Skip to main content

Channing Dungey to Succeed Paul Lee as Chief of ABC Entertainment

LOS ANGELES — A long-running internal battle among ABC executives over creative control and future strategy led to the ouster on Wednesday of the network’s entertainment president and the elevation of a pair of his lieutenants.

Paul Lee, who found hits like “How to Get Away With Murder” and led an industrywide push toward more diverse casting, resigned under pressure. Channing Dungey, previously ABC’s drama chief, will take over the prime-time part of his job as the head of ABC entertainment, making her the first black network president.

Ms. Dungey’s elevation is a breakthrough for an industry that has often struggled with diversity, especially among the senior executive ranks.

“Channing is a gifted leader and a proven magnet for top creative talent, with an impressive record of developing compelling, breakthrough programming,” Ben Sherwood, president of the Disney-ABC Television Group, said in a news release. Ms. Dungey, 46, who has worked on series like “Scandal” and “Once Upon a Time,” said she was “thrilled and humbled,” adding that Mr. Lee was “a valued mentor and friend.”

Patrick Moran, the executive vice president of ABC Studios, will take over Mr. Lee’s duties there and report directly to Mr. Sherwood.

Mr. Sherwood, who became Mr. Lee’s boss last year and demanded more creative involvement — something Mr. Lee resisted — used ABC’s soft standing in the overall ratings race to make a case inside Disney for a management shake-up. Mr. Sherwood had been trying to sideline Mr. Lee for at least a year, several talent agents noted, at one point even introducing Robert A. Iger, Disney’s chief executive, to a possible outside successor.

Still, Mr. Lee’s ouster was a surprise to many in the industry, in part because ABC had a lot of momentum last season, riding its Thursday night drama lineup and a crowd of other hits — “Modern Family” and “Shark Tank” among them — to a first-place finish among adults in the 18- to 49-year-old demographic for the May sweep. Even though ABC has since dropped in the ratings, declines are now seen as an inevitable industry norm and less of an urgent reason for executive replacement.

Mr. Lee took over ABC in 2010, which was a time of instability for the network. Among his accomplishments, Mr. Lee better defined the ABC brand. He also emphasized racial diversity, backing sitcoms like “Black-ish” and “Fresh Off the Boat” and the drama “Quantico.” A decision to concentrate on soapy dramas on Thursday nights — advertised as “T.G.I.T.,” or Thank God It’s Thursday — was well received, with Mr. Lee’s profile on Disney’s corporate website joking that he even improved sales of “red wine and popcorn” in the process.

Within minutes of his resignation announcement, however, Mr. Lee’s profile had been removed.

Among the areas where Mr. Sherwood and Mr. Lee clashed was programming strategy. Mr. Sherwood, whose background is in television news, saw himself as having smart opinions on scripts and casting. Mr. Lee disagreed, something that came to a head in recent weeks, as the network moved deeper into planning for next season. Mr. Sherwood had long wanted ABC to focus more on CBS-style procedural series like “NCIS,” while Mr. Lee continued to back serialized dramas like “American Crime.”

 

“I’m especially proud of the incredible team I built and the strategic, creative vision we established and successfully executed,” Mr. Lee said in a statement.

Not all of Mr. Lee’s programming choices paid off. “The Muppets,” introduced in the fall to significant marketing hype, has been a flop. On Tuesday night, the show fell to a woeful 0.8 rating among adults 18 to 49 — a demographic that advertisers pay a premium to reach — and had just 2.4 million total viewers, a low for the series. ABC was also the first network forced to cancel a new series this season when its drama “Wicked City” went off the air.

Among the big four broadcast networks, ABC ranks third among total viewers and last among adults ages 18 to 49 for the season that started in September, according to Nielsen data.

Of the four networks, ABC has sustained the biggest declines this season in both categories, though every competitor receives a substantial ratings boost from sports.

With Mr. Lee’s resignation, Mr. Sherwood, who has faced setbacks in his early tenure, including a ratings drop at ABC News and a failed effort with the cable network Fusion, will notably gain direct control of ABC Studios. As ABC and other networks face an uncertain business future, the television studio could become a growth engine, especially if it begins selling more shows to streaming services.

For the most recent quarter, Disney’s broadcasting division, which includes ABC and a chain of eight local television stations, had operating income of $223 million, a 7 percent decline from a year earlier, as higher programming costs and a loss related to Hulu offset higher advertising sales.

ABC is also preparing to introduce several new series seen as holding ratings promise, including “The Real O’Neals,” about a Catholic family that stops pretending to be perfect and embraces its uniqueness. “The Catch,” another drama from Shonda Rhimes, who is behind series like “Scandal” and “Grey’s Anatomy,” is also on the way.

The Oxford-educated Mr. Lee became president of ABC after a successful tenure running ABC Family, a Disney-owned cable channel that Mr. Sherwood recently renamed Freeform. Born in Britain, Mr. Lee previously served in top jobs at the BBC.

Ms. Dungey joined ABC Entertainment in 2009, and most recently oversaw drama development. Her relationship with Ms. Rhimes, the most important executive producer ABC has in its stable, is said to be particularly strong.

If Ms. Dungey has prime-time solutions that escaped Mr. Lee, the entire television industry will be eager to know them. Same-day ratings continue to drop at a time when viewers have more options than ever and increasingly watch television on a delayed basis. Last year, for instance, there were 412 scripted shows offered by the networks, cable channels and online services.

It has been a boon for viewers but less so for executives who have to deal with advertisers who are still most interested in viewers who are watching within the first three days of a show’s broadcast date, an audience that is shrinking.

 

The Ambitious 11.22.63 Is the Beginning of a Brand New Hulu

LAST THURSDAY NIGHT, Hulu rented a parking lot. The massive concrete expanse was a few doors down from the Bruin Theater in Los Angeles’ Westwood neighborhood. Hulu rented that theater too, for the premiere of its first original drama, 11.22.63. But the parking lot was for the afterparty. A crew erected a massive tent and decorated it to look like the diner that plays a central role in Hulu’s new time-travel epic, its decor equal parts aughts and 1950s. There were crowds and there were Hollywood types; the crowds watched the Hollywood types walking from the theater to the parking lot. Inside the tent-diner, roaming waiters served margaritas and a drink called the Kennedy Kooler.

Hulu has produced original shows before; it threw premieres and parties for them as well. But the streaming service never rented a parking lot. 11.22.63, which you can watch starting today, is by a wide margin the most ambitious and expensive project Hulu has ever undertaken. The company hopes it marks the beginning of a new era, as it tries to be more than just a way to watch last night’s TV. It has big owners, but until now has been small potatoes in the streaming world. Now, after nearly a decade of tumult, Hulu is taking aim at the biggest and most prestigious of its streaming competitors. And it’s hoping that a kick-ass show about time travel starring James Franco and produced by JJ Abrams might be the bullet it needs.

The story of 11.22.63 begins more than two years ago, when everything at Hulu started to change. See, Disney, 21st Century Fox, and Comcast own Hulu. These are giant conglomerates with every interest in preserving the TV industry as it existed 15 years ago, and they’ve always seemed to regard their digital child with a wary side-eye. It was as if they couldn’t tell whether this upstart outfit with an office full of game rooms and micro-kitchens was trying to save traditional TV or kill it. They even tried to offload it twice, most recently in 2013; that July, at an annual conference for the mightiest in the media, Disney CEO Bob Iger said they were “committed to selling” Hulu. DirectTV was supposedly offering a billion dollars. Eventually they decided not to. Rather than sell Hulu, they decided to fix it.

The first step was hiring a new CEO, Mike Hopkins. The original CEO was a tech and product guy, but Hopkins knows TV. Hopkins, in turn, brought in Craig Erwich from Warner Horizons as his head of content. The Silicon Valley guys were out; the Hollywood guys were in. They got an additional $750 million to invest, and one instruction: Grow. Fast.

