Speaker 1: Welcome to Strictly Business Varieties weekly podcasts featuring conversations with
Speaker 1: industry leaders about the business of entertainment. Today's guest is
Speaker 1: Paul Davidson, head of Film and TV for The Orchard.
Speaker 1: The independent distributor is expected to be one of the
Speaker 1: most active companies at this year's Sundance Film Festival. In
Speaker 1: preparation for Sundance, Brett Lange, Varieties Executive editor of Film
Speaker 1: and Media, spoke with Davidson about his approach to dealmaking,
Speaker 1: why documentaries are all the rage again, and how the
Speaker 1: Orchard distinguishes itself from other studios. Hello, I'm Brent Lane,
Speaker 1: and I'm the Variety Executive editor of Film and Media,
Speaker 1: and I'm joint here today at our New York studio
Speaker 1: with Paul Davidson, who is the executive vice president of
Speaker 1: Film and Television at the Orchard, one of the premier
Speaker 1: and the studios working in the space right now. Uh,
Speaker 1: the Orchard is very busy this awards season. Um, they
Speaker 1: have l and Hell coming out, an acclaimed foreign film,
Speaker 1: and also the Party's just beginning. Upcoming films of the
Speaker 1: Orchard include Birds of Passage, The Hummingbird Project, Date Like Sleep,
Speaker 1: and under the Eiffel Tower. Very pleased to have Paul
Speaker 1: with me today. Thanks, I'm glad to be here to
Speaker 1: see you. So, Paul, UM, I think to start, why
Speaker 1: don't we talk a little bit about Sundance. The slate
Speaker 1: has been announced, at least the bulk of the slate.
Speaker 1: I'm interested. Will you be at the festival this year?
Speaker 1: Will you be looking for product when you hit Park City?
Speaker 1: Of course? I mean this is Sundance, is the pendulate
Speaker 1: Um festival for us next to can in Toronto. UM,
Speaker 1: so we will be there in force as we have
Speaker 1: been for the last set of years. It's interesting UM
Speaker 1: to watch UH and and anticipate what we think will
Speaker 1: happen there, especially with respect a competition at the festival.
Speaker 1: One of the trends that we had seen mostly out
Speaker 1: of two thousand, sixteen and seventeen was this scenario where
Speaker 1: you had the s the streaming services who had yet
Speaker 1: to really spin up their production and development you know entities,
Speaker 1: and so as a result, everything was getting bit up
Speaker 1: fairly high. You were seeing huge you know, price tags
Speaker 1: on content. And then what we saw over the last
Speaker 1: year specifically, which we anticipated, was this change in the
Speaker 1: marketplace where the Amazons and the Netflix is of the
Speaker 1: world already had most of their product um in development, production,
Speaker 1: and some of the other indies were also starting production,
Speaker 1: development and production themselves, and so um it actually regulated
Speaker 1: last year, and that's something that you know, we we
Speaker 1: anticipate to happen this year as well, and we're looking
Speaker 1: forward to the slate. When when you talk, when you
Speaker 1: say the word regulated, you mean that prices came back
Speaker 1: down to earth a little bit, Yes, they did. Last
Speaker 1: year was a good example of of movies selling for
Speaker 1: what you would expect them to sell. We're based on
Speaker 1: how you model a movie and what you think, you know,
Speaker 1: looking at historical comps of what a movie can do.
Speaker 1: You know, that's ever, every distributor who's picking up a
Speaker 1: movie has their set of numbers that they're they're running
Speaker 1: when they're looking at what they can pay for a film,
Speaker 1: and typically Netflix and Amazon were always paying you know,
Speaker 1: two times that, maybe three times that some of that
Speaker 1: because they're buying out the lifetime of the product and
Speaker 1: so filmmakers and producers and investors will never have the
Speaker 1: opportunity for upside and so they're compensating them for that.
Speaker 1: Um But yeah, there was you know there it's going
Speaker 1: to regulate regulated last year, it'll regulate more this year
Speaker 1: as well. The only kind of wild card this year
Speaker 1: is documentaries because this last year, documentaries you know, gross
Speaker 1: revenue at the box office that we've never seen over
Speaker 1: the last ten years. But before this year, typically we
Speaker 1: would expect four or five movies to break two million
Speaker 1: of the box office from a documentary standpoint, and this
Speaker 1: year you're seeing huge number. There's i mean ten million
Speaker 1: plus on you know, five six seven movies this year.
Speaker 1: So the expectation is, uh, the agents and the the
Speaker 1: sales as agents will be coming to town with an
Speaker 1: expectation to um get much higher value for the documentaries
Speaker 1: based on the potential opportunity for docs to explode again
Speaker 1: next year. So that's a good question because it seems
Speaker 1: like in in Hollywood often, um, you know, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of imitation, right, things that work. Studios are eager
Speaker 1: to sort of do the same thing that worked for
Speaker 1: someone else. How do you, you know, balance the fact
Speaker 1: that documentaries seem to be doing quite well right now, uh,
Speaker 1: with maybe the risk that that's something of an anomaly, right,
Speaker 1: that maybe there were just a few projects that really
Speaker 1: resonated with people that it's not some kind of larger
Speaker 1: popular embrace of that medium. When you're making your decisions, well,
Speaker 1: I think that's what you have to do. You can't
Speaker 1: get caught up in the the you know, the buzz
Speaker 1: and the business of it all. You have to stay
Speaker 1: true to what you think a film is going to do.
