Cinematic TV and 'Carnivàle'

With shows like our dearly departed “Breaking Bad,” Netflix’s offering to the zeitgeist, “House of Cards,” and recent critical and, increasingly, fan darling, “True Detective,” the divide between television series and movies as we’ve traditionally understood it is in a state of erosion. Zachary Wigon over at Tribeca Film has written a brief thought piece on why this blending of form, narrative styles and technique is a development worthy of our enthusiasm.  Says Wigon:

“…filmmakers who are apprehensive of working in TV need to understand that the medium is continually reshaping itself to accommodate their needs. Anyone who has doubts about TV’s allowances for formalism should check out the virtuoso 6-minute shot that ends episode four of True Detective. But just as crucially, it’s necessary to remind TV fans that TV is not gaining a greater share of cultural influence because it’s ‘better’ than cinema; it’s gaining a greater influence because it is reappropriating the tenets of cinema.”

Wigon’s blog post led me to wonder which other shows demonstrate a flair for the cinematic and, specifically, which shows, if any, “reappropriated the tenets of cinema” long before it was cool to do so. Although I had a list in mind (classics “The Wire” and “Twin Peaks” foremost among my ideas), there is one series that stood out as a preeminent example of a cinema-TV hybrid – and which, for all its opacity, maintains its preeminence.

I first came across a clip from HBO’s “Carnivàle” last year, embedded in a blog post that asked if the below scene was the most beautiful ever filmed for TV. The author admitted he had no idea what was going on between the characters, but also that his ignorance didn’t bother him. The scene was that compelling.

 

“Carnivàle” is a bizarre show with a dense mythology many viewers found daunting and many others found pretentious when the series ran on HBO from 2003-2005. The show’s pilot set a record ratings high for an HBO original upon its premiere, but, although creator Daniel Knauf had crafted a storyline he intended to unwind over six seasons, the network cut “Carnivàle” short after only two.

The show concerns itself with a mythic battle between the forces of good and evil as played out against the backdrop of the Dust Bowl. These opposing forces seek human proxies with each new generation, “avatars” who must continue their fight. Of course, the humans don’t necessarily know they’re proxies, which is the case with “good” Ben Hawkins (Nick Stahl) and “bad” Brother Justin Crowe (Clancy Brown).  “Carnivàle” follows both men, although Ben’s relationship with a traveling troupe of carnies, many of who possess their own magic abilities, seems to be the focus.

Biblical imagery and allusions, historical references, “avatars,” tarot readings, “prophets,” “ushers,” and many more abstract and esoteric elements left viewers scratching their heads, especially as the above explanation was never explicitly given within the series, but rather left for audiences to parse on their own and actively discuss in online forums, “Carnivàle” being one of the first shows to foster intense Internet fandom. Much of the cinematic beauty of “Carnivàle” is in fact a function of the series’ obsession with leaving clues. For instance, the positioning of Ben Hawkins and Brother Justin Crowe in relation to the two men sitting at the table behind them in the clip above is a clue, as is, possibly, their re-positioning when Brother Justin looks in the mirror. The song that plays in the background of the scene, as well as the waitress’ cryptic “Every prophet in his house” are both repeated several times throughout the series – more clues.

“Carnivàle” could be considered cinematic for the painstaking attention afforded its cinematography and the staging of its shots, as well as by virtue of the sheer scope of its narrative ambition – you don’t get much grander than biblical. Of course, neither an emphasis on style nor one on universal themes is exclusively the purview of film. However, given cinema’s larger budgets and scale, “big” has traditionally been left to the big screen.  Not so with “Carnivàle,” which HBO afforded $4 million for its every episode. Additionally, given HBO’s great no-commercials policy, the show’s creators were able to tailor the runtime of each episode to the story’s needs. The hour-long show in actuality often ran anywhere from 40, 45 to a little over 60 minutes.

