Caveh -

You have to remember whom you're dealing with here - Mark Cuban has a horrendous track record when it comes to business ethics. Of course, this is exactly why he's such a success in the business world.

Having willfully entered the professional distribution game, you've now got no choice but to play by its rules. As much as this absurd episode might hurt "I Am a Sex Addict" at the box office, don't forget, it can also be exploited to do just the opposite. As many cynical publicists have shown us over time, controversy is akin to free publicity. Keep playing the squeaky wheel and the grease will come...

Let's just be happy that it's no longer going to Mark Cuban.

Mark Cuban just made it very difficult for a lot of people in the indie filmmaking & distro & consumer arenas to look at him & Landmark Theaters as a potential friend & ally.

While I appreciate the physical high-quality of Landmark theaters & Cuban's focus on the bottom line (which indies need a little more of, so things like AIVF coming up $60K short can be avoided, perhaps) & experimentations, Cuban's approach to indie film as a pure commodity, a strategic piece in his financial empire, is alienating.

On a personal level, just a few weeks ago I was looking forward to the relative ease of working w/ Landmark on some DIY distro events/rentals/four-walled screenings for my new flick Date Number One (since Landmark is throughout the US & I could deal pretty much w/ one office in LA for accessing those screens it would have meant fewer phone calls & e-mails), but I am definitely very weary of that option 'cause the strengths of Landmark: its size, reach & simple command structure (Cuban decides all), can also make it incompatible w/ small indie film entrepenuers like myself, here is why: if I worked a few weeks on promoting a booking w/ a small indie theater & for some reason they decide to pull the booking at the last minute, I may be better able to fight that decision because the theater is most likely not controlled by a multi-millionare who really can care less, has almost nothing to lose if I decide not to do business with them/him again & to spread the word that the theater engages in questionable business practices. Cuban's welath & the size of Landmark makes it possible for them to mess w/ IFC Films (probably one of the largest & most active indie film distributors in the country) w/ very little to no regard for the consequences.

Luckily more people are becoming aware of Landmark & Mark C's alientating tendencies at a time when Landmark not yet owns every single indie film theater in this country.

Let's keep track of non-Landmark theaters & support them so that they may: 1) continue to serve the indie film fan & filmmaker community, 2) continue to bring interesting movies, alternatives to Hollywood, to the greater audience, and 3) perhaps keep Landmark in check to some degree.

I am making a list of non-Landmark theaters over at my blog: http://diyfilmmaker.blogspot.com/2006/04/lets-make-list-of-non-landmark-i
ndie.html

Add some names & locations to it when u get a chance, if u know of some non-Landmark theaters. I am going to keep adding names & URLs & links to that entry all year long. Let's see what the non-Landmark indie film exhibition options look like.

While a part of the indie film watching audience has no idea & could care less about the indie film & filmmaker community, its histroy, its future, there is a significant minority of participants who do care, the type who invented the genre, the type who will re-invent it in the future & keep it alive. They, we, should try to keep this Cuban/Sex Addict/Berkeley episode in mind for a long, long time.

Mark Cuban may have just crossed outside of the "friends of indie film" line. We'll see what happens in the future. Cuban is wealthy enough, he does not need US indie film. Perhaps US indie film can do just fine w/ out Cuban too.

We'll see how it goes.

Thanks for reading this very long :) comment. Good luck to all of us in surviving the Landmark Theaters/Mark Cuabn combination.

Sujewa
http://www.diyfilmmaker.blogspot.com/

Mark Cuban does not care one bit about independent film. He cares only about making money. We hope that your plight will help wake up people in the indie community to this fact.

for more, see www.markcubanhasnoclothes.com

Let's try that URL again, from my comment above, didn't fully work last time:

http://diyfilmmaker.blogspot.com/2006/04/lets-make-list-of-non-landmark-indie.html

Just cut & paste the entire URL into your browser if the link is not active here. Thanks!

Sujewa
*******

well, i guess the only thing i can say about all of this is that the politics of money almost always complicates the equation of art. surely, i'm behind caveh and his film and every reasonable argument that caveh has made thus far. and i feel a bit divided regarding cuban's stance. i neither approve of it, nor do i find it wholly close-minded. but it does reaffirm (for the worse) that distribution/exhibition of a film is unbelievably hard.

keep optimistic, caveh. as i mentioned to you a few months back, it's moments like these where ideally the "word-of-mouth" factor becomes a faithful ally. besides which, the movie is an honest work - and for that, it'll find its true audience in time. (preferably soon, no doubt!)

