Video: The Art Of Immersion - How The Digital Generation Is Remaking Hollywood

by Ted Hope
August 9, 2011 3:00 AM
3 Comments
  • |

A little while ago I got to participate in a great discussion at Google, centered around Frank Rose's must-read book The Art Of Immersion. Joining Frank and I were Chris Di Cesare, Director of Creative Programming at Google Creative Lab, i Paul Woolmington, Founding Partner of Naked Communications, and Susan Bonds of 42 Entertainment. If you want to know where it is all headed, I suggest you read Frank's book and listen to our talk, posted below.

You might also like:

3 Comments

  • Sasha | September 15, 2011 2:36 AMReply

    Thanks for posting the video. It's my introduction to Frank Rose. Im getting his book tomorrow at Strand.

    Suppose there could be a set of non-gaming principles one would apply to a cross-platform traditional (character driven) narrative.

    My hypothetical question to you, Ted -say you're been recommended as the produce on special project for a 30 something filmmaker. And for argument state he's the reincarnation of Akira Kurosawa. How would you advise him today to build and delivery the stories he wants to tell? What are the principles you'd suggest?

  • Mark Savage | August 10, 2011 4:02 AMReply

    What has changed is the marketing. It now has many tendrils and targeting a niche is more possible. The internet provides access to a community in which discussion about a particular film or TV show can take place.

    However, I find the academic discussion here nothing new. Boring, actually. If you have a broad knowledge of cinema around the world, you'll know that very little out there today is new. It seems new because the watchers have little knowledge of the past.

    It's still about story and characters, and characters wanting something, and another character wanting the same thing or its opposite.

    The only way you'll get true interactivity with an audience is by shooting and broadcasting live, opening the data lines (photo, internet, whatever), and engaging directly with that audience. Even then, how much actual interactivity will there be? Will it actually change the content? Maybe marginally, but so what! It's a gimmick.

    Nothing kills the magic of the process for me more than academic "discussion".

    45,000 movies a year in a theatrical market that can adequately accommodate 600? Sounds like the opposite of a food shortage. Perhaps it's time to consider theatrical as a niche. And theatrical production budgets as unnecessary.

  • Scott Brookens | August 9, 2011 10:35 AMReply

    Ted,

    My heart sank a little when you said that there were 45,000 titles created last year in a market that is only capable of consuming around 600 theatrically for the same time-frame. Basic Economics (and I am by no means an economist) leads us to believe that when there is an excess in supply, suppliers make adjustments in price and quantity supplied until equilibrium in the market is once again attained. But when comparing the amount of titles supplied to the amount consumed in a given year, there seems to be an unhealthy amount of disparity in the market (and the disparity doesn't seem to be going away).

    Obviously there are plenty of distribution avenues that exist outside of theatrical, but are there enough to support 44,000+ titles a year that don't make it into the theater? What are your thoughts on this, Ted? What does this incredible disparity between quantity supplied and quantity consumed mean for the average indie filmmaker? What is the best way for indie filmmakers to approach/deal with/overcome this disparity in the context of their own projects?

    Thanks for a great blog and for your work in supporting the indie film community!

Hope on social

Popular Posts