Speaker 1: It's it's tough because suddenly you're looking at a list
Speaker 1: of comps from the last year that are generating you know,
Speaker 1: five to ten million dollars at the box office, and
Speaker 1: those always are these outliers that come into play when
Speaker 1: you're you know, modeling out what you think you can
Speaker 1: pay for a film. But our philosophy, I mean, we
Speaker 1: we're not We're not spending at the upper echelon um
Speaker 1: to where we're going to drop, you know, millions and
Speaker 1: millions of dollars on a documentary. It's just the reality
Speaker 1: because you have to plan for the scenario where it
Speaker 1: doesn't resonate. There have been films in the past we've
Speaker 1: picked up um documentaries that we thought were very theatrical
Speaker 1: that didn't necessarily deliver in that window the way we'd expected.
Speaker 1: And you know, if you if you overspend in that scenario,
Speaker 1: it can really ruin your year, and you you know,
Speaker 1: you just have to be cognizant and careful about how
Speaker 1: how aggressive you get. What about the slate on paper
Speaker 1: and obviously a lot of time as you go into
Speaker 1: these festivals and you think, oh, these are going to
Speaker 1: be the movies that really deliver. Maybe it's because they
Speaker 1: have a big star, they have a director who's who's
Speaker 1: proven themselves in the past, and you know, lo and behold,
Speaker 1: there's some surprise that that you never saw coming, that
Speaker 1: that starts some kind of bidding more. But on paper,
Speaker 1: what do you think about UM this year selection? Do?
Speaker 1: Do these films look commercial? Compelling? What? What are your
Speaker 1: sort of impressions? I think with respect to the narrative
Speaker 1: films that are at the festival this year, there's there's
Speaker 1: a good handful of commercial projects. I think, UM Late Night,
Speaker 1: which is the Mini Kaling film. Um, we've been tracking
Speaker 1: for some time. We read the script, it's a very
Speaker 1: commercial film. UM, Emma Thompson, I mean is in there
Speaker 1: in that film as well? It's a it's a great
Speaker 1: cast of characters and you know, if it delivers, it
Speaker 1: could could be a big sick esque um, maybe not
Speaker 1: that big, but I think it has the potential to
Speaker 1: attract studios who are looking for additional content. You know,
Speaker 1: I could see that if it works, that's a movie
Speaker 1: that goes for you know, four to six million in
Speaker 1: domestic MG, and that potentially goes you know, maybe that
Speaker 1: is an Amazon, maybe that's a lions Gate. Perhaps that's
Speaker 1: a paramount if it's at that level. The funny and
Speaker 1: sad thing. At the same time, as you know, we
Speaker 1: say we were we're looking for movies that are um,
Speaker 1: we're passionate about that are really going to deliver. But
Speaker 1: also if they're perfect, they're probably going to be at
Speaker 1: the level of expense that a studio would suddenly jump into.
Speaker 1: So you know, you you're always looking for the movies
Speaker 1: that are not perfect. Like we have this joke where
Speaker 1: when we're watching films at festivals that are comedies, especially
Speaker 1: a we don't laugh because we don't want to laugh
Speaker 1: and contribute to the overall perception in a in an
Speaker 1: audience with buyers that the movie is amazing and every
Speaker 1: laugh costs us more money. So it's like you kind
Speaker 1: of live in this world of like it's it's really good,
Speaker 1: but it's not amazing gonna cost this, It's not gonna
Speaker 1: cost that um. But anyway, so Late Night is one
Speaker 1: of those examples of it's for sure going to be
Speaker 1: a commercial film. I think there are there are new filmmakers,
Speaker 1: so new producers and new filmmakers bringing content to Sundance.
Speaker 1: That um, they've gone through the Sundance Labs and we've
Speaker 1: been aware of these titles for some time and they've
Speaker 1: kind of made it through over the last three years
Speaker 1: finally to to green light into you know, physical production.
Speaker 1: There's a film called Wolf Hour with Naomi Watts originally
Speaker 1: with Jennifer Connolly. This was a film that has made
Speaker 1: it through the labs for some time and said in
Speaker 1: the seventies and could be a good performance for Naomi. Um.
Speaker 1: There's a film and I'm gonna and it's horrible on
Speaker 1: spacing on the name, it's um. Alec Baldwin is in it.
Speaker 1: Judith light Um. It's a kind of a New York
Speaker 1: based comedy about two sisters who find out that their
Speaker 1: mother is still alive and she's a soap opera actress.
Speaker 1: That's another one that went through the Sundance Labs that um.