Caveh, thought you mght want to post the entire thread we had
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 2:39 pm, caveh zahedi wrote:
> Dear Mark,
>
> IFC has already made a deal with Comcast. It wouldn't be right
> for them to try to get out of it.
I didn't suggest they get out, just modify it to create a compromise
that helps you

Have you even discussed what they might do to help you out ? What have
they said ?

> Besides, IFC WANTS to do day and date. Just like you do. Why
> would they abandon what for them is the whole point of the First Take
> series?

To help you out doesn't seem like a big deal to make some minor
modifications, after all you are their partner.

Sounds like I have spent more time discussing what could happen then
they have.

> The DVD rights were bought by IFC when they bought my film. The
> DVD will be released through Genius (the sub-distributor with whom
> they have an output agreement), and won't be coming out until late
> Summer.

That's a shame.

> I would love to sell DVD's in theaters to people who saw the movie
> and to other indie fans at the theater. I, too, believe that this is
> the future. But Magnolia declined to pick up my film when I offered
> it to them, and IFC did not decline. So I ended up going with IFC,
> which also meant going with Genius for the DVD, and not releasing the
> DVD simultaneously. That would not have been my first choice.

Another opportunity for compromise w ifc to help you. We are happy to
sell the dvd in our theaters for you.

Have you asked if the would allow you to sell a simple screener on dvd ?
As you said, this is a critical financial situation for you. Wouldn't it
be reasonable to at least ask them ? Or to ask them to ask genius ?

> Everyone has their own code of ethics, obviously, but I personally
> think that the "right" thing to do in this case would be to let my
> film play at the Landmark Theaters that had already agreed to play it.

So ifc shouldn't compromise to help you although
they knew they were potentially creating the problem ?

I'm open to mutual compromise. I'm open to shwoing the film in non
comcast markets even if IFC doesn't care enough to budge. I'm open to
selling addict screener dvds in any theater, even in comcast markets .
I think I'm being fair and open to help you.

None of this is going to make landmark much if any money. Its to try to
help you through a difficult situation

All you need to do is convince the company that is actually your partner
to try to help you

M
I can see why you don't want to "support" Comcast, but an agreement
had been made, even if it was based on an oversight on somebody's
part.
Wouldn't the "ethical" thing to do be to make an exception for all
previously agreed upon screenings, and just not allow any further
Landmark

The ethical thing would be for IFC to acknowledge the situation and work
out something agreeable. Which we are open to.

screenings until Comcast comes around on the HDNet front. This strikes
me as a reasonable compromise.

> And again, I would be happy to put whatever pressure I can on
> Comcast, but I would need contact info for those guys.

