, which is in the midst of renewing its terms of trade, and ScreenWest both confirmed they are closely examining the Film Victoria initiative, which assigns the agency’s equity interest to producers.

The South Australian Film Corp., which introduced a producer equity scheme soon after Richard Harris’ arrival as CEO in 2007, is reviewing aspects of its scheme.

At Screen NSW, any adjustment of its funding policies would need to be signed off by a new film and TV industry advisory committee to be appointed by the Minister for the Arts, which replaced the board. Screen NSW recently increased the non-recoupable sum available per project from $70,000 to $100,000. CEO Maureen Barron is on leave and unavailable for comment.

Announcing the funding arrangements that began on July 1, Film Victoria CEO Jenni Tosi said an external review found there was no “real rationale” for the agency to make equity investments. Projects which are primarily but not entirely filmed and post-produced in Victoria will also be eligible for non-recoupable investment, a move which may attract more production from other States.

Film Victoria has the advantage of being the best-resourced of all the state agencies, meaning it can support financially more projects than Screen NSW and Screen Queensland.

By Don Groves INSIDEFILM [Wed 02/07/2014]

Screen Australia Invests Over $3.8 Million In 13 New Documentaries

In the final round of documentary funding for this financial year Screen Australia is pleased to announce 13 projects will receive over $3.8 million in support, generating production value of more than $13.2 million.

The projects selected under the National Documentary Program and General Documentary Program include eight one-off documentaries and five series. The documentaries will appeal to a diverse audience covering areas across science, arts, sports, history and religion, and will be accessible broadly through public, free-to-air and subscription broadcasters.

Screen Australia’s Senior Manager of Documentary, Liz Stevens, said, “We are excited about this final round of well-researched projects that will entertain and inform.

Appealing to a wide audience the projects should stimulate conversation about contemporary concerns such as parenting, poverty and identity.”

Three projects will be supported through the National Documentary Program.

From Blackfella Films comes DNA Nation, an epic story of genetic time travel, written/produced by Jacob Hickey and produced by Darren Dale for SBS. It is a story about our origins and how we are all related to one another.

Writer/director Paul Clarke’s Priscilla: Monster in a Party Frock is an observation of the history and development of celebrating gay culture. This one-off documentary from Jungleboys FTV will be produced by Jo-anne McGowan, Jason Burrows and Jen Peedom for the ABC.

Stop Laughing, This Is Serious is a three-part one-hour series exploring the history of Australian comedy, by writer/producer Paul Horan and Paul Clarke with Screentime for the ABC.

Ten projects will receive funding through the General Documentary Program.

Battlefields is an account of the ANZACs’ encounter with and defeat of the enemy on the Western Front. Written by Michael Cove, produced by Michael Tear and Harriet

Pike, and directed by Serge Ou, the six-part half-hour series by For Valour will broadcast on Foxtel’s History Channel.

A moving examination of the growing trend of broken families and fatherlessness, Call Me Dad, is about fathers that have come together through a men’s program to transform themselves with a focus on reconnecting with their children. Writer/director, Sophie Wiesner, producers Madeleine Hetherton, Rebecca Barry and Ester Harding with Media Stockade will make the one-off documentary for the ABC.

From Cordell Jigsaw Productions, Go Back to Where You Came From returns with a third series, by producer/director Rick McPhee. The three-part documentary for SBS, will challenge six Australians with strong views about the government policy on illegal immigration and boat arrivals.

360 Degree Films’ one-off documentary The Great Australian Fly, written/produced by Sally Ingleton and written/directed by Tosca Looby for the ABC, examines the annoying pest and the influence it has had on shaping Australia.

Harry is the story of a poor young Brazilian immigrant who rises to become an Australian AFL celebrity and struggles to understand a different culture and establish his identity along the way. Jotz Productions’ one-off documentary will be written and directed by Jeff Daniels and produced by Tom Zubrycki for SBS.

From writer/producer/directors Tosca Looby and Alex Tarney, and producer Sally Ingleton, comes Kids Unplugged, a life lesson from Carl Honore teaching three busy families techniques to turn their fast-paced lives into relaxed and happy existences in five weeks via the power of ‘slow’. The one-off documentary from 360 Degree Films will go to air on the ABC.

Licketty Split’s Missing Ingredient explores the ramifications of donor-conceived children and donor dads not being allowed to find each other because of existing laws.

The one-off documentary will be written/directed by Lucy Paplinska and produced by Lisa Horler for the ABC.

A documentary about a celebrated comedian and writer travelling to the East to discover the oldest religion in the world to help him better understand his own relationship with God, Artemis International’s SMGR will be written/directed byRussel Vines and produced by Celia Tait and Brian Beaton for SBS.

KEO Films’ three-part series, Struggle Street, observes the voices and stories of a cross-
section of the western Sydney community struggling to get by while facing overwhelming personal and social challenges. The three-part series by producers Leonie Lowe and David Galloway will be broadcast on SBS.

WKCR is a documentary about a murder investigation and trial that affected many in the community. Produced by Artemis International with writer/director Michael Muntz, writer/producer Celia Tait and producer Brian Beaton, it will be screened on the Seven Network.