Speaker 1: We've read the script we know that the talent and
Speaker 1: we you know, kind of been waiting to see what
Speaker 1: was gonna happen with that. Um, I'm trying to think
Speaker 1: across the board with some of the other films that
Speaker 1: are there. There's not there's not a huge amount of
Speaker 1: like big sick type films this year, but I think
Speaker 1: that the the slate of films is a little broader
Speaker 1: um than last year. Last year felt to me personally,
Speaker 1: um like, um, it was very much a response to
Speaker 1: kind of what was going on in our world and
Speaker 1: in the country, and um, you know some of the
Speaker 1: issues that I think were present in representation of women
Speaker 1: and minorities and African Americans. I mean, you saw on
Speaker 1: the heels of Moonlight winning Best Picture, there was the
Speaker 1: Sundance slate was very kind of it was darker. It
Speaker 1: was kind of holding up a mirror to society and
Speaker 1: what was going on in a way that there was
Speaker 1: a lot of powerful films, but when it came down
Speaker 1: to what film is going to generate money at the
Speaker 1: box office, there were less of those movies. There were
Speaker 1: films that came out of Sundance last year that, um,
Speaker 1: we're great and critically acclaimed, but just didn't connect. And
Speaker 1: I think that that's an example of audiences, you know,
Speaker 1: having had experienced that one great film the previous year
Speaker 1: that filled a certain genre um or spoke to them
Speaker 1: in a certain way, and then there were three or
Speaker 1: four of them the following year, and people just you know,
Speaker 1: reached a point of where of saturation with respect to that.
Speaker 1: And I think you'll you're gonna see a lot of
Speaker 1: docks this year go for a significant amount of money
Speaker 1: and they're not all going to delivered. UM. Cameron Crowe
Speaker 1: has a documentary he's produced UM that I think if
Speaker 1: the music doc that that could do well. There's a
Speaker 1: UM there's a doc called the I think the Amazing
Speaker 1: Jonathan about this kind of quirky magician. His story sounds
Speaker 1: like it could be fun. UM. You know, Apollo eleven
Speaker 1: is there, which is already being distributed by Neon UM.
Speaker 1: And we saw we saw footage of that almost a
Speaker 1: year ago. We were you know, it came down to
Speaker 1: I believe Neon and us looking at that movie and
Speaker 1: that's the spectacular film where they have all of this
Speaker 1: amazing footage from the Apollo eleven missions that people have
Speaker 1: never seen that were UM remastered in four K. I
Speaker 1: mean it's it's it's an experience. So that's the other thing.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of movies that already have UM distribution
Speaker 1: across Netflix across and Neon has that title. I think
Speaker 1: has three titles. We have Birds of Passage there. So
Speaker 1: there you that becomes the trend that we see more
Speaker 1: and more. We saw it can this last year is
Speaker 1: when you look at the films that are available, there's
Speaker 1: a higher percentage of films that are already spoken for
Speaker 1: UM and so just it limits the titles that are available.
Speaker 1: But I think it it kind of it all balances
Speaker 1: out in the wash at the end of the day
Speaker 1: because you have less streaming services, less companies that are
Speaker 1: looking for products are already producing or have already pre
Speaker 1: acquired those those films. Um. You were talking about a
Speaker 1: movie like Late Night, Um, that that seems very commercial,
Speaker 1: that could sell for four to six million dollars. UM.
Speaker 1: When you when you purchase something for that price, what
Speaker 1: do you actually need to do with the box office
Speaker 1: in order to make that back? And when you factor
Speaker 1: in marketing and other kinds of costs, well, um, you know,
Speaker 1: when we look at the numbers behind acquiring a movie,
Speaker 1: we're looking at all the windows were attributing a certain
Speaker 1: dollar amount to you know, you're making the box office right,
Speaker 1: so you can calculate that Typically your SPoD your pay
Speaker 1: one deals are tied to a percentage of the box office,
Speaker 1: So you can calculate if you believe, based on comps
Speaker 1: that that four million dollar pickup is going to do
Speaker 1: eight million at the box office, then you're probably gonna
Speaker 1: do in your first pay window of that number. Um
Speaker 1: you look at comps on digital and cable, the ancillary
Speaker 1: pieces at the end of the day. From our perspective,
Speaker 1: and we look at a film and a P and
Speaker 1: L of a movie where we're hoping to target somewhere
Speaker 1: in like um net profit range. So we use our comps,
Speaker 1: we map it out. We you know, we be put
Speaker 1: in there what we're going to spend on P and A,
Speaker 1: but we think it takes I mean typically in the industry,
Speaker 1: the modest way of thinking about it is, if you
Speaker 1: are expecting eight million at the box office, you probably
Speaker 1: need to spend close to eight million to make that
Speaker 1: in in your box office. We've been fortunate and some
Speaker 1: movies in the past where word of mouth really is significant,
Speaker 1: like a Hunt for the Wilder People. I don't know
Speaker 1: that we've we've shared it before, but I don't mind
Speaker 1: sharing it. I mean, we spent one point two million
Speaker 1: on P and A for that movie and generated close
Speaker 1: to five million of the box office. Like when you
Speaker 1: can do that, that's a word of mouth film. It's
Speaker 1: it's kind of tough to do that. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it doesn't happen often. But where you you can spend
Speaker 1: so modestly, then you're in you're in an amazing shape.
Speaker 1: But typically it's you know, spend eight to make eight,
Speaker 1: and so you're just you have to build out all
Speaker 1: those numbers and ensure that you're seeing you know, you
Speaker 1: believe we do you know a low base and high
Speaker 1: case scenario. Where do we think that base case scenario is?
Speaker 1: And and then that tells us what we can spend.