“We put the gas pedal all the way down,” says Lisa Holme, the company’s head of acquisitions, “and said okay, let’s be more aggressive than we’ve ever been. License more content, better content, exclusively, all of that.” Holme and her team hammered out deal after deal for shows from AMC, FX, Viacom, Turner, and others, scoring rights to stream South Park, Seinfeld, and the Epix catalog of big-name movies. Meanwhile, a new head of originals, Beatrice Springborn, set out to try and turn Hulu Originals from an also-ran into a powerhouse.

Building the House of Cards
Quick: name the first Hulu original show. Name any Hulu original show before six months ago. You probably can’t, and Springborn doesn’t blame you. Hulu’s approach to buying and creating content had always been timid. And that’s putting it kindly. The service’s primary appeal was still as the place you’d go to catch up on the shows you missed last night. “We were known for acquisitions,” Springborn says flatly. It bought shows from its parent companies plus a few others, and dabbled with originals around the edges. With shows like The Awesomes and East Los High, Springborn says, “the brand for Hulu was lower-budget comedies.”

About two years ago, the new leadership team at Hulu decided to try to go from bit player to big kahuna in the world of original programming. Why? Because unlike even the biggest acquisition, good original content gives a company an identity, and establishes it as a serious player doing serious work. Things changed for Netflix when House of Cards came out. It was no longer a storage house for old ABC sitcoms, but a creative force, a place you go (and pay) to see Kevin Spacey and David Fincher’s work. Same for Amazon and Transparent, the first streaming-only show to win the Golden Globe for best series.
Once you prove you’re serious about enabling (and financing) good stuff, you hope that good stuff starts to find you. “Dramas help define a network,” Springborn says. “You can point to those for AMC: Breaking Bad and Mad Men. For FX it’s The Shield and Sons of Anarchy.” Those shows redefined what viewers expect from a TV show, and elevated their producers to new heights.

Popular originals would also give the beleaguered Hulu staying power in its ever-changing industry, where new players with deep pockets come in all the time. Brian Wieser, a senior analyst at research firm Pivotal, calls it “the need to differentiate on an ongoing basis.” Hulu can’t rely on its good relationship with its parent companies forever. Hulu’s had huge problems with subscribers leaving the service as rights expire and new shows come out on other networks. One study found that nearly 50 percent of its subscriber base had cancelled in the last year, compared to just nine percent for Netflix. “I think they all know that if they want to be a viable standalone entity,” Wieser says, “they need something that doesn’t render them permanently dependent on their owners. Because the owners might not own them forever.” They’ve already nearly sold the company twice, after all. Owning your own stuff is the only way to control your fate.

Early on in the reinvention, the leaders of Hulu asked each other a question: What kinds of shows does Hulu make? They figured out they didn’t want to be like Netflix, with lots of programming for small audiences; Springborn says Hulu wouldn’t have been interested in reviving Arrested Development. They didn’t just want to win awards and please people with lensless glasses and skinny jeans. “We don’t want to convince you what good TV is,” says Ben Smith, Hulu’s head of experience, “or what edgy is. You love it? We love it.”

When you’re interested in making broadly appealing shows, you approach things a more traditional way. “Netflix and Amazon’s approach seems to be, we’re just going to throw stuff out there,” says Todd VanDerWerff, culture editor at Vox. They give creators lots of money and lots of freedom, and hardly meddle in the process. “Some will work, and some won’t. But people are going to watch, so it’s fine.” Hulu, on the other hand, seems to have a much more traditional TV development process. It means Hulu won’t fail often, since the process tends to smooth edges, polish everything just right. But it also means “the upside for Netflix and Amazon is probably higher,” VanDerWerff says. “The great thing about a Netflix show is, if it’s brilliant it’s like nothing else. You’ve never seen anything like it.” Netflix didn’t know it had a hit on its hands with Orange is the New Black. Hulu’s hoping it can see the next one coming.

Everyone at Hulu seems to be in love with the notion of TV as an event, a spectacle that captures everyone’s attention. “I feel like there’s almost been a shame built into being popcorn-populist,” Springborn says, “but we embrace that.” At the same time, they wanted to do better: to have a different tone, a surprising story, something you’ve never seen before. They came up with a mantra: “A Hulu show is a New York Post story with a New Yorker cover.”

Hulu’s development team bought and began developing two comedies, Casual and Difficult People, each with big names attached. They launched in 2015 and were immediately successful: Casual received Hulu’s first-ever Golden Globe nomination only a few months after its release. (It lost to Amazon’s Mozart in the Jungle.) Difficult People, which Amy Poehler produces, has won some critical acclaim. Still, both were just better, more expensive, bigger-name versions of the shows Hulu had always done. They needed something splashier.

Long Live the King
Springborn and her team met in late 2014 with Bridget Carpenter, a producer whose credits include Friday Night Lights and Parenthood. She pitched them on 11.22.63, a Stephen King time-travel novel that JJ Abrams owned the rights to. Carpenter laid out a plan for a nine-hour miniseries, and Hulu immediately bought in. They probably overpaid for the project, according to one source, but that was okay. “You can tell people that you’re making premium content, but you have to put your money where your mouth is,” Springborn says.

Internally, Hulu refers to 2016 as “the year of the drama.” After 11.22.63, it has The Path, starring Aaron Paul and Michelle Monaghan, ready to go. Chance, starring Hugh Laurie and directed by Lenny Abrahamson (Room), is coming later this year. The company spent as much as $1.5 billion on content in 2015, and that number will surely be higher this year. The originals team is thinking about developing movies, kids content, and anything else that might serve its purposes. While they’ve been working on 11.22.63, Holme has also been systematically acquiring the kinds of complementary content they think viewers might want to see: JFK-related programming, documentaries, and more, which they’ll release in bursts as the show goes along. “If someone has watched the show and gets curious about Kennedy,” Holme says, “we have something else that they can get into.” Because it’s only eight episodes and nine hours long, it may not be the category-redefining, House of Cards moment for the network, but it’s the first capital-E Event the company has ever attempted to produce.
11.22.63 isn’t like House of Cards in one other important way: It’s not dropping all at once in a binge-friendly bundle. The show will air on Mondays for the next eight weeks, one episode at a time. You know, like how your parents watched TV. Creating Event Television means making people dissect every episode and guess where things go next; you get none of that during a bleary-eyed 13-hour binge. Hulu’s other shows are also released an episode at a time, and Springborn says it’s worked beautifully. “We’ve created a sense of anticipation from week to week. That’s why Serial worked so well! You’re building anticipation, and people are questioning what’s going to happen next week.”

There’s no way to ever guarantee a hit show, of course. Even Stephen King and JJ Abrams produce duds. If this one doesn’t work, Hulu hope maybe Aaron Paul can entice you to watch The Path instead. Or whatever comes after that. VanDerWerff, for his part, is particularly curious about the prospects for Chance. “Hulu…still awaits its first breakout original hit,” JP Morgan analyst Alexia Quadrani wrote in a recent report, “though its expanded slate means it’s like a matter of time before an original hit debuts on the service.” Springborn admits that you can’t engineer success, and Hulu’s free-spending ways can’t last forever. Not only do their shows need to be good, they need to be exciting enough to claim hours of your time you could otherwise spend on thousands of other shows. And then, don’t forget, Hulu has to figure out how to turn spending money into making money.

Yet even before the first 11.22.63 episode drops, the show seems to have already been a success for Hulu. Simply by acquiring a project of this magnitude, with this budget, with this many stars attached, Hulu got into the game. In the space of a week after the announcement, Hulu got 120 submissions for new projects. People they were working with started referring their famous friends and favorite colleagues.