Screen Australia’s documentary funding programs are currently under review to ensure that they continue to support the unique qualities of Australian documentary in an evolving ecosystem of screen production and consumption. Drawing on the submissions to the Discussion Paper, Stories that Matter, Screen Australia will be publishing draft guidelines shortly for industry feedback.

NATIONAL DOCUMENTARY PROGRAM (NDP)

DNA NATION (working title)

3 x 52 mins

Blackfella Films Pty Ltd

Producers Darren Dale, Jacob Hickey

Writer Jacob Hickey

Broadcaster SBS

Sales SBS Distribution

Synopsis This is an epic story of genetic time travel. A story about who we are, where we

came from and how we are all related to one another.

PRISCILLA: MONSTER IN A PARTY FROCK

1 x 57 mins

Jungleboys FTV Pty Ltd

Producers Jo-anne McGowan, Jason Burrows, Jen Peedom

Director Paul Clarke

Writers Paul Clarke, Alex Barry

Broadcaster ABC

Sales ABC Commercial

Synopsis Monster in a Party Frock is the story of how an unlikely film changed the

course of history and brought a celebration of gay culture to the world.

STOP LAUGHING, THIS IS SERIOUS

3 x 57 mins

Screentime Pty Ltd

Executive Producers Jennifer Collins, Bob Campbell

Producers/Writers Paul Horan, Paul Clarke

Broadcaster ABC

Sales ABC Commercial

Synopsis Stop Laughing:This Is Serious is a documentary series exploring the history of

Australian comedy for ABC1.

GENERAL DOCUMENTARY PROGRAM (GDP)

BATTLEFIELDS

6 x 24 mins

For Valour Pty Ltd.

Producers Michael Tear, Harriet Pike

Director Serge Ou

Writer Michael Cove

Broadcaster FOXTEL History Channel

Synopsis How the ANZACs met and defeated the main force of the enemy on the

Western Front.

CALL ME DAD

1 x 57 mins

Media Stockade Pty Ltd.

Producers Madeleine Hetherton, Rebecca Barry, Ester Harding

Director/Writer Sophie Wiesner

Broadcaster ABC

Synopsis In the midst of a silent yet devastating epidemic of fatherlessness, this is a film

about fathers at risk of or struggling with broken families whose children are vulnerable.

Now, through a men’s program, they each have the chance to regain what’s lost, to

transform himself and earn another shot at the title, ‘Dad’.

GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM SERIES 3

3 x 52 mins

Cordell Jigsaw Productions Pty Ltd

Executive Producers Nick Murray, Michael Cordell

Producer/Director Rick McPhee

Broadcaster SBS

Sales Cordell Jigsaw Distribution

Synopsis With major changes to government policy on boat arrivals, six Australians with

strong views on the issue, embark on a life changing journey which will challenge their

opinions to the very core.

THE GREAT AUSTRALIAN FLY

1 x 57 mins

360 Degree Films Pty Ltd

Producer Sally Ingleton

Director Tosca Looby

Writers Tosca Looby, Sally Ingleton

Broadcaster ABC

Sales ZED Sales

Synopsis How a national nuisance helped shape Australia.

HARRY

1 x 52 mins

Jotz Productions Pty Ltd

Producer Tom Zubrycki

Director/Writer Jeff Daniels

Broadcaster SBS

Synopsis The story of an immigrant boy from Brazil who becomes an AFL star. A black

man in a white world, Harry searches for his own identity in a country and culture that

he feels never really accepts him. From the slums of Rio de Janeiro to the dizzying

heights of Australian celebrity this is the story of a boy who becomes a man by forging

his own perilous path through other’s expectations.

KIDS UNPLUGGED

1 x 57 mins

360 Degree Films Pty Ltd

Executive Producer Sally Ingleton

Producers Sally Ingleton, Alex Tarney, Tosca Looby

Directors/Writers Tosca Looby, Alex Tarney

Broadcaster ABC

Synopsis ‘Slow coach’ Carl Honore has five weeks to turn three busy families from

stressed and hectic, to happy and unhurried – via the power of ‘slow’.

MISSING INGREDIENT

1 x 57 mins

Licketty Split Pty Ltd

Executive Producer John Moore

Producer Lisa Horler

Director/Writer Lucy Paplinska

Broadcaster ABC

Synopsis Missing Ingredient is an intimate and cautionary tale about secrets

surrounding sperm donation … and the donor conceived adults – and donors – who are

demanding some answers.

SMGR

1 x 52 mins

Artemis International

Producers Celia Tait, Brian Beaton

Director/Writer Russel Vines

Broadcaster SBS

Synopsis Celebrated comedian and writer journeys to the East to discover the oldest

religion in the world to help him better understand his own relationship with God.

STRUGGLE STREET

3 x 52 mins

KEO Films Australia Pty Ltd

Producers Leonie Lowe, David Galloway

Broadcaster SBS

Sales Hat Trick International

Synopsis A three-part observational documentary series that will feature the voices and

stories of a cross-section of struggling western Sydney residents and families as they try

to get by, despite overwhelming personal and social challenges.

WKCR

1 x 55 mins

Artemis International Pty Ltd

Producers Brian Beaton, Celia Tait

Director Michael Muntz

Writer Michael Muntz, Celia Tait

Broadcaster Channel 7

Synopsis A murder investigation and trial divides a city, and the legal fraternity.

Screen Australia Media Release = Friday 6 June 2014