Speaker 1: And have you found that that when you sort of
Speaker 1: map out the potential lifespan of a film that you
Speaker 1: require one of these festivals, is it pretty accurate? I mean,
Speaker 1: are you you know? It's um, It's it's tough to say,
Speaker 1: I mean, um, more often than not, it's tough. It's
Speaker 1: I would say, probably, you know we're building a slate.
Speaker 1: So when we look at, you know, the eight to
Speaker 1: ten theatricals were acquiring a year. If we've been conservative
Speaker 1: and we've we've matched, we've kind of locked to that
Speaker 1: base case once some are gonna over perform, some are
Speaker 1: gonna underperform. And generally, at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: unless you have a big failure or a huge success,
Speaker 1: your your singles and doubles maybe overperform and your your
Speaker 1: home runs, don't. It kind of balances out on a
Speaker 1: title by title basis. You know, do those numbers? How
Speaker 1: close are we do those original expectations? If I don't
Speaker 1: think anybody's anybody's great at it. It's all instinct and comps.
Speaker 1: Maybe sixty percent of the time, six seventy percent of
Speaker 1: the time. Are you in the neighborhood plus or minus?
Speaker 1: You know of the number, but it's just things you know, like,
Speaker 1: for example, we picked up the Hummingbird Project at Toronto
Speaker 1: and UM for it's a great movie, very modest MG,
Speaker 1: and we haven't even released the movie yet, And some
Speaker 1: of the ancillary windows we've already secured are above and
Speaker 1: beyond what we've spent to get the movie. So we know,
Speaker 1: going into a movie like that. Wow, we the first
Speaker 1: pay window was so significant for that film because of
Speaker 1: the cast with Salamahayak and Jesse Eisenberg and scars Guard that, Um,
Speaker 1: we're feeling great going into that movie because you know,
Speaker 1: spend P and A is basically the only thing we
Speaker 1: have to kind of recoup with all the other windows.
Speaker 1: So sometimes you just you you luck out in a
Speaker 1: way you never expected. I mean, the movies that we
Speaker 1: distribute from Taycho with TV, which is what we do
Speaker 1: in the Shadows and Hunt for the Wilder People, these
Speaker 1: movies were very modest pickups. They've you know, collectively probably
Speaker 1: made more money the two of those movies and any
Speaker 1: any other film that we have in our slate. Um collectively,
Speaker 1: they probably generated ten to twenty million dollars in net
Speaker 1: revenue um because they become they become these word of
Speaker 1: mouth cult classics. And so you know, when you find
Speaker 1: those films, as many people have found this year, when
Speaker 1: you see some of the box office for these indies films,
Speaker 1: you you double down and you you keep building on that.
Speaker 1: One thing I always thought was really interesting about what
Speaker 1: you guys do at the Orchard is that you believe
Speaker 1: in transparency when it comes to how you make money,
Speaker 1: you actually share them publicly on certain films. Why did
Speaker 1: you decide to do that? I mean, nobody else seems
Speaker 1: remotely interested in sharing that kind of information. Well, it's it,
Speaker 1: guess it's it could be dangerous for some. I mean
Speaker 1: the origin, you know, the origins of the Orchard UM
Speaker 1: first and foremost are based in a twenty year history
Speaker 1: of global music distribution, where labels and artists are it's
Speaker 1: very important to them to understand how they're how they're
Speaker 1: sorry their films and movies, how their calm, their content,
Speaker 1: their albums, their songs, that tracks are performing. And so
Speaker 1: from a very early stage that DNA was built into
Speaker 1: the Orchard to share and be transparent. And we have
Speaker 1: engineers have built these these back end dashboards that allow
Speaker 1: those those clients to see in real time how money
Speaker 1: is being spent against their films and where you know,
Speaker 1: where the money is coming from the digital platforms. So
Speaker 1: for us, when we really through gasoline on the fire
Speaker 1: for building the film division back and four team, we
Speaker 1: wanted to do the same and what we heard from
Speaker 1: filmmakers was one of the major frustrations was the two
Speaker 1: things UM they have no had no idea how their
Speaker 1: movie was doing when they were going to recoup the
Speaker 1: recoupment of the investment profitability, no no awareness whatsoever. They
Speaker 1: would get kind of a statement in the mail a
Speaker 1: year later and had to call somebody to figure out
Speaker 1: what it even meant. Um and collaboration, that's the other
Speaker 1: thing that I'll talk about in a sec But for us,
Speaker 1: we heard that loud and clear, and so you know,
Speaker 1: we doubled down on it. And so, you know, a
Speaker 1: couple of years ago as a you know, we've continued
Speaker 1: to internally build and um this dashboard in the back
Speaker 1: end that not only shows filmmakers what they're making in
Speaker 1: real time, but does this kind of projection of here
Speaker 1: the contracted dollars. We know we're coming we have a
Speaker 1: deal at Netflix for the next three years. This much
Speaker 1: money is coming in. Here's where we think profitability is
Speaker 1: going to happen. And this is all kind of you know,
Speaker 1: under under the main the guys of what we initially
Speaker 1: green with the movie at what we thought it was
Speaker 1: gonna do. So they can see all of these things
Speaker 1: and and we're super We're super transparent about everything. We
Speaker 1: I'm always surprised when I hear from filmmakers. We'll get
Speaker 1: an offer for a pay one license, and we'll call
Speaker 1: them up and we'll say, we have these three platforms.
