Money, Money, Money

I was sent an interesting link by Guy Gonzalez on Twitter this morning.  It’s an article from trade website thewrap.com titled “Hollywood Throws Big Bucks at Untested Novelists.“

Now, that’s the sort of headline that gives literary agents and publishers nightmares, as it tends to perpetuate this (mostly) false notion that writers can spring out of nowhere and become multi-millionaires with one inspired manuscript.  I don’t know the context that the deals described by thewrap.com were made in – and context always matters.  Nonetheless, I’d like for you to read the piece, because I’m going to pull out some points from it.

There is Still a Lot of Money in Content

It may well be that we are, as many very smart people have observed, in the midst of a slow transition from static (pirateable) content to more personalized, evanescent “experience-based” entertainment.  But we’re not there yet.

My guess is when thewrap talks about a “mid-six figure deal” (implying ~$500k), it actually means a much smaller five figure option contract, with the bigger sum to follow if the film gets made.  Nonetheless, businesses don’t invest in things that they don’t think have at least a chance of paying off.  Here, the studios are clearly spreading their bets – paying $500k a piece for ten properties is nothing if one of them makes a billion dollars.  I’m guessing that half a million dollars is quite a lot of money to you, so the lesson is this: structure your Transmedia project around a driving, saleable, existing platform that can be sold.  See David Wilson’s great report on Thomas Hoegh’s Power To the Pixel talk for more.

Genre Is Hot

This barely needs stating.  A cursory glance at the titles and loglines suggests that – with the exception of the Shona Rhimes project – they are all fantasy, sci-fi or action pieces.

Perhaps this is a fad, and drama will come back, but I doubt it and here’s why: firstly, as has been oft-observed, television is becoming the format of choice for television.  More money and control for writers, great production value, more opportunity to delve into characters, conflicts and backstory.  Secondly – and critical for you if you are reading this blog – genre materials lend themselves most easily to Transmedia development, planning and extension.  Unless you are in the Sundance lab or something similar, you are never, never, ever pitching just a movie.  You are pitching a rich story world that can be developed (not “milked” or “exploited”) in a way that creates exciting stories and sustainable revenue streams for years to come.

Publishers: Here’s Your Answer

There’s been a little bit of discussion on Twitter this week – partly stemming from an article I wrote about the publishing industry – about the suitability of publishers for the task of incubating and developing intellectual property.

I want the publishing industry to put aside the more radical parts of that piece – the new platforms, the possibility of producing A/V content in-house – and concentrate on the basics of development.  Publishing is, more than ever, a game where the big winner subsidizes the losers (how many weeks has Dragon Tattoo been on the bestseller list?).  Publishers are all looking for the next Twilight or Harry Potter, and so is the movie industry – these deals are evidence of that.  Even if publishers want to be entirely hands-off with regard to Transmedia implementation, I hope the benefits of these techniques are clear: more durable properties, more brand awareness, more books sold, and closer engagement with fans (who may follow the publisher across book series).

The deals described by thewrap are ostensibly being made on the back of loglines and treatments.  My suggestion is that the work of transforming these properties from clever pitches into sustainable franchises begins right now.  Somebody – a publisher, a producer, or very likely an agent (defining their traditional role) – needs to prepare these manuscripts for Transmedia before they are published.  Remember, Transmedia is not multi-platform – it is the possibility of multi-platform.  That’s a subtle distinction, but I hope it is clear.  The real work takes place in development – not years down the line when you want to make a sequel or sell a cartoon series.

Don’t Get Twilighted

The article talks on page 2 about the unfortunate situation with Paramount and Twilight.  In short, Paramount had the option to Twilight, lost it, and Summit swooped in.  It’s dumb luck in one way, because producers and studios have to let options lapse all the time and most of them don’t go on to become behemoths.  However, it’s also the financial equivalent of throwing a billion dollars down the sink – and a lot of people lost their jobs because of it.

There’s a very important lesson to be extracted from this – aside from the professional consequences of not realizing the value of an IP.  Studios and producers often option books as a gamble.  They take interest in a number of properties and hold that interest like lottery tickets – hoping that the book hits the bestseller list and builds up a fanbase.  A green light becomes inevitable, and everyone profits.  The studios and producers don’t necessarily invest the time and effort to deeply understand those properties while waiting to see if they make it big.

Now, I’m aware that some studios are far more proactive about developing properties; I’m reminded of this wonderful scene with Robert Evans in The Kid Stays in the Picture when he talks about The Godfather and Love Story.  However, I’m unconvinced that most studios truly appreciate the potential of fan-engagement techniques.  It is possible – through smart thinking and Transmedia strategy, not just marketing dollars – to create fan communities for books before they are even published.  I’m seeing some marketing teams do this already through social networking, but not to the full potential suggested by experts such as Mike Monello and Jeff Gomez.

Before you can create an audience, however, you have to truly understand the property.  Not just in terms of its high concept plot, or suitability for a certain A-list director (though, as the article suggests, that is key), but by thinking about the underlying themes that make it appealing.  If somebody gave you the Twilight logline before it was released – it’s about a girl who falls in love with a vampire – you’d likely dismiss it out of hand.  But Stephanie Meyer tapped into a cultural nerve and it was that – combined with great casting and some luck – that made Twilight such a phenomenon.

The Power of Ready Made Audiences

Fan engagement has another huge advantage – it mitigates your risk.  When you work from an existing property – or cultivate a fanbase before release (The Blair Witch Project did this masterfully) – you know what your worst case scenario is.  Sometimes the property will resonate with a wider audience (see The Walking Dead, which is absolutely superb) and sometimes it will struggle, or at least be a slow burner (Scott Pilgrim).  But if you create a “universe worthy of devotion,” you’re taking much less of a risk.  In that regard, this quote from Caren Bohrman hits the nail on the head:

“For the most part, graphic novels are branded and have a built-in audience…[s]o if you bring in a writer and director and the right kind of team, you already have 2 milion geeks who are going to see that.”

But, Respect Your Fans

In a way, it’s unfair of me to single out this quote by Caren Bohrman.  She’s a smart person and a brilliant agent, she’s talking to a trade publication (not at Comic-Con), and she likely doesn’t mean anything negative.  However, in the internet age, you simply cannot be too careful with your fans.  You can’t blindly defer to them on creative issues, but you absolutely must take care not to offend them.  If Bohrman had made the comment, with the use of the word “geeks,” in regard to a specific film, it could have been picked up on message boards, commented on in the blogosphere, and might ultimately have hurt the property’s long term prospects.  As Jeff Gomez said in the PGA talk a couple of weeks ago, IP stewards shouldn’t fear fans – those who love something are often most critical.  However, I’d suggest that this particular issue is so easily fixable, it would be negligent not to.

So in future, I suggest substituting the word “nerd” or “geek” with “fan,” “evangelist” or “ambassador.”  The cost of doing so is nil, and it’s better not to risk offending the devoted.