At the premiere on Thursday night, as the first 11.22.63 episode ended and the credits began to roll over loud applause, Hulu’s logo lingered on screen a little longer than the others. The event wasn’t just for 11.22.63. It was also for the new Hulu: a place where big names come to make big shows, where everyone comes to watch TV. The company now has JJ Abrams, Stephen King, and James Franco on its roster. It has swagger, it has money; it has ambition. On the day we meet, Springborn is actively involved in 12 different shows at various stages of the development process, including Hulu’s first slate of pilots. She hasn’t taken a vacation since she started at the company. And that might not change anytime soon, she says: “I’d say 11.22.63 is going to turn the volume way up.”

Peter Strickland

Peter Strickland is a British director and screenwriter, known for his award-winning films The Duke of Burgundy (2014) andBerberian Sound Studio (2012). His films unfurl as bleak visual poetry, often with stark production design and stylistic music.

He was born in 1973 to a Greek mother and British father, both teachers, and grew up in Reading, Berkshire, where he was a member of Progress Theatre, directing his own adaptation of The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka. In 1997, his short film Bubblegum premiered at the Berlin Film Festival. He currently resides in Budapest.

His first feature, the low-budget rural revenge drama Katalin Varga, was financed by an inheritance from an uncle and filmed in Romania over a period of 17 days in 2006. His second, Berberian Sound Studio, is a psychological thriller set in a 1970s Italian horror film studio and stars Toby Jones. It was previewed at London FrightFest Film Festival in August 2012 and at the 2012 Edinburgh International Film Festival, where Robbie Collin of The Daily Telegraph described it as the “stand-out movie”. In 2013, the film obtained the Best International Film Award at BAFICI Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian has described Strickland’s latest film as marking his emergence as “a key British film-maker of his generation”. His third feature, the chamber drama The Duke of Burgundy, was a homage to Jess Franco and stars Sidse Babett Knudsen and Chiara D’Anna. It delves into the world of lesbian BDSM with unflinching precision.

The Duke of Burgundy (93% on Rotten Tomatoes) is available on Netflix, Amazon, and iTunes.  Trailer

Berberian Sound Studio (84% on Rotten Tomatoes) is available on Amazon and iTunes.

Representation
David Kopple  |  CAA  |  424.288.2000
The Agency  |  +44.20.7727.1346

Filmography
2014 The Duke of Burgundy Writer, Director  $1M Budget $33K Gross
2014 Bjork: Biophilia Live Director $133K Gross
2013 The Great Chicken Wing Hunt Additional Photography
2012 Berberian Sound Studio Writer, Director
2010 Larry the Cable Guy: Tailgate Special Thanks
2009 Katalin Varga Director, Producer, Performer
2004 A Metaphysical Education (Short) Writer, Director
1996 Bubblegum (Short) Writer, Director

Awards
2014 Hamptons International Film Festival Won Pioneering Vision Award for The Duke of Burgundy
2012 British Independent Film Awards Won Best Director for Berberian Sound Studio
Nominated for Best Screenplay for Berberian Sound Studio
2012 Edinburgh International Film Festival Nominated for Best British Feature Film for Berberian Sound Studio
2010 London Critics Film Circle Film Awards  Nominated for Breakthru British Filmmaker for Katalin Varga
2009 European Film Awards Won Discovery of the Year for Katalin Varga

IMDBhttp://www.imdb.com/name/nm3270827
Facebook (293 likes): https://www.facebook.com/pages/Peter-Strickland/358313290917508?fref=ts

———
After Björk and butterflies, film director Peter Strickland makes first radio play  |  The Guardian  |  June 17th, 2015

One of the most enjoyable aspects of British director Peter Strickland’s career so far has been seeing what his next move will be. He has been refreshingly impossible to second guess; going from Romanian revenge drama Katalin Varga to unsettling psychological thriller Berberian Sound Studio. He then gave us, after a slight detour directing a Bjork concert film, a tender, relatable love story submerged into S&M trappings and lepidopterology in The Duke of Burgundy. His newest writing and directing project, The Len Continuum, isn’t even a film – it’s a radio play, set in Reading and is the closest thing Strickland has done to a sitcom.

“Part of me always wanted to write a teatime drama. That’s something that I wanted to get out of my system,” he explains. “The structure is modelled on the kind of British sitcoms that would’ve been popular in 1983 when the play is set. I always loved 1970s and 80s sitcoms. The farce was one thing, but the corrosive undercurrents were also really interesting in things like Reginald Perrin or even Fawlty Towers.”

Strickland’s play follows the titular Len Cummins, played by Toby Jones, a struggling actor searching for his big break – an audition for Juliet Bravo looms large in the plot. But petty Len is impossible to root for; he’s jealous of his wife, Alice (Belinda Stewart-Wilson from The Inbetweeners), who reads the travel reports on local station Radio 210 and he actively prays for misfortune to befall anyone more successful than himself. Which is just about everyone he meets. He can’t even walk the dog with his only friend Dave (The Office’s Ralph Ineson) without finding some way to embarrass himself with his rampant pomposity and unearned ego.

Toby Jones plays Len.
For followers of Strickland’s work, this sounds like a big departure – but, looking closer, there is plenty that aligns with his movies and, indeed, his life. “This play is the most clearly signposted towards autobiography because anyone who is familiar with my work knows I grew up in Reading and that I struggled for years. I like the idea that a lead character who is flagged up to be autobiographical is a complete prick. Struggling and being stuck in your hometown is a story that thousands of people could relate to, and the fun for me was to confound that potential audience by turning that highly relatable figure of Toby Jones’s character into someone you don’t want to relate to.”

It’s not just the subject matter that Strickland found appealing – after spending years on each film project, the swiftness of a radio production proved irresistible. “It’s the same working method, but so much quicker. The edit and sound mix is still where it all comes alive for me. The nature of it means it’s a fast turnaround.” He also seems to thrive under pressure and restrictions. “The dynamic range in radio is also pretty compact compared to film. The short amount of time you get to do a sound mix forces you to be more decisive and you just have to prioritise,” he says.

While there has been plenty of humour in Strickland’s film work, it is often of an unusual, off-kilter nature, such as the scene in The Duke of Burgundy where someone mimes the mechanics of a “human toilet”. Here the laughs come easier – but still with a devious slant towards awkwardness as Len’s stress and bitterness plays havoc with his digestive system, leading to a medical exam that he manages to make more uncomfortable, both socially and physically, than it needs to be. “In a sense, Len is literally stuck up his own backside and even a colonoscopy can’t provide any clarity.” He explains, making us thankful that radio is not a visual medium.

As The Len Continuum has proven such an enjoyable experience for Strickland, he is currently planning another more ambitious radio project with an adaptation of Nigel Kneale’s classic 1972 horror television play The Stone Tape. Strickland’s version, to be aired on Halloween, is from a new script by Matthew Graham (co-creator of Life on Mars). It promises to be far more sonically adventurous: “For me, it’s a chance to return to that Berberian world and try out things I perhaps felt too timid to do back then. Music will be by James Cargill (Broadcast) and voice effects will be by Andrew Liles (Nurse With Wound), which is essentially the same basic set-up as Berberian. The premise of Nigel Kneale’s play lends itself to dramatically profound ideas regarding natural acoustics. This is a rare opportunity to be dramatically justified in doing a play that incorporates a substantial radiophonic element.”

The Len Continuum airs on Thursday, 2.15pm, on BBC R4

———

An arthouse Fifty Shades? Peter Strickland’s erotic The Duke of Burgundy will get you hot under the collar…  |  The Independent  |  February 7, 2015


There can’t be many films that credit the services of a perfumier, entomologists and “human toilet consultants”. Then again, British director Peter Strickland’s The Duke of Burgundy isn’t any ordinary movie. A fable-like tale of two women locked into what looks like an ailing S&M relationship, it will be the second bondage drama to arrive in cinemas in a fortnight, following the big-screen adaptation of E L James’s Fifty Shades of Grey – which is either a bizarre coincidence or intuitive counter-programming.