No thank you. Its not necessary

>
> Best Wishes,
>
> Caveh
>
> On Apr 5, 2006, at 8:35 AM, Mark Cuban wrote:
>
>> Q more thing
>>
>> What is ifc saying to you ?
>>
>> Do you realize ifc could fix the whole thing by asking comcast to
>> delay the vod release by 2 weeks ?
>>
>> Or by just promoting your film theatrically and not doing vod for now
>> ?
>>
>> Have they offered any compromise at all ?
>>
>> And what r u doing about dvd sales ?
>> You should be selling dvds in theaters to people who saw the movie
>> and to other indie fans at the theater. Are you ? Can we help u w
>> that in landmark screens that r showing the movie ?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 5:08 am, caveh zahedi wrote:
>>> Dear Mark,
>>>
>>> Do you have contact info for those Comcast guys? I'd be happy
>>> to publicize their e-mail addresses and encourage people to contact
>>> them, as well as to write to them myself.
>>> As for the indieWIRE article, a lot of those quotes were taken
>>> out of context, as so often happens. I did say the words: "It is
>>> misguided..." but it was in the context of saying that I didn't
>>> think that pulling my film from Landmark would have any effect on
>>> Comcast's decision not to carry HDNet. I didn't mean to imply that
>>> your decision to pull my film was motivated by "trying to make
>>> public" your fight with Comcast. I only meant that you were using
>>> my film to make a point to Comcast. Perhaps this is not true, and
>>> if so, then it was a misperception on my part. But I was asked
>>> what I thought was going on, and I prefaced my remark by saying:
>>> "It seems like...." In other words, I didn't pretend to know what
>>> was actually going on. I only ventured a hypothesis when queried.
>>> I would be the first to acknowledge that I am supremely unqualified
>>> to comment on the real story between you and Comcast.
>>> Finally, I also said that it seemed like monopoly capitalism
>>> for Comcast to try to exclude HDNet from the marketplace. I
>>> expressed nothing but sympathy for your position, and clearly
>>> stated that I thought Comcast should carry HDNet, and that I would
>>> gladly say the same to anyone at Comcast who would listen, but that
>>> I seriously doubted that anyone there would listen to me (or to
>>> IFC). I also said that I didn't see why Comcast and HDNet couldn't
>>> negotiate a revenue-sharing deal that would be a win-win for all
>>> concerned.
>>> I don't blame you for being pissed off (at them, or even at me
>>> for publicly questioning the social implications of what you are
>>> doing). I would be pissed off in your situation too. And again, I
>>> really do appreciate your taking the time to respond to this. I
>>> just hoped to persuade you to look at the situation differently -
>>> from the point of view of a struggling independent filmmaker caught
>>> in the crossfire and for whom the loss of the Landmark Theaters in
>>> question represents a significant setback.
>>> Granted, my problem is not your problem. But if you do care
>>> about the quality of film culture in America, and I know you do,
>>> then I would simply argue that you are squelching it with one hand
>>> while trying to invigorate it with the other. Surely, there must be
>>> a better way.
>>> If the price of you changing your mind is that Comcast agree
>>> to carrying HDNet, then let me at them. Meanwhile, I respectfully
>>> agree to disagree.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Caveh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 4, 2006, at 9:40 PM, Mark Cuban wrote:
>>>
>>>> its the ceo and president. Brian Roberts and Steve Burke
>>>>
>>>> More importantly, based on your quotes
>>>> "It is too bad that Mark Cuban is taking such a narrow view of
>>>> it," Caveh
>>>> Zahedi told indieWIRE in a conversation today. "It is
>>>> misguided...but I
>>>> understand it. It seems like he is trying to make public his fight
>>>> with
>>>> Comcast. I am sympathetic to his attempt, it seems like there must
>>>> be some
>>>> solution."
>>>>
>>>> I want to be clear on something. I felt like i owed you an
>>>> explanation.
>>>> Out of respect for your efforts and for the position IFC and our
>>>> folks at
>>>> Landmark put you in because of a lack of communication. thats why i
>>>> explained what was going on. I didnt have to.
>>>>
>>>> to suggest Im misguided or that im trying to make this a public fight.
>>>> Well, lets just say we agree to disagree.
>>>>
>>>> I wish you all the best with your movie and all your future
>>>> endeavors. I
>>>> hope you do 100mm at the box office. Even if you do more than that, it
>>>> wont change our position, we will just be happy for you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> m
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: caveh zahedi
>>>> To:
>>>> Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:20:56 -0700
>>>> Subject: Re: "IFC Knew"
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> What are the names of the people at Comcast who are refusing to carry
>>>>> HDNet, and do you have contact info for them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Caveh
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 4, 2006, at 11:42 AM, mark cuban wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Different reason every time we talk to them. Bandwidth usually, never
>>>>>> because they don't like it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> m
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: caveh zahedi [mailto:caveh@cavehzahedi.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 12:03 PM
>>>>>> To: mark.cuban@dallasmavs.com
>>>>>> Subject: Re: "IFC Knew"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Mark,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why won't Comcast carry HDNet and HDNet movies?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Caveh