Speaker 1: It's HBO and it's Netflix, and it's Amazon, and here's
Speaker 1: why we would want to go with this one and
Speaker 1: here's what it means. And filmmakers say, we never get
Speaker 1: calls about this. Nobody. They just call us up and say,
Speaker 1: your movie is gonna be on direct TV and that's
Speaker 1: where it's going. And so for us, it's it requires
Speaker 1: a lot of time and effort, but at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, I think the effort far outweighs the
Speaker 1: downside of being honest with them about what's going on,
Speaker 1: and that that's the one problem I think that most
Speaker 1: filmmakers have when they come out of experiences. A bad
Speaker 1: experience with the distributor is typically it's colored by a
Speaker 1: lack of communication, lack of transparency, and a lack of
Speaker 1: um aligned expectations. You know, if you don't when people
Speaker 1: ask for an awards campaign, and this is here's a
Speaker 1: great example. We went to Cannon, we picked up Birds
Speaker 1: of Passage and we said, Birds of Passage, this is
Speaker 1: our our focus. For an awards campaign. Um, we told
Speaker 1: that to the filmmakers and we said to them, we're
Speaker 1: not going to pick up another movie to compete with that,
Speaker 1: that we are committed to this plan. And then we
Speaker 1: saw l Angel or if I'm being good with the accent,
Speaker 1: l ang Hell is what they say in Argentina. And
Speaker 1: they came to us and I said, I love the film,
Speaker 1: that we already committed to Birds of Passage the only
Speaker 1: way we would distribute it as you need to be
Speaker 1: aware that we are not doing an awards campaign. We're
Speaker 1: doing it for birds And if you're okay with that,
Speaker 1: knowing going in we're not doing X Y and Z,
Speaker 1: we're not spending X Y and Z, then I need
Speaker 1: to go back to the Birds of Passage team and
Speaker 1: make sure they're okay with it. That's just how how
Speaker 1: we approach it. We find that it just at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, is a better way to interact
Speaker 1: with folks. And El Angel was very appreciative and they
Speaker 1: still wanted us to distribute their film, and the Birds
Speaker 1: of Passage filmmakers were were happy for us to help
Speaker 1: them out in that way, and that that kind of
Speaker 1: is like an example of how how we deal with
Speaker 1: our filmmakers and it, as I said, it's it takes
Speaker 1: a lot of time and effort, and sometimes we look
Speaker 1: at ourselves and we say, oh my gosh, we we
Speaker 1: have to do how many calls this week to socialize this, this,
Speaker 1: this and this. But it's a better experience. UM. So
Speaker 1: you were talking about coming on board and I believe
Speaker 1: to help launch this film enterprise for for the Orchard.
Speaker 1: Why did the Orchard feel there was an opportunity here.
Speaker 1: It's not as if there have been a lot of
Speaker 1: success stories and the indie film space. What what did
Speaker 1: they see as a a you know, possible source of profits. Well,
Speaker 1: I think they had they had witnessed the experience that
Speaker 1: the music the music artists had had with them as
Speaker 1: a company. You know, this is this is a global
Speaker 1: distribution network. This is not we're going to handle this
Speaker 1: piecemeal and that piecemeal. It was the infrastructure was there
Speaker 1: in such a significant way, UM. And the writing was
Speaker 1: on the wall with respect to the changing of the
Speaker 1: windows and the new platforms of opportunity with UM with
Speaker 1: video content, with film and television that they felt like
Speaker 1: if we could as a company, we could offer that
Speaker 1: similar life cycle. You know planning and support for content
Speaker 1: that there was a value there. If you look at
Speaker 1: the landscape of indie distributors, there's very few any distributors
Speaker 1: that actually handle from A to Z. You know, some
Speaker 1: indie distributors will handle marketing and releasing of their theatricals
Speaker 1: and then a studio takes their digital and another company
Speaker 1: takes their physical. We handle aside from us. You know.
Speaker 1: The only thing we don't do internally is we do
Speaker 1: work with Lionsgate on our bigger titles to release them
Speaker 1: through their DVD infrastructure because we just at this point
Speaker 1: in the DVD life cycle um that that business is
Speaker 1: not growing and so it was something we didn't feel
Speaker 1: like we needed to build but internally as a company
Speaker 1: for us to be able to offer filmmakers and content
Speaker 1: creators of that end to end opportunity where it's not
Speaker 1: a different team every six months as a new window
Speaker 1: opens up, it's the same team. They're leveraging all the
Speaker 1: great work and marketing materials and assets and critical acclaim
Speaker 1: from the first window for the second window and that
Speaker 1: digital windows. You know, success is being leveraged for you know,
Speaker 1: when it's on av ODD services and so it just
Speaker 1: it's a seamless opportunity, and we felt that that would
Speaker 1: be something that folks would be you know, interested in,
Speaker 1: and they happen. Has it been um more difficult than
Speaker 1: you expected to to get into this space? I mean, what,
Speaker 1: what are some things that surprised you when it came
Speaker 1: to really making it a name for yourself? Well? I
Speaker 1: think when we so the first Sundance we all went
Speaker 1: to after we kind of you know again, before I
Speaker 1: came in, we were doing some level of you know,
Speaker 1: digital distribution just for you know, other companies like the
Speaker 1: Scholastics or the NBA's or the Red Bulls. But um,
Speaker 1: there was no theatrical component. The level of the content
Speaker 1: or the portfolio was candidly and there wasn't much there. Um.