That Carnivàle seems to share a cinematic sensibility may have something – or everything – to do with the fact that creator Knauf initially wrote his series as a film script. Since “Carnivàle’s” cancelation, Knauf has vocalized his desire to either have another network pick up the rest of his story, or possibly have a studio turn it into a feature film. Given the hybridized nature of TV today, the landscape is ripe  for a continuation of his cinematic show. Audiences may not have been ready for “Carnivàle” a decade ago, but by the looks of things, pop culture may have finally caught up.

‘Paranormal Activity’ to scare up weekend business

Though 2013 ended on a high note earlier this week – domestic sales tallied out at almost $11 billion for the year – the first weekend of 2014 will likely be a quiet one.  The Marked Ones, the fifth installment in the popular Paranormal Activity horror franchise, is the only new release opening today. The first PA film was a surprise hit and a testament to the power of word-of-mouth buzz. The micro-budgeted flick, released in 2007, earned $107.9 million and is still the series’ most successful movie. Paranormal Activity 2 grossed $84.8 million in 2010, while Paranormal 3 has come the closest yet to matching the first film’s haul, raking in $104 million in 2011. Paranormal Activity 4, however, which opened in 2012, took in roughly half its predecessor’s total, earning just $53.9 million.

This time around, the filmmakers are hoping to utilize the power of demographics. The lead actors in The Marked Ones are Latino, perhaps a direct casting nod to the series’ fans: Latinos tend to make up a large percentage of horror-movie audiences. Not to mention, with the success of recent films targeted toward Latino viewers, such as Instructions Not Included, Hollywood in general seems to be wising up to the power (i.e. the willingness to spend) of this previously underserved group. Besides a shift in players, though, it’s supernatural business as usual, with previews emphasizing unsettling video footage, the franchise’s hallmark.

Pundits are predicting a haul of just under $25 million for Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones. Expectations have been softened by the weekend’s Northeastern snowstorm, which many believe will keep viewers inside, where their VOD, DVDs and Netflix are more readily accessible.

A good portion of those who are brave enough to weather the elements in search of off-the-couch entertainment, though, will in all likelihood opt for Disney’s grand success story, Frozen. This weekend will mark the animated musical’s sixth in theatres, and it’s still going strong. Strong enough to win the No. 2 slot just beneath The Marked Ones, according to those in the know. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug will probably clock in at No. 3, followed by Oscar and fan favorite American Hustle, with Anchorman 2 rounding out the top 5. Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street may be able to leverage recent controversy and prurient interest in its subject matter to sneak its way into the No. 5 slot, just ahead of Burgundy and his much more harmless coterie of buffoons, but given Street’s low Cinemascore rating  of a “C”, that seems unlikely.

 

Kaufman carves out piece of film history

Situated in the “suburbs of New York City,” as one member of the press put it, The Kaufman Astoria Studios in Queens, New York, is now the proud home to the city's very first backlot. The space made its official debut earlier today at a well-attended ribbon-cutting ceremony. Though the weather was mild, sunny, and cooperatively ripe for the public display of an outdoor facility, the attenuating press conference was held inside Kaufman studios itself. Journalists and the city’s cultural movers and shakers schmoozed by the set of Amazon’s hit Web series “Alpha House,” though they were cordoned off from the show’s important, breakable items (facades of painted-brick houses and a long, imposing hallway with the look of sterile governmental officiousness about it provided the backdrop for what was really a congenial photo-op for the event’s politician speakers).

After getting off to a late start – not that many of the attendees minded, given the dark chocolate and peanut-butter cupcakes available – several important personages, figureheads and influential personalities alike, discussed the benefits of the new Kaufman Studios backlot. Council Member Jimmy Van Bramer was the day’s master of ceremonies, providing the opening remarks and setting the excited and hopeful, if often self-congratulatory, tone. “We like to think of it as Hollywood East,” he said of the studio space. “What [Head of Kaufman Studios] George Kaufman started here has produced billions – literally billions – of dollars in revenue,” and countless jobs.