Strickland, 41, is less than impressed with the Fifty Shades parallel. “I couldn’t give a flying bullwhip about that film!” he groans. “It’s just a coincidence I certainly hope it wasn’t planned to come out that way.” Strickland’s characters, the dominant butterfly professor Cynthia (Borgen’s Sidse Babett Knudsen) and the submissive housekeeper Evelyn (Chiara D’Anna), may not be much like James’s high-flying Christian Grey and S&M newbie Anastasia Steele, but comparisons are inevitable.

The British Board of Film Classification has rated Strickland’s film “18”, despite the fact there is not an ounce of nudity and most of the sexual acts are behind closed doors. You can only imagine that the scene where Cynthia leads Evelyn into the bathroom and – off-camera – proceeds to use her as the aforementioned “toilet” was enough for the censors.  And enough for a number of actresses to reject the lead role of Cynthia, as he tells me.

Balding, bearded and buttoned-down, Reading-raised Strickland is a curiosity. His first feature,  2009’s self-funded Katalin Varga, a rape-revenge saga shot in Transylvania, came out of nowhere to win a host of awards. At the time, he was working as an English teacher in Austria and Hungary, where he still lives. He finally quit his day job just before shooting his second movie, 2012’s Berberian Sound Studio, starring Toby Jones as a sound effects technician gradually losing his mind. More awards followed.

Duke_Of_Burgundy_Official_Screening.jpg
If there’s a touchstone for Strickland’s work, it’s 1970s Euro cinema: where Berberian was a marvellous tribute to the era’s “giallo” Italian horror movies, Burgundy is a nod to the era’s directors of erotica such as Jess Franco and Radley Metzger. “Those films were made by male heterosexuals, mostly for a heterosexual audience,” says Strickland. “They were appropriating lesbian desire, and this is appropriating what they’re appropriating … [and] putting it in a different context, that of a domestic drama.”

In its own kinky way, Burgundy deals with what happens when one person tires of a relationship – in this case Cynthia. “It was interesting for me to look at something quite universal through a very niche prism,” says Strickland, who denies that his characters are in an S&M tryst, their relationship being masochistic but not sadist. “Cynthia is not inclined that way. And I don’t think Evelyn would want a true sadist, because it wouldn’t be on her terms.” Recently, he was asked if he thought Burgundy was a “queer film”. He looks puzzled by this suggestion, though points out that one of his early film jobs was production assistant on underground gay cinema legend Bruce LaBruce’s 2000 porn film Skin Flick. “If somebody called it queer, that would be fine. If somebody called it an S&M film, that would be fine. I just don’t want to give people the wrong impression.”

What really disarms about Burgundy is its rich, fairy-tale atmosphere. It’s no sleazy sexploitation title, like those churned out by Franco and Metzger. Living in a rural enclave where it seems men don’t exist, Cynthia spends her days lecturing the local women about moths and butterflies. All of the females wear lavish fashions (created by Peter Greenaway’s costume designer Andrea Flesch) that wouldn’t look out of place in a Fellini movie.

Chiara_D'Anna_as_Evelyn_in_Duke_of_Burgundy2.jpg
Much of the film’s ethereal feel comes from the soundtrack by Rachel Zeffira and Faris Badwan, aka alternative pop duo Cat’s Eyes. Strickland was a fan of their self-titled first album. “It was the first time I’d heard the spirit of Karen Carpenter without any irony,” he says, and he sent them the screenplay for Burgundy. “We’d [been asked to soundtrack some] rubbish scripts [before], but that one was great,” says Badwan, who most will know as lead singer in The Horrors. Even so, putting it to music was always going to be a challenge.

Strickland sent across scenes and reference points – everything from John Barry to Mozart and the film The Wicker Man. “He had clear ideas,” says Zeffira, “but he allowed us a lot of freedom”. The result is beautiful, a harpsichord and flute-driven score, topped off by Zeffira’s alluring vocals, that’s as beguiling as Strickland’s subject matter. In May, the film will be screened at the Brighton Festival with a live rendition of the score by the band.

Strickland has his own fascination with sound and music. In 1997, around the time he first started writing, he co-formed experimental outfit The Sonic Catering Band, making “intense, monolithic soundscapes”, and later started the boutique record label Peripheral Conserve. Both Katalin Varga and Berberian boasted rich sound design, and recently he co-directed a Björk concert film, Biophilia.

Chiara_D'Anna_as_Evelyn_Fatma_Mohamed_as_The_Carpenter_in_Duke_of_Burgundy.jpg
This sudden glut of work is a surprise. The son of two teachers, Strickland spent most of the Nineties and Noughties “knocking on doors” trying to get into the film business. Unable to land a place at film school, he studied fine art at Reading University (“hated it”), made shorts in his bedroom and directed a stage adaptation of Kafka’s Metamorphosis. But it wasn’t until 2001, when his uncle died and left him some money, that he had the funds for a feature.

Leaving England for Bratislava he worked for a computer-game company and prepared to make Katalin Varga. Filming in 2006, it ground to a halt in post-production when the cash ran out. Strickland returned home, chastened, forced to get a job in data-entry. “It was soul-destroying,” he says. “You look at your CV … you can’t say you’ve done film, it looks really pretentious, especially in Reading.”

Thankfully Strickland scraped the money together to finish the film, and now, five years on, he’s established as one of our most visionary film-makers – an “original voice”, says Badwan, who first heard that Strickland wanted to work with him from pioneering director Chris Cunningham, who produced the artwork for Cat’s Eyes’ first album. “The more you watch the film, the more profound it is,” adds Zeffira.

Peter_Strickland.jpg
It even explores the very nature of film-making. “The theatricality of sado-masochism is a great platform for exploring the power in any relationship, but also the power [play between] directors and actors,” says Strickland. Evelyn has scripts she wants Cynthia to learn and marks to hit, just like a director.”

To look beyond the sexual content, Strickland’s film is really about fetishism – everything from nylon stockings to cataloguing insects. Indeed, as we part company, with Strickland revealing that he’s planning a film about London’s Romanian immigrants, he says he’s still wary of the S&M tag for Burgundy. “I just see it as a relationship, based on trust.”

‘The Duke of Burgundy’ opens on 20 Feb. Cat’s Eyes’ soundtrack is out 16 Feb on RAF/Caroline Records

Let me know if you need additional information.
Attachments area
Preview YouTube video The Duke of Burgundy – Official Trailer I HD I Sundance Selects

The Duke of Burgundy – Official Trailer I HD I Sundance Selects

Preview YouTube video BERBERIAN SOUND STUDIO Trailer | Festival 2012

BERBERIAN SOUND STUDIO Trailer | Festival 2012

Hillary Clinton: The vast, right-wing conspiracy” is “even better funded” now

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks to journalist and CNN anchor Anderson Cooper during a CNN Democratic Town Hall in Derry, New Hampshire February 3, 2016.The “vast, right-wing conspiracy” that Hillary Clinton warned about in the 1990’s still exists, she confirmed on Wednesday evening — but now it’s out in the open and it’s “even better funded,” she said.

Clinton was asked about that infamous quote during a televised town hall hosted by CNN in Derry, New Hampshire.

“At this point it’s probably not correct to say it’s a conspiracy because it’s out in the open,” Clinton said. “There is no doubt about who the players are, what they’re trying to achieve… It’s real, and we’re going to beat it.”

Clinton first used that line in an interview with NBC’s Today Show in 1998 when talking about the political attacks that followed President Bill Clinton’s affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. “The great story here, for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it, is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president,” she said at the time.

On Wednesday night, referencing GOP financiers like the Charles and David Koch, Clinton said the right-wing is now “even better funded.”

“They’ve brought in some new multibillionaires,” she said. “They want to control our country. They want to rig the economy so they can get richer and richer.

“They salve their consciences by giving money to philanthropy,” Clinton continued, “but make no mistake, they want to destroy unions, they want to go after any economic interest they don’t believe they can control.”