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 4, 2006, at 3:56 AM, mark cuban wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Its unfortunate that you get caught in the crosshairs. In reality ,
>>>>>>> yours
>>>>>>> and the other films pulled does make a difference to Comcast. Their
>>>>>>> big wigs
>>>>>>> went around saying they were going to have day n date movies
>>>>>>> available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Landmark is the only chain of screens that has no problem playing
>>>>>>> day n
>>>>>>> date.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So in reality , if we don't show the IFC movies that Comcast is
>>>>>>> using to
>>>>>>> promote their Day n Date response to not having the HDNet Movies
>>>>>>> day n date
>>>>>>> program, then the chances are very, very good that Comcast now has
>>>>>>> no day n
>>>>>>> date movies available to it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We know how hard it is to get day n date movies booked. The
>>>>>>> Regals/AMC/Century, etc have basically joined together to say they
>>>>>>> wont play
>>>>>>> any of our Day n Date films. Enron, Bubble, War Within, Herbie
>>>>>>> Hancock, 1
>>>>>>> Last Thing, all movies that have gotten mixed to great reviews,
>>>>>>> they wont
>>>>>>> even play.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So Landmark basically is carrying the torch for Day n Date. If we
>>>>>>> don't show
>>>>>>> IFC or anyone elses day n date releases, chances are they are only
>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>>> be shown in a very very few independent theaters. Which severely
>>>>>>> reduces
>>>>>>> their value to Comcast and creates more reasons for cocmast to pick
>>>>>>> up HDNet
>>>>>>> if they want day n date movies for their customers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IFC understands this. Remember, they are owned by the same people
>>>>>>> that own
>>>>>>> Clearview Cinemas, and Clearview isnt even showing day n date on a
>>>>>>> widespread basis. Only a smattering of off screens here and there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The good news is that this only applies to Comcast markets. We are
>>>>>>> happy to
>>>>>>> play yours and all the IFC films in non Comcast markets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if you want to help, have your friends call the GM of any
>>>>>>> Comcast market
>>>>>>> they are in, and give them a hard time about not having HDnet and
>>>>>>> HDNet
>>>>>>> Movies !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks and all the best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> m
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: caveh zahedi [mailto:caveh@cavehzahedi.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:07 AM
>>>>>>> To: Mark Cuban
>>>>>>> Subject: "IFC Knew"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Mark,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for your comment on my blog. I really appreciate
>>>>>>> your addressing this. I thought it was very classy of you.
>>>>>>> I'm just an independent filmmaker, so I really have no idea
>>>>>>> what IFC (whoever that is) knew or did not know. But from where I'm
>>>>>>> standing, it sounds like there may have been a few misunderstandings
>>>>>>> along the way.
>>>>>>> I have already signed a contract with IFC to distribute my
>>>>>>> film, so it's no longer up to me to dictate where it plays or where
>>>>>>> it doesn't. But just so you know, we did turn down other theaters
>>>>>>> that wanted to play the film because we all felt that Landmark
>>>>>>> theaters were the best place to show it. I, personally, love
>>>>>>> Landmark's taste (they almost always show the best films in town),
>>>>>>> and I also love their magazine (FLM). That's a great magazine.
>>>>>>> I'm also a big fan of the whole day and date thing. I think
>>>>> it
>>>>>>> makes total sense, and I especially loved what you wrote about
>>>>> making
>>>>>>> it worthwhile for theaters by giving them a percentage of the DVD.
>>>>>>> I seriously doubt that IFC is going to pull out of their
>>>>>>> Comcast deal, since Video-on-Demand is a significant part of their
>>>>>>> projected income for the films they are releasing, and a film like
>>>>>>> mine probably wouldn't have gotten picked up by them if it weren't
>>>>>>> for their Comcast deal. I have no idea why Comcast is refusing to
>>>>>>> carry the two HDNETs. In a pluralistic society, they obviously
>>>>>>> should. HDNET has made some great films, and a lot of people would
>>>>>>> want to be able to see them. But do you really think that pulling
>>>>> my
>>>>>>> film from your theaters is going to persuade Comcast to carry HDNET?
>>>>>>> I don't think Comcast could care less whether you pull my film or
>>>>>>> not. It just seems to me like a case of killing the messenger. I
>>>>>>> had nothing to do with Comcast's decision. I'm just caught in the
>>>>>>> crossfire here.
>>>>>>> If there's anything I can do to help create peace between
>>>>> HDNET
>>>>>>> and Comcast, I would be happy to try. But I feel confident in
>>>>>>> conjecturing that my opinion on the matter is of absolutely no
>>>>>>> importance to Comcast whatsoever.
>>>>>>> Meanwhile, I would urge you to reconsider your decision about
>>>>>>> pulling my film. It took me 14 years to make, I put everything I
>>>>>>> have into it, and I think the film has something important to say.
>>>>>>> In short, I think you might like it.
>>>>>>> In any case, I wish you and HDNET the best. May there be
>>>>> peace
>>>>>>> between HDNET and Comcast, and may Comcast soon carry HDNET!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yours Truly,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Caveh
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> Its mavs time ! Get all the info at www.mavs.com
>>
>> And for the best in hdtv, its HDNet ! Www.hd.net
>> Thx
>>
>> m
>>

m