Photo credit: Jill Lotenberg

Subsequent speakers, including Senator Charles Schumer, George Kaufman’s right-hand man Hal Rosenbluth, Queens Borough President Helen Marshall, Senator Michael Gianaris, Assembly Member Aravella Simotas, and Senior Vice President of Film, Arts and Culture Development for New York State Rhoda Glickman, each echoed Van Bramer’s sentiments in turn. George Kaufman’s achievement – renovating the studio space after it fell into disrepair around 1980, subsequently revamping New York City’s film industry – was universally lauded, as were the benefits of the city’s film tax exemptions.

“The breaks come back to us – so much money comes back to us,” said Senator Schumer. The reinvigorated movie business has “created hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs – not tens of thousands,” he was quick to emphasize.

Rosenbluth sounded, “Today is the celebration of a vision coming true,” while Senator Gianaris challenged the haters (none of whom were in attendance). He asked that “for all those who want to be critical, to rewind 10 years… It’s not just the talent, Tom Cruise and Harrison Ford, that’re making money off these productions.” He ticked off carpenters, electricians, and caterers as examples of those who benefit from a healthy entertainment business. Later, Rosenbluth cited the end credits of a film. “Each name [you see] is a job,” he said, “and each company is many jobs.”

George Kaufman, the man of the hour and its least loquacious, spoke briefly of how proud he felt and of his hopes for the future development and success of those projects that utilize the lot.

The conference moved along at a nice clip. Afterwards, the press was invited outside for more officially staged photos, including those that included the cutting of the ribbon. The speakers grouped together before the lot’s gates and beneath an outdoor catwalk, accessible via a broad spiral staircase and headed by large metal letters spelling out “Kaufman.”

Photo credit: Jill Lotenberg

Though she didn’t speak during the press conference, “Orange is the New Black” actress Dascha Polanco was on hand to discuss her experience filming Netflix’s popular series on the Kaufman property. As someone living on the border of Brooklyn and Queens, she said, she felt “proud” when she first got wind of a Kaufman backlot. “It’s a great representation of how things [here] keep getting better and improve. I’m witnessing history, and that’s an honor.” Not to mention a memorable way to kick off your 30th birthday.

Polanco’s reference to history is apt. Back when it was known as Famous Players Lasky, the studio officially opened for show-business in 1920. It later went on to house Paramount Studios, and, for many years, was the largest film stage outside of Hollywood. Early luminaries like Gloria Swanson, Claudette Colbert and W.C. Fields all starred in productions filmed in the space. More recently, Kaufman studios continues to play host to TV series “Nurse Jackie” and "Sesame Street," as well as “Alpha House” and “Orange is the New Black.” The Bourne Legacy filmed there, as did the upcoming Ben Stiller drama The Secret Life of Walter Mitty.

“This is a game-changer for New York,” Schumer stated. We have the talent, he said, as so many people would rather live here than in California. In other words, and in sum:  “Hollywood, watch out!”

Netflix's 'House of Cards' turns content into a science--are movies next?

In the old days people baked cookies. Now the market is dominated by specially-formulated packaged food that's engineered to fall right into a U-shaped graph that measures bliss. Perhaps you could say the same thing about content. In the old days, people came up with movies and shows by combining great ingredients with a hunch. Now, it's scientific. I'm twelve out of thirteen episodes into Netflix's "House of Cards," drawn in by the smooth credits music, arty feel, and sordid look at political scandal. According to recent articles in the New York Times and Salon, this wasn't
just a well-put together show hitting it big, but due to an analysis of Netflix viewer habits that ensured that "House of Cards" would have the broadest appeal.

"House of Cards" is based on a 1990 BBC series (that did well on Netflix), stars Kevin Spacey (an actor who tracks well on Netflix), and has episodes directed by David Fincher (drawing in Netflix cinephiles). It's an addictive, adult-geared drama, with some episodes ending on cliffhangers that make it almost impossible not to click "next episode." That's something Netflix tracks too. In the old days, a test screening might measure the laughs and gasps of an audience, adding beats when necessary to accommodate them. Now, Netflix measures when people pause episodes, and especially when they don't return to them.