How Amazon’s Bookstore Soothes Our Anxieties About Technology

Amazon’s new bricks-and-mortar bookstore, in Seattle’s University Village, lets customers experience the tension between front-of-house and back-of-house as a kind of pleasure.
Amazon’s new bricks-and-mortar bookstore, in Seattle’s University Village, lets customers experience the tension between front-of-house and back-of-house as a kind of pleasure. Photograph by George Rose / Getty

At first glance, the physical place that Amazon created with all its data is anticlimactic. The bookstore is not some through-the-looking-glass swoopy physical incarnation of the ineffable clouds of computerized memory. Instead, the books are all shelved cover-out, just as they appear on Amazon, and the relative prominence, proportion of stock, and pricing of best-sellers and recommended titles, including the little cardboard signs excerpting each book’s online user reviews and ratings, are calibrated to correspond exactly to what you would find online.

Other than that, the store looks sort of like a Starbucks—and, at least, the coffee chain’s latest look as developed by its in-house designer Liz Muller for the company’s upscale Reserve branches—one of which also opened in November right across the mall promenade from Amazon’s new bookstore. The look is a mash-up of a New England Barn and a Second World War submarine. It features wood that looks like it’s been salvaged from a shipyard. Black metal abounds, whether in the sign-holders, the window trim, the pipes and ducts up in the blacked-out ceiling above the overhead lights, or the lamps just inside the windows that, with their bulbous shades and pipe-like tubular mountings, look like something that would be attached to a drill press in a nineteen-forties machinist’s workshop.

It’s a style that’s been called Heritage Modern or Warm Industrial—a sleeker take on the neo-Victoriana waxed-mustache-and-varietal-pickle aesthetic of Edison lightbulbs, taxidermy, and gray metal stools that during the late aughts represented hipster chic, from Williamsburg to Portland. In home decoration, the look has been perfected by the Restoration Hardware chain of furniture stores, now known as R.H., where you can buy desks that look like parts of nineteen-thirties ribs-and-rivets airplanes and lamps that look like eighteen-nineties surveyors’ tripods, alongside monumental sofas and cabinets in leather and teak. As it happens, a Restoration Hardware store shares Amazon’s mall building, just two doors down. You could argue that this part of the mall isn’t so much selling books or chairs or cappuccinos but, rather, a particular look. And selling whatever this look does to soothe and stir the anxieties and ambitions of this moment in our culture.

The machine-age era that this look references, from the late eighteen-nineties to the late nineteen-forties, represents a precise period in the history of technology: post-electric and pre-atomic. This was a time in which radically new electromagnetic tools—gramophone, telephone, radio, radar, cinema, television—shattered our centuries-old expectations about how information and image are located and transported across space. And yet the objects embodying these technologies had, to today’s eyes, an appealingly heavy and clunky presence: wooden cases that opened and closed, Bakelite switches that turned on and off. These devices didn’t continuously communicate with one another and without us; or record our behavior for the corporations that made them; or insinuate themselves into our clothes and bodies; or, with some sly reversal of utility by hacker or terrorist, do us harm. So those machinists’ lamps descending from the ceiling of Amazon’s bookstore represent, in our age of pattern-recognition algorithms and drone deliveries, a specific kind of nostalgia—not for some lamplit pre-industrial era but for an earlier high-technology moment in which our machines were still uncannily powerful, but were more legible, more tangible, and more compliant.

This look, with its taste for rivets and gaskets and tubular steel, also provides a kind of aesthetically retroactive continuity for all the junky infrastructural odds and ends—the sprinklers, the pipes, the ducts, the conduits, the wires, the cables, the brackets, the beams—that until recently would have been hidden behind hung ceilings and maintenance panels. At Amazon’s bookstore, much of these overhead mechanicals are open to view but painted black, rather like the lighting grid or stage machinery in a small theatre. Something about those slender pipe-like lamp arms below makes all the preëxisting mess of pipes above seem more intentional, more interesting, more palatable.

At Amazon’s bookstore, this carefully staged view of the architectural backstage serves as an acknowledgement, conscious or not, of the online retailer’s own back-of-house. The real way that Amazon makes physical places out of all its data is in the form of its vast exurban fulfillment centers: the hundred or so warehouses around the globe, each about a million or more square feet in size and staffed by a thousand or more personnel, where it stores and sorts and sends all its stuff. These facilities are a kind of limit condition of big-box retail: endless steel shelves under florescent lights and steel trusses, in which the shoppers are elsewhere, their avatars now the stockers and pickers who fulfill orders, unshelving goods to a complex network of carts and chutes and conveyor belts to be packaged and delivered.

Seattle’s University Village mall, built over a drained marsh in the fifties and updated in the nineties, already represents an attempt at domesticating the big box. The mall’s former anchor tenant, a fifty-thousand-square-foot Barnes & Noble bookstore, lasted sixteen years before shuttering, in 2011. This mall is neither a university nor a village, but its layout rewards the kind of pedestrian stroll you might take across a campus or small town. It’s an outdoor mall, meaning that, past a ring of parking, its half-dozen big warehouse-like structures are wrapped in smaller storefronts that offer mall-goers the incomplete illusion of walking through a picturesque neighborhood made of freestanding buildings. Look past the brick cornice of Amazon’s bookstore and you’ll see, immediately behind, the higher blank stucco wall of the big box it’s really situated in, the big box that also houses and services the neighboring Restoration Hardware. From a drone’s-eye view, the top and back of this kind of big box, with its factory-like rooftop air-handling units and its loading docks, is indistinguishable from an Amazon fulfillment center.

If Amazon’s intention had been a miniature masquerade, to pose as the kind of downtown community bookstore that it (like Barnes & Noble before it) is conventionally said to have displaced, then plenty of actual neighborhood storefronts were available in Seattle. A wave of smaller online retailers—especially clothiers and accessories-makers like Bonobos, Frank & Oak, and Warby Parker, for whom in-person trying-on is a thing—has done just that, recently opening bricks-and-mortar storefronts in urban downtowns from New York to San Francisco. Amazon’s decision to occupy a pseudo-neighborhood psuedo-storefront is, intentionally or inadvertently, more interesting.

One of the entertainments of Blue C Sushi, the restaurant whose space Amazon took over and that moved to another part of the University Village mall, is those miniature conveyor belts that bring sashimi to your tabletop—a charming little extension, domesticated in scale, of all the industry of belts and docks and wheels involved in shipping flash-frozen tuna across the Pacific. “Our proprietary digital tracking technology,” Blue C’s promotional materials read, “lets us monitor every item on our delivery belt, determining how long it’s been on display and alerting the chefs when it’s time to refresh.” One of the entertainments of Restoration Hardware is simultaneously seeing a domestic vignette—sofas and tables and carpets arranged to make a scene of tasteful domesticity—and the stagecraft behind the vignette: the lighting grid holding the spotlights above, the fabric scrim that might masquerade as a wall, everything that holds everything in place. You see the scenes and behind the scenes. The back is made to look as good, in its own way, as the front.

The Amazon bookstore does something similar: suspended somewhere between a tangible (albeit exquisitely staged) reality of paper and wood, and a perceptible (albeit artfully obscured) reality of pipes and machinery, the bookstore customer is able to experience a curated version of the ethical and visceral tension between front-of-house and back-of-house—between the sleek one-click seamlessness of the screen and the unceasing labor of the fulfillment center—as a kind of pleasure. In our global moment of high-tech fabrication and doorstep delivery, we are gradually becoming more aware of distant factories and warehouses, from urban China to exurban America, and of the dispossessed lives of the faraway people who make and move our possessions. Can it be a coincidence that this awareness parallels the emergence of an aesthetic that seems, somehow, to remind us of warehouses and factories—but, with all that burnished wood and polished metal, of warehouses and factories at rest, from another time, at their most impossibly beautiful?