Speaker 1: And so when we went into Sundance in two thousand fifteen,
Speaker 1: you know, we I always joked like there was the
Speaker 1: new kid on the block tax because you know, you're
Speaker 1: beening on a movie and what can you what do
Speaker 1: you have to show for it? What can you point
Speaker 1: to to say, hey, trust us on our reputation, you know,
Speaker 1: give us the movie for X because look at all
Speaker 1: the other great stuff we've done at that that scenario
Speaker 1: and that and that festival that wasn't there, so we
Speaker 1: had to pay you know, the new kid tax on
Speaker 1: a certain set of movie ease, and then that gave
Speaker 1: us the content that we needed to deliver and show
Speaker 1: people over that year what we could do in the
Speaker 1: level of capabilities that we had. And then suddenly you're
Speaker 1: you know what's happened over the years is you build
Speaker 1: these relationships. You you know, this producer now is this
Speaker 1: new movie, This director has his has his next film.
Speaker 1: People talk and at the end of the day, you know,
Speaker 1: I always say this to people who were pitching on
Speaker 1: wanting to distribute their film. You can you can literally
Speaker 1: throw a rock and hit somebody in the space now
Speaker 1: in the space who's worked with us, and go talk
Speaker 1: to him. They'll tell you what the experience has been like.
Speaker 1: And typically we even because we're not only doing theatricals,
Speaker 1: we're releasing, you know, we're acquiring somewhere like thirty to
Speaker 1: forty films, like films like The Party's Just Beginning or
Speaker 1: Paul Eberstein's um Song of Back and Neck, which just
Speaker 1: came out last week. Um, these are day and date releases,
Speaker 1: so they're you know, new York and l A or
Speaker 1: ten city day and dates. We're picking up thirty to
Speaker 1: forty of those. Were distributing another couple of hundred films
Speaker 1: on digital every year. So what's funny is you can
Speaker 1: instantly see people who are producing smaller films that we
Speaker 1: may not put out in theaters and they want the brand,
Speaker 1: they want the logo on the front of their movie.
Speaker 1: Like there's a level of UM, awareness, UM and respect
Speaker 1: based on the brand and the kind of movies we
Speaker 1: put out. And so it's fun to see. So how
Speaker 1: would you define that brand? What what makes the Orchard
Speaker 1: different than Sony Pictures Classics or Bleaker Street or Neon.
Speaker 1: What what is your Orchard film? Well, I'd say, um,
Speaker 1: first and foremost weird, championing, championing, UM, the new voices
Speaker 1: in film. If you look at a slate of our films,
Speaker 1: typically one third to half of those films or new filmmakers,
Speaker 1: new voices, um, you know Bart Layton's American Animals, his
Speaker 1: first narrative film, Tycho with TV Yoakim. True. I mean
Speaker 1: there are filmmakers who, um, they're coming to us in
Speaker 1: their first you know with Yochim. His first English language
Speaker 1: film was louder than bombs. Um, we like playing that
Speaker 1: in that space of to be the first experience with
Speaker 1: this filmmaker, and let's hope that we do such a
Speaker 1: great job that we have an opportunity to keep building
Speaker 1: on that with them. By always my metaphor is like,
Speaker 1: we're not we're not buying the star pitcher of the
Speaker 1: baseball team. We're buying the rookies, and we're hoping to
Speaker 1: build those rookies into star pitchers. Sometimes those star pitchers
Speaker 1: will then go to another larger company, which typically happens.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, Tycho Tyka does well on his
Speaker 1: smaller movies and he directs thor Ragnarok, Like, these things happen,
Speaker 1: and that's okay. But we're very focused on building those relationships,
Speaker 1: building a family of of talent that, um, we're there
Speaker 1: in the beginning. Movies that we pick up oftentimes they're
Speaker 1: they're not easy. You can't just put them in a box.
Speaker 1: Like a movie like American Animals is not an easy sell.
Speaker 1: But the craft of it is so amazing and so
Speaker 1: entertaining that we like the challenge of trying to figure
Speaker 1: out how to make audiences aware of these films and
Speaker 1: and share our passion on those films. We typically don't
Speaker 1: um focus on older demo content. If even if you
Speaker 1: look at something like The Hero with Sam Elliott, it's
Speaker 1: still had a kind of a youthful energy to it
Speaker 1: with the rest of the cast with you know, it's
Speaker 1: a little experimental actually, you know, you know, with Nick
Speaker 1: Offerman and and so um. You know. So there are
Speaker 1: companies that are very you know, there are movies that
Speaker 1: you can look at, you can see at a festival
Speaker 1: and you know they're going to do just fine. They
Speaker 1: have a certain level of cast. If they're a little
Speaker 1: bit older in their demo, that's those are the folks
Speaker 1: who they go to movies all day long, you know
Speaker 1: that like something like a UM you know, like The
Speaker 1: Wife with Glenn Close or you know, some of the
Speaker 1: films that Bleaker puts out there. They are solid cast driven.