I might have taken an anti-Big Brother stance on this information, if it weren't for the fact that "House of Cards" is so good. It doesn't feel formulaic, but daring and innovative. (Unless it's just scientifically pushing those "daring" and "innovative" buttons right up to the point where it knows it will start to alienate viewers). Major networks air at least half a dozen new shows each season, and most of them fail. There's something to be said for the fact that Netflix is currently batting one for one. I'm sure there's data to parse when it come to movies too. If a movie plays better on Netflix than in theatres, what does that mean? In passing during a recent Q&A, a filmmaker mentioned that Netflix doesn't release information about how often a movie is viewed to the filmmaker or distributor. I imagine that releasing that information could eventually become a bargaining point in acquisition discussions, if it hasn't already.

Whenever a mindless superhero picture releases, people bemoan that studios are catering to the lowest common denominator, and neglecting other audiences. Maybe the studios are accurately playing to their audience, but maybe looking at a different set of data could reveal other truths. It takes a film like The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, for example, for many to realize that boomers are now a huge part of the moviegoing public. What plays well on Netflix doesn't always play well in movie theatres, but within this data there is a possibility to create great television and movies that also pass the "numbers test."

Will Netflix be the new HBO?

By Sarah Sluis

Years after the technology for video streaming was first introduced, the technology's potential is finally being monetized in a big way. When Netflix first started video streaming (around 2005, if I remember correctly), I watched choppy videos on a computer that constantly seemed to be buffering. Now, my television has a "Netflix" button. I browse for and watch flawless, unpixelated videos without any problems 98% of the time. In recent months, Netflix has made three bold business decisions that promise to shake up the entertainment industry. One, they acquired the rights to the original series "House of Cards," putting Netflix in the company of premium cable channels like Showtime and HBO that combine movies with original content. Two, they raised prices and split their company in two, Netflix and Qwikster. DVD-by-mail and streaming will now be totally separate. Finally, they outbid HBO for exclusive rights to stream DreamWorks Animation's content. Netflix is looking a lot less like mail-order Blockbuster and more like HBO.

Neflix has always been a forward-thinking company. They named their company "Net"-flix when they were a DVD-by-mail service, and their company culture is something of a legend (check out this human resources-created Power Point, which includes an outline of their "unlimited vacation time" policy). It's interesting to see them make so many high-profile strategic changes in such a short period of time.

So far, it appears Netflix is primarily repositioning itself in the home entertainment market, meaning there won't be any threat for theatre owners. Blockbuster may be bankrupt, but Netflix can now count premium cable channels as well as Amazon Prime (which just signed a streaming deal with Fox's TV shows) as competition. There's also a chance that the cost of making these deals will raise the price of Netflix's services. The company reportedly paid DreamWorks $30 million a title, a steep sum when their customers currently pay just $7.99 a month for streaming. With over 20 million subscribers, Netflix does have hundreds of millions at play to acquire content, but it will be a struggle for the company to satisfy 100% of a customer's needs when they've separated DVD-by-mail into a separate business, Qwikster. The companies will now operate with separate queues and billing. Netflix may have willingly gotten rid of its most potent advantage in the business. It's no longer a one-stop shop for any title on a consumer's to-see list.

Theatre, Netflix, or TV? Netflix price hike brings to light moviegoer habits

By Sarah Sluis

Yesterday, I mentioned my occupation as a writer for a film magazine to my hair stylist. "Yeah, between cable and Netflix I don't really go to the movies anymore," he said. He's not alone. 30% of Americans don't see a single movie in a year. The remaining 70% includes two groups. A minority sees movies regularly, once a week or a few times a month. The majority sees a select few movies a year that seem worth the expense for the experience. Movies like Harry Potter, Twilight, and Avatar make the cut for these people. Others prefer to see action-filled flicks in theatres and save talky ones for home. I recently recommended Midnight in Paris to a friend. "No, I don't see those kinds of movies in theatres," he said. He prefers seeing movies like X-Men: First Class, which benefit most from monster screens and surround sound, on the big screen. Movies lost their monopoly long ago, back when television first made its way into American homes. How much of a threat is Netflix really to movie theatres? Nada.