The first thing Amazon did to the building that would become its first bricks-and-mortar bookstore was add bricks and mortar. The store, located in Seattle’s University Village shopping mall, opened in early November. Amazon’s new bricks, mottled in color from chalky yellow to dusky near-purple, look thoroughly artisanal. Their irregular texture and wide mortar gaps, along with the casement-like black metal mullions of the new windows, make the bookstore appear much older than the storefronts around it. “We’re taking the data we have, and we’re creating physical places with it,” the Amazon Books vice-president Jennifer Cast told the Seattle Times when the bookstore opened.

Why Would Amazon Want To Be the New Barnes & Noble?

Customers in Amazon’s first brick-and-mortar bookstore, in Seattle. According to reports, the company plans to open many more in the near future.
Customers in Amazon’s first brick-and-mortar bookstore, in Seattle. According to reports, the company plans to open many more in the near future. Photograph by David Ryder / Bloomberg / Getty

On Tuesday, Sandeep Mathrani, the chief executive of a national shopping-mall operator, said during an earnings call that Amazon.comwas planning to open as many as four hundred physical bookstores in the next few years. At first, the news, which was reported in the Wall Street Journal but wasn’t confirmed by the company, sounded almost too strange to be true. Amazon opened its first retail bookstore, in Seattle, only this past November, and, although book sales form the historical core of its business, it now makes the vast majority of its money off of its highly profitable Web-services division. Moreover, Amazon’s identity is so tied to e-commerce that a purported plan to create its own version of the defunct Borders chain defied our expectations of ongoing digital progress.The Times, citing an anonymous source, has since confirmed that the company plans to expand its physical presence, albeit at a much more modest scale than Mathrani suggested. But even four hundred stores might have been one of the most logical moves that Amazon has ever made, not to mention one that other online-first retailers, such as Warby Parker, Blue Nile, and Birchbox, have already cleared the way for. Amazon is unrivalled in its ability to sell and ship people books and other goods more cheaply and smoothly than anyone else, but, long after it established itself as the world’s de-facto bookseller, Amazon has failed (if purposefully, in many respects) to fulfill the simplest promise of the digital-commerce revolution: making a profit by selling goods online.

When Amazon began selling books in 1995, its business model seemed brilliantly simple. Without the costs and hassles of physical stores and their staff, and with limitless capacity for inventory, it was able to offer books at lower prices than other competitors could, including big chains such as Barnes & Noble, whose deep discounts had already threatened independent booksellers. Amazon could also grow more quickly than physical retailers, and, because of this, achieve unmatched economies of scale. The company’s success kicked off a revolution in online retailing, with countless startups and traditional retailers selling every possible product online. E-commerce transactions now make up close to ten per cent of all retail transactions in the United States, and that number continues to grow annually.

Launching an e-commerce business is relatively simple, especially when compared with opening a brick-and-mortar store. But it has proven to be difficult to make a profit from selling stuff online—a problem that is rarely acknowledged by the technology industry. E-commerce companies tend to point to sales, revenues, and other markers of growth, while eliding figures that speak to the most basic goal of retail: selling things for more than they cost. Most e-commerce startups fail to turn any profit at all, and those that eventually do succeed operate with extremely slim margins. This is why a company such as Gilt Groupe, which was once valued at more than a billion dollars, just sold to a traditional department-store chain for two hundred and fifty million dollars.

There are strong economic reasons that e-commerce struggles to make a profit. One is pricing. Deprived of most of the tools that physical stores can rely on (the presence of the object, nice locations, window displays, salespeople), online retailers rely heavily on offering the lowest possible price. And competition on price is intense, because a better offer is always just a click away (often, to Amazon’s vast digital catalog).

Then there’s shipping. Here, too, Amazon has established a difficult standard for the market, by offering discounted and free shipping on its products, and free returns as well. Most other e-commerce companies have been forced to follow Amazon’s lead. But as the retail consultant, onetime e-commerce entrepreneur (of the failed gift retailer Red Envelope), and New York University professor Scott Galloway pointed out in a widely discussed talk last year, all of this shipping costs tremendous amounts of money. That is, there is no such thing as “free” shipping. The U.P.S. driver doesn’t work for free, and the gas in the truck isn’t free, either. Amazon and other online retailers must absorb these costs, cutting into their potential profits and placing further stress on their pricing strategies.

To reduce these costs, many traditional retailers with e-commerce divisions, including Walmart, Macy’s, and Best Buy, have rolled out “click and collect” services, which allow customers to pick up online purchases in physical stores, saving both the customer and the retailer the cost of shipping that purchase. Amazon has already started to do this, with Amazon Locker, paving the way for a potential larger investment in a national brick-and-mortar retail chain. Amazon stores would serve as local warehouses, distribution centers, and someday, perhaps, drone-delivery airports.

The move from e-commerce to physical retail makes sense for deeply human reasons, too. Shopping has never been purely a transactional exchange of cash for goods. It’s also what we do on vacation, on weekends, and when we walk down a street. We shop to be with people, to have a place to go, to touch things, to indulge our consumption fantasies. Online shopping can offer a kind of digital mimesis of these things, but it doesn’t reward consumers in the same way as a physical store. Right now, Amazon might be the best place to find any book on Earth and purchase it at the lowest possible price, but the experience of shopping there remains impoverished. Even with all of the resources at its disposal, the company’s Web site is a morass of scattered graphics, random reviews, and predictable recommendations. (I just read a book about the history of Detroit—I don’t need ten more.)

The report of new Amazon stores comes at a time when independent bookstores are experiencing a surprisingly robust resurgence. According to the American Booksellers Association, the number of new bookstores in the U.S. has grown by more than twenty-five per cent in the past six years, while in-store sales have also grown. In New York, neighborhood stores such as Greenlight and Book Culture have added locations in the past few years to meet demand, selling books to their customers at prices that are often markedly higher than Amazon’s.

Aware of the advantages of physical space, some e-commerce companies are already opening stores or deepening their investments. Some are putting tremendous effort into making their shops as pleasurable as possible. Warby Parker’s showrooms have turned the act of purchasing eyeglasses into a sort of Wes Anderson–approved theme-park ride, complete with attendants in custom-designed blue smocks, photo booths, and jars of free pencils and school erasers. And while the stores look beautiful, and have been leased, designed, and staffed at a great cost, according to the company they’re also making money.

The great secret, too, for e-commerce companies with physical spaces, is that the stores can be arranged to offer the benefits of both the retail location and online shopping, drawing people in but driving online sales, too. This is what Amazon appears to have done with its test store in Seattle, integrating consumer product reviews on its shelf displays, stocking books that sell well online (including self-published titles), allowing for instant payment with Amazon technology, and offering unified online and in-store pricing.

These advantages, coupled with Amazon’s size, suggest a potentially fascinating development in the retail industry, and one that would make a good deal of sense for the company, especially given all the cash it has on hand. We would also see the company continue to tacitly admit that, for all the advantages of selling things online, you can’t be an everything store without actually having a shop or two.

Amazon Studios is producing a New Yorker series in partnership with Condé Nast Entertainment.

Mall CEO’s statement about Amazon opening hundreds of bookstores ‘was not intended to represent Amazon’s plans’

BookstoreOne day after a report surfaced in which the CEO of a mall said Amazon was planning to open hundreds of bookstores around the US, the same CEO appears to be backtracking his statement.

“General Growth Properties, Inc. Chief Executive Officer Sandeep Mathrani has indicated that a statement he made concerning Amazon during GGP’s earnings conference call held on February 2, 2016, was not intended to represent Amazon’s plans,” according to a statement released by the company Wednesday.

General Growth Properties CEO Sandeep Mathrani had said on his company’s earnings call: “You’ve got Amazon opening brick-and-mortar bookstores and their goal is to open, as I understand, 300 to 400.”

A move into larger-scale brick-and-mortar commerce would follow Amazon’s decision to open a store in Seattle last November.