Speaker 1: They you just know that they're going to work in
Speaker 1: that space. We UM, we recognize that opportunity. But I
Speaker 1: think we were a bit younger in our sensibilities and
Speaker 1: UM and we like to challenge ourselves if we're gonna
Speaker 1: spend all of our waking hours focusing on these films,
Speaker 1: which we do. UM. We want to. We want to
Speaker 1: be excited about the both the opera tunity. We like
Speaker 1: the David versus goliafe mentality of let's you know, find
Speaker 1: the underdog and and let it, you know, find its audience. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, every once in a while we'll pick up
Speaker 1: something something super commercial. UM. But you know, that's that's
Speaker 1: kind of like when people talk about the orchards and
Speaker 1: they talk about the films. They say, the one thing
Speaker 1: that we know is when I see the logo at
Speaker 1: the front of a movie that it's a quality film.
Speaker 1: It's got you know, a certain level of craft to it,
Speaker 1: and I know that I'm going to, you know, at
Speaker 1: least walk away. I mean, not love the film, but
Speaker 1: I'll recognize the fact that it's well made and there's
Speaker 1: there's an audience for it. Um. For the most part,
Speaker 1: it seems like most of your movies are picked up
Speaker 1: at at festivals. UM. A lot of companies have felt
Speaker 1: that that's kind of a bit of a dangerous strategy
Speaker 1: that they can end up getting involved in bidding wars
Speaker 1: and losing their shirts, so they've gone into producing their
Speaker 1: own content. UM. Are you going to do that? Are
Speaker 1: you doing more of that? Well? We did last summer
Speaker 1: we produced we funded the whole production of a film
Speaker 1: called Under the Eiffel Tower, which is you know, it's
Speaker 1: Gary Cole, it's Matt Walsh, it's reads Uh read Um
Speaker 1: Read Scott from Veep, Judith gold Wretch from the Overnight Um.
Speaker 1: It's a light romantic comedy um with a lot of
Speaker 1: comedy talent. That was an example of something where the
Speaker 1: script came to us, the cast was all in place,
Speaker 1: and you know, if we were going to a festival
Speaker 1: and trying to pick up that film, we probably would
Speaker 1: have paid more for it versus funding it and then
Speaker 1: having all worldwide rights on it. So now that's a
Speaker 1: film that we'll put out in February day and date
Speaker 1: with theaters and our own internal team sells it to
Speaker 1: markets across the world. But I'll say that being said
Speaker 1: that it is a risk, even pre buys or a risk.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've we there was a point in time,
Speaker 1: especially when we were going to the festivals and these
Speaker 1: bidding wars were out of control because spud services were
Speaker 1: also trying to fill their coffers as well, where we said,
Speaker 1: look we maybe maybe we need to get into some
Speaker 1: of these movies a little bit earlier, so we don't
Speaker 1: have to get into these bidding wars, and in some
Speaker 1: scenarios that those that worked out, and in some scenarios
Speaker 1: some of those movies, when you finally finally got to
Speaker 1: see the film, it wasn't necessarily the film that we
Speaker 1: had thought we were going to get. And so for us,
Speaker 1: especially at this point in time in the industry and
Speaker 1: where things are at um, where there's less there's there's
Speaker 1: enough content to go around finished content, our focus is
Speaker 1: definitely more on the finished product space now there will be.
Speaker 1: If Takoa Tit came to me tomorrow and said, I'm
Speaker 1: ready to do the sequel to what we do in
Speaker 1: The Shadows, we'd write them a check. If you know,
Speaker 1: there's certain filmmakers that we know what we're getting, and well,
Speaker 1: we would do that. But I think from approaching like
Speaker 1: a brand new filmmaker with who's unproven, that's looking for
Speaker 1: someone to come in and fund the entire production, I
Speaker 1: think for us it's probably not what we're going to
Speaker 1: be doing. So I've always been sort of interested in
Speaker 1: one of these all night bidding wars that you hear about,
Speaker 1: and they're always sort of breathlessly and reported, what is
Speaker 1: it actually like to be kind of in the room.
Speaker 1: And and also you know, at some point you have
Speaker 1: to be rational and maybe you just absolutely love a movie,
Speaker 1: but you realize that the bidding has gotten out of
Speaker 1: control and you have to walk away. So what is
Speaker 1: that feeling like too, when you and you have to say,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm out. Yeah, it's it's it can be frustrating.