The only company to go out of business since Netflix has been Blockbuster. That's the clearest indicator that consumers consider Netflix a replacement for movie rentals, not going to the movies or catching them on TV. Netflix has also increased the "pie," opening up entirely different patterns of viewing. Never has it been so easy to sit down and watch an entire series of a television show. It's also the subscription method of choice for young adults, many of whom can't be bothered to set up a cable connection, much less pay $100 a month for the privilege, in their transient lives. Everyone I know who doesn't have a television watches programs online with Hulu or Netflix. So much for reducing screen time by not having a TV.

What will be most interesting about Netflix is to see how consumers react to the 60% price hike announced last week. Before, streaming was just an add-on to the DVD delivery service, which could be had for $9.99 a month (one DVD + streaming). Now consumers will have to purchase a $7.99 streaming plan and/or a $7.99 DVD rental plan, a big increase for Netflix's budget-minded customers. That makes the calculus of choosing a plan a bit more difficult. Personally, I've enjoyed streaming now and then when nothing else looks good, but the content and selection isn't strong enough to justify that cost, given how little the content I stream is worth (we're talking the movies that used to be in the 99 cents rental section). Perhaps that's why Netflix decided to outbid HBO for an original series back in March. I bet the $7.99 streaming fee will soon have an added bonus: original content.

As you can see by reading through the comments on Netflix's blog, a lot of their customers are very unhappy about the price hike. People are mentioning Red Box, Blockbuster, Amazon Prime, and Hulu as competitors who can provide them movies for a lower price. Not one person said, "Well, I might as well go to the movies now." Maybe that's because a month of Netflix is still less than the price of a night at the movies for two.

Netflix is part of the changing landscape of the post-movie theatre market. But so many of these changes are just variations on existing ways Americans already find and watch movies. Netflix is like a video rental store. Streaming is like on demand or even selecting what's best from the TV guide. Movie downloads are just buying a digital DVD. And going to the movies is always going to be a more immersive experience than watching a movie at home.

Outside of the theatres, movies are produced and shown online

By Sarah Sluis

Since their inception, movies have always been shown in theatres. It's only everything else that has changed. Yesterday, CNET News published an ominously-titled piece entitled "End of the world as Hollywood knows it." DVDs and movie rentals, according to media reporter Greg Sandoval, are on the outs, depriving studios of a valuable revenue stream. What's more, downloading or streaming movies from illegal sources is socially acceptable, free and so easy it's hard for people to resist.

Of course, Netflix, iTunes and Hulu are examples of legitimate ways the internet movie business has been monetized, but, especially for ad-supported streaming sites, the revenue isn't yet substantial. While the internet appears poised to decimate the DVD and movie rental business, the new medium also shows potential for lowering the cost of film production. If production costs shrink, it may make decreasing revenue streams a bit less frightening.

Lionsgate announced that it will produce a film with Massify, an online movie-production networking site. The project will be a "high-concept, male-driven comedy short based on a script from our community," with plans to expand the premise to a feature film. Crew will be drawn from the ranks of the Massify community. The intermediary process (from short to feature) helps reduce risk by offering audience feedback before the movie goes into the more expensive production of a full-length movie. Plus, the viral potential of the internet will be at the filmmakers' fingertips. Even if this movie never gets off the ground or registers as more than a blip, its experimentation with production makes it part of the vanguard of internet production. Earlier this year, an animated short was created using collaboration via Facebook. The result was "Live Music," good enough that Sony Pictures picked it up and is now showing it in festivals. It's also worth noting that Intel, which creates a software used by the animators, sponsored the project--corporate tie-ins also appear to be part of the wave of the future.