Barnes & Noble shares, which fell 9% on Wednesday following the report, were up as much as 9% in after hours trade on Wednesday after Mathrani’s statement.

Disclosure: Jeff Bezos is an investor in Business Insider through his personal investment company Bezos Expeditions.

Amazon is reportedly planning to open hundreds of bookstores. Here’s why.

In November, Amazon opened its first bookstore, and reports from the CEO of one of America’s largest shopping mall operators Tuesday afternoon suggest that the company is prepared to open several hundred new ones across the country. This prompted many to ask why the company that destroyed the physical bookstore industry would possibly want to operate a physical bookstore.

Part of the answer is that, as the announcement of the original store location said, “At Amazon Books, you can also test drive Amazon’s devices,” meaning Kindles, Echos, Fire TVs, and Fire Tablets “are available for you to explore, and Amazon device experts will be on hand to answer questions and to show the products in action.” Apple has physical retail stores for its digital devices, as do (albeit less successfully) Microsoft, Sony, and Samsung. Since Amazon makes Amazon-branded devices, why shouldn’t it have a store too?

But the bookstore framing is no coincidence, and the reality is that something bigger and more profound is happening than a simple desire to let people window shop for Fire TV sticks. Amazon is interested in bookstores for two big reasons:

  1. It has the ability to open bookstores.
  2. It is driven by a relentless desire to conquer everything in its path, and brick-and-mortar retail is a thing.

For years now, Amazon has been the most terrifying competitor on the planet. And a possible move into physical retail should be taken as a reminder that no business of any kind should view itself as protected from Jeff Bezos’s plan for global domination.

Amazon started making money

Large American technology companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, and Microsoft are ridiculously profitable and, indeed, infamous for the lengths to which they go to avoid paying corporate income tax on their gargantuan profits. Since Amazon is also a large American technology company, it is easy to assume that it, too, must be ridiculously profitable. But this is not the case. The retail industry has traditionally been a very low-margin matter, and Amazon has outcompeted traditional retailers in part by offering even lower margins.

But that’s recently changed. In the most recent two quarters, Amazon has earned meaningful profits — profits driven by the success of Amazon Web Services, an enormously popular technology infrastructure company that enjoys tech-like economics rather than retail-like ones. That means 25 percent profit margins on a business that does $2 billion in revenue a quarter and is growing at a 70 percent annual rate.

As the technology industry analyst Ben Thompson put it, Amazon became profitable because “AWS is simply spinning off more cash than Amazon knows what to do with.”

Amazon doesn’t want to make money

The key to understanding Amazon as a business is that earning a profit is antithetical to its corporate culture and mission. Rather than increasing the value of Amazon stock by pushing out cash to shareholders, Bezos’s strategy is to increase the value of Amazon by literally making the company bigger. Each year, Amazon owns more warehouses, more customer data, more intellectual property, wider distribution channels, etc., and therefore becomes a more valuable enterprise than it was before.

On occasion, Amazon will turn a profit either to prove to Wall Street that it can, or else because (as with AWS recently) a particular venture simply proves more lucrative than expected.

But that AWS revenue was never going to sit around in the corporate treasury or be paid out as dividends. A surge in revenue needs to be met by a surge in new expenses. Recently prestige video content (Bezos says he wants to win an Oscar) and an effort to create a two-hour delivery service called Amazon Now have been soaking up the extra money. Brick-and-mortar retail is both another potential money sink and also a possible launching pad for Amazon Now services, which are obviously going to require some kind of logistical infrastructure.

Today books, tomorrow the world

So why brick-and-mortar retail? Most likely because Amazon’s long-term strategy is simple: It wants everyone, everywhere to buy everything from Amazon.

And it’s clear that whatever the struggles of some major big-box retail chains lately, people do in fact continue to buy things in stores. For some people, some of the time, a physical store is where they want to shop. These days you probably could buy everything you need online, but almost nobody actually does. Which means nobody buys everything from Amazon. Which is unacceptable.

So why bookstores? For the same reason Amazon.com was originally an online bookstore. You’ve got to start somewhere, and the book industry is a relatively soft target. Since Amazon’s already basically crushed the national bookstore chains, nobody can really stop the company from getting a foot in the door of this niche.

Ultimately, it might be a total dead end. But even if the effort to establish stores fails, it will be a potentially valuable learning experience. Amazon prides itself on a value it calls “customer obsession,” but lacking a physical presence means the company ends up with a somewhat limited view of what its customers look like and how they behave. A retail presence can help change that.

A store can be a same-day delivery hub

The bigger, less irony-laden thing that Amazon is working on right now is same-day delivery for Amazon Prime members. Currently, same-day delivery is sporadically available — for some products, in some cities, some of the time. It feels kind of like magic when it works, but it’s not nearly predictable enough right now to be a real driver of business rather than an impressive occasional delight for customers.

Amazon’s long-term aspirations in this field appear to involve fleets of driverless trucks and even flying delivery drones.

But in the human-powered present (and perhaps even in the drone-full future) same-day delivery requires stockpiles of merchandise that are more numerous and located more directly adjacent to population and transportation hubs than the company’s existing warehouses. The geography of same-day delivery depots, in other words, looks a lot like the geography of classic big-box stores. You wouldn’t have just one Borders serve an entire region. Instead, a given metro area would feature one or more downtown locations plus a bunch of mall spots in the surrounding suburbs. The goal was to ensure that nobody who bought books regularly was ever all that far from a Borders.

Essentially replicating this structure but combining it with Amazon’s logistics infrastructure, immense supply-chain bargaining power, vast stockpile of consumer knowledge, and the Prime subscription revenue model is at least a plausible vision of the future. And if the depots can serve as showrooms for Amazon hardware and help get traditional brick-and-mortar shoppers into the Amazon lifestyle, then why not?

Hillary Clinton Super PAC Gets Big Hollywood Checks from Haim Saban, Thomas Tull

Hillary Clinton Attends Grassroots Campaign Event In Florida

 

Billionaire George Soros donates a whopping $6 million
Hollywood’s heavy hitters are giving Hillary Clinton’s campaign major love in the form of some pretty hefty checks.

Hillary Clinton’s Super PAC, Priorities USA Action, received a $5 million check from longtime friend media mogul Haim Saban and his wife Cheryl, as well as a $1 million check from Legendary Entertainment CEO Thomas Tull.

Billionaire George Soros donated a whopping $6 million. That’s on top of the $1 million he donated earlier this year.

Jeffrey Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg, and the Sabans each gave $1 million to Clinton’s Super PAC in the first half of 2015. J.J. Abrams and Katie McGrath each gave $500,000.

Editor’s note: A previous version of this story stated that Haim Saban had donated $1.5 million to Clinton’s Super PAC. TheWrap regrets the error.

The Film Collaborative

The Film Collaborative 
THE FILM COLLABORATIVE is the first non-profit committed to distribution and facilitation of independent film.

Education & Advocacy
We offer a full range of affordable distribution, educational and marketing advice and advocacy to independent filmmakers looking to reach out to traditionally underserved audiences.

No Rights Taken
THE FILM COLLABORATIVE achieves these goals without ever needing to own or exploit a filmmaker’s intellectual property rights, opening up a new landscape of distribution opportunities free of extraneous middlemen and unfair contract terms, and drawing heavily upon the promise of new media/digital distribution and the power of viral and social networking.

In today’s marketplace, the traditional avenues of distribution for independent and art house distribution have dramatically contracted, leaving thousands of filmmakers without a way to bring their films to market.

As a result, there is a dire need for a service-oriented agency to step in to educate and empower filmmakers to reach out to audiences directly, to network with each other and trade vital experiences and marketing assets, and to master the tools of emerging DIY and new media opportunities.