Speaker 1: I mean, typically you see the movie that you love,
Speaker 1: the movie, you run back to your house, you start
Speaker 1: running the numbers you're running. I mean, for us, we're
Speaker 1: running the numbers we're doing the comps were quickly because
Speaker 1: if it's Friday night of Sundance, you want the filmmakers
Speaker 1: to see that offer that night, because everybody, you know,
Speaker 1: on the other side of the of the this whole experience,
Speaker 1: filmmakers watch the offers come in and if it takes
Speaker 1: three days for somebody to come in on it with
Speaker 1: an offer, they may not they may be less interested
Speaker 1: because what looks like it took them too long. They
Speaker 1: weren't that passionate about it. So you know, you want
Speaker 1: to get in an offer quickly. Typically for us, we
Speaker 1: just have a set of you know, corporate approvals, we
Speaker 1: have to go through at a certain level. Um. And
Speaker 1: then you know, the conversation that always happens is the agents.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's so it's maddening at times because it's
Speaker 1: like buying a house, a real estate. You don't know
Speaker 1: you only can you know gauge what they're telling you
Speaker 1: as the truth. Um. And there's always like a number
Speaker 1: that you have to be at if you want to
Speaker 1: get in the room and pitch the filmmakers. So it's
Speaker 1: like you send an offer and they say no, it's
Speaker 1: it's seven figures, or you won't even get a chance
Speaker 1: to talk to the filmmakers. And that's that's where we win.
Speaker 1: That's where anybody wins a movie is getting in the
Speaker 1: room and talking about how you see the film and
Speaker 1: what you're gonna do with it. So there's that trying
Speaker 1: to get in the room. Then there's you know, in
Speaker 1: the room pitching the filmmakers and the producers on what
Speaker 1: what you're gonna do with it. And then eventually after
Speaker 1: the pitching happens, then the agents do their thing and
Speaker 1: it becomes you know, back and forth where they're constantly
Speaker 1: trying to get that number up as high as they
Speaker 1: can and sometimes you may be the higher number. And
Speaker 1: I actually like this, Like I I like the scenario
Speaker 1: that the filmmakers go with a lower number because of
Speaker 1: the filmmaker, because of the company they want to be with.
Speaker 1: To me, I'll I'm happy to lose a film that
Speaker 1: way every day of the week because that it's not
Speaker 1: just about the dollars. It's about the plan, it's about
Speaker 1: the people, it's about the release that they're going to,
Speaker 1: you know, mount for the film. Um. But you know,
Speaker 1: there have been many films over the years where it's
Speaker 1: come down to us in another company, and you you're
Speaker 1: sometimes you lose it for a hundred thousand dollars because
Speaker 1: in the moment to your point, you say, I spend
Speaker 1: as much as I can, I can't go another hundred
Speaker 1: And then of course, you know, in hindsight, you watch
Speaker 1: these movies that you lost for a hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 1: do eight million of the box office, and you say, shoot,
Speaker 1: like we it's only a hundred grand, like we should
Speaker 1: have just you know, but you just it's like eBay,
Speaker 1: Like I I don't go on eBay anymore because eBay
Speaker 1: for me is a problem. It's you get sucked into
Speaker 1: that and you have to you have to know, at
Speaker 1: least for us, everybody has this. You have a budget,
Speaker 1: you know what your budget is for the year. You
Speaker 1: know how many movies you you need to um to
Speaker 1: buy with that budget, And if you're gonna overspend on one,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have to underspend on others. And but it
Speaker 1: gets it's it's it's tough, especially if it's Monday or
Speaker 1: Tuesday and Sundance. You haven't picked up anything, and now
Speaker 1: you found the here's the movie you want, and the
Speaker 1: bidding is getting to a point where it doesn't make
Speaker 1: sense for you. You have to make a call like
Speaker 1: what are you gonna do? Where you're gonna get the
Speaker 1: rest of your content? But it also seems that sometimes
Speaker 1: the price is sort of an albatross for filmmakers. Like
Speaker 1: I always think, like Happy Texas is in every article
Speaker 1: about somebody you know overspending it sundance. Was that actually
Speaker 1: good for them in the end? They may have won
Speaker 1: that Sundance, But because the movie underperformed at the box office,
Speaker 1: it has sort of a target on its back. I mean,
Speaker 1: sometimes it seems very shortsighted of filmmakers too to try
Speaker 1: to kind of um artificially goose the price tag. I think.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting, nobody knows at Sundance what a
Speaker 1: film is going to do. We all know those movies
Speaker 1: that went from ten to twenty million over the last
Speaker 1: couple of years that didn't deliver anywhere near that in
Speaker 1: box office. But in the heat of the moment, I
Speaker 1: mean all of those movies were great experiences at Sundance.
Speaker 1: They were films that people loved. And I can see,
Speaker 1: I can, I get it. I get in the heat
Speaker 1: of the moment, I get why movies like you know
Speaker 1: a Patty Cakes or you know, a Big sick Um
Speaker 1: why they go for certain numbers because they have these
Speaker 1: great screenings, um, and you just don't know. Again, it's
Speaker 1: like it's it's instinct. You know. My philosophy is you
Speaker 1: might as well live or die based on your instinct
Speaker 1: and your passion for something, because putting any other kind
Speaker 1: of logic behind why you're choosing a movie, it makes
Speaker 1: as much sense as passion or instinct at the end
Speaker 1: of the day. And I'd rather fail or succeed based
Speaker 1: on feeling something for a film and then figuring it
Speaker 1: out after versus the alternative. Well, Paul, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for joining us. I really appreciate you coming in
Speaker 1: and sharing your insight. I'll see you at something all right.
Speaker 1: Thanks for the time, thanks for listening. Be sure to
Speaker 1: tune in next week for another episode of Strictly Business. Hmmm.