About

THE FILM COLLABORATIVE is both an educational and networking resource and a service provider for filmmakers.
  • Provide you with a commercial assessment of your work…where we think your film can fit within the current marketplace
  • Handle your festivals/non-theatrical/hybrid/educational release
  • Help you strategize all aspects of your domestic and international sales
  • Assist you on DIY theatrical releases
  • Supervise or spearhead your grassroots marketing and publicity
  • Advise or manage your Digital Aggregation…from iTunes to Cable VOD to Amazon VOD, and more
  • Provide Fiscal Sponsorship
  • Advise and educate you on all aspects of distribution and marketing as they relate to your film
A Message from Orly Ravid, Founder and Co-Executive Director
With fourteen years of acquisitions, distribution and sales experience, I conceived of THE FILM COLLABORATIVE because I was sick of the layers of middlemen standing in between filmmakers and the revenues they deserved but were often not receiving. I was further bothered by the wasted money and ineffeciency, to say nothing of greed and cheating. And frankly, the old model of giving up rights never made any sense to me. So I wanted to find a way to work with film based on a service model in which my team could get paid for our time, experience and work, but not be given ownership and control of a film. It was out of this feeling of frustration and commitment to fairness that TFC was born. We’re non-profit, on purpose, and we truly believe in and stand by our two taglines: “filmmakers first.” and “we don’t own your rights…you do!”
Founded: 2010
Company Size: 1 – 10 employees
YouTube Channel (276 followers): https://www.youtube.com/user/thefilmcollaborative
Twitter (28.6K followers): https://twitter.com/filmcollab
Partial Filmography:
Kidnapped for Christ – 2014
To Be Takei – 2014
G.B.F. – 2013
Interior. Leather Bar. – 2013
Kink – 2013
Pitstop – 2013
I Am Divine – 2013
Gayby – 2013
The Invisible War – 2012
We Were Here – 2011
Weekend – 2011
In the Media: 
 

Toronto 2012: The Film Collaborative Launches Legal Services Initiative | The Hollywood Reporter | September 6, 2012

Law firm of Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson is spearheading the program, availing itself for a flat fee rather than billing by the hour.

The Film Collaborative is launching a legal services initiative.

Dubbed TFC Legal, the initiative will offer business affairs and legal contract expertise to filmmakers looking to hammer out distribution deals.

The Los Angeles- and New York-based law firm of Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson is spearheading the program for TFC Legal, which will offer legal services for a flat fee rather than billing by the hour.

“The key to this initiative is that it is only focused on distribution agreements, our specialty and the focus of our mission,” said Orly Ravid, founder and co-executive director of the nonprofit. “This new service pairs our expertise in distribution, particularly digital distribution, with AGMB’s extensive experience in entertainment law, in order to achieve the best results for TFC clients.”

Ravid stressed that because digital distribution has become the new paradigm, filmmakers need to be aware of all their rights as well as new licensing issues.

“Rather than filmmakers signing distribution agreements where the terms are not clearly defined, which can be the case with digital rights in particular, TFC Legal will advise on exactly which rights are being granted to the distributor and for which platforms, without taking control of the filmmaker/content creator’s rights, as traditional sales agencies do,” said Sheri Candler, director of digital marketing strategy. “This allows us to put the filmmaker’s interests first and allows them to work with us instead of being locked into a sales agency agreement.”

Since TFC’s inception in 2010, it has offered resources and services to independent filmmakers, including film festival distribution, marketing and publicity strategy and implementation, theatrical releasing, digital distribution aggregation and foreign sales negotiation. The nonprofit has provided its services for more than 150 independent films, including Kirby Dick’s The Invisible WarAndrew Haigh’s Weekend and Musa Sayeed’s Valley of Saints.
———
 
Que(e)ries: How The Little ‘Gayby’ That Could Soared On iTunes During a Very Big Week For LGBT Americans | Indiewire | July 2, 2013

Clearly the biggest LGBT news in America last week — which just so happened to also mark pride celebrations in gay meccas like New York and San Francisco — was the Supreme Court’s historical rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act and Prop 8. But in the midst of that came a notable success story in the indie film world: Jonathan Lisecki’s “Gayby” was picked as the film of the week on iTunes and subsequently soared to the top of their charts, beating out films with budgets and theatrical grosses literally 100 times greater (if not 1,000).

Perhaps all the big news put at-home audiences in a particularly gay content friendly mood, or maybe Lisecki’s hilarious and charming rom com simply won them over (like it did Kerry Washington and Paul Feig, whose vocal support for the film surely aided it as well). The answer is probably somewhere in the middle, along with the fact that the film was on sale — $0.99 to rent and $5.99 to buy (studio titles are often $4.99/$19.99).  But either way it’s great news for “Gayby,” and low budget indies in general.

The film — which premiered back at SXSW last year — follows two BFFs (a gay man and a straight woman) who met in college and are now in their thirties. Both single, they decide to actually go through with their youthful promise to have a child together. Their story won very warm reviews on the festival circuit, and an Indie Spirit award nomination for Lisecki. But theatrically the buzz didn’t quite translate: It only grossed $14,062 from a small run last October. However, it seems like the film will have financial happy ending after all.  FilmBuff, who handles digital for “Gayby” distributor Wolfe, arranged with iTunes for the film to be included in their Pride sale.  Then iTunes ended up picking it as the overall film of the week.

“We’ve had a ‘little indie that could’ vibe going for a while now,” Lisecki said.  “Not many indie gay films per year receive that kind of attention, and the same can be said of indie comedies, so for a gay indie comedy to get noticed is unexpected in a wonderful way. We premiered at SXSW, played tons of great festivals, had a small theatrical run, got lots of great critical notices, and I was nominated for an Independent Spirit Award. But when a huge platform like iTunes give us this kind of spotlight, it takes things to new level.”

That new level saw “Gayby” hit #1 on iTunes’ indie charts, #3 on their comedy charts and #5 overall.  The latter saw it top the likes of “Spring Breakers,” “Silver Linings Playbook,” “Jack The Giant Slayer” and “Django Unchained.”  For a film with a $100,000 budget to top films that likely spent at least that on catering alone.

“I have received amazing feedback from friends, family, people in the business, people on Facebook and Twitter.  It’s been entirely positive and great,” Lisecki said. “All week long my friends have been cheering us on.  We went from 10 to 9 to 7 to 5…”

———

‘The Invisible War’ to Be Distributed by Cinedigm and New Video | The Hollywood Reporter | March 5, 2012

Kirby Dick’s look at the rape epidemic in the U.S. military won the U.S. documentary audience award at the 2012 fest.

Cinedigm Entertainment Group and New Video have jointly acquired North American distribution rights to The Invisible War. Directed by Kirby Dick, the film won the U.S. documentary audience award at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival in January. It will receive a theatrical release this summer.

Dick’s investigative documentary takes a devastating look at the rape epidemic in the U.S. military. Amy Ziering (Outrage, Derrida) produced the project.

The Invisible War is the first acquisition under the new partnership between Cinedigm and New Video to distribute independent films theatrically, on demand, digitally and via DVD/Blu-ray.

“We are honored that our first New Video/Cinedigm acquisition is The Invisible War,” said Cinedigm chairman and CEO Chris McGurk. “The film is incredibly powerful and deserves – in fact demands – to be seen by as many people as possible. We very much look forward to working with Kirby, Amy and their team to share this important film with audiences across the nation.”

Orly Ravid of The Film Collaborative and distribution advisor Jonathan Dana repped the sale for the filmmakers.

“In a highly partisan political season it’s refreshing to be working with a political story that is completely and profoundly bipartisan,” said Ravid. “The Invisible War has engendered overwhelmingly passionate response from women and men, military and civilians, as well as politicians on both sides of the aisle.”
Ro*Co Films is handling educational distribution and international sales for the picture; Film Sprout is handling non-theatrical distribution and The Film Collaborative is handling worldwide festival distribution. Independent Lens is the broadcast partner and helped finance the film.