Last nights meeting was a good one. I had hoped to be out by around 9pm, so I could get home and pack for my trip to LA. I finally got home at 11pm. Delayed, once again. But, true to form, worth very minute. At the heart of our “post-script” discussion was a number of topics dealing a variety of issues. Some which we’ve all been feeling, some that Clayton and I have been struggling with for a while.

Right now ReCinema is a purely volunteer endeavor. Its not a business, and no one makes any money. Given that there a certain hard costs associated with ReCinema, and while very small (rent, website hosting, domain names, Celtx accounts, Vimeo accounts, etc.), ReCinema still runs in the red.

We’ve struggled with finding a commitment from people in a number of areas. I believe, while there is a real draw for writers and directors to collaborate and develop projects in a quid-pro-quo environment, there has been a lot of resistance from others to commit to contributing to the effort. I believe this is a result of collaborators wanting to commit to their own projects, rather than someone elses. Understandable. But how then do you find the collaborators necessary to move projects forward, projects which may not be their own. It takes a special kind of people. People who believe not in a particular project, but rather believe in the concept and the ideas that ReCinema represents. People must believe in ReCinema, and the desire to see any and all projects that are developed within the ReCinema model succeed. I could go on and on about our discussions regarding finding collaborators, but I think I’ll let Clayton cover that one… ;-)

These two seemingly disparate thoughts, for me, conclude at the same point: Sustainability and Cash-Flow.

I don’t intend to go into a lot of detail about our discussion along these lines, but some of the overarching ideas that arose involved finding ways to make ReCinema sustainable with a positive cash-flow. There is a fine line which we are acutely aware of, and are being careful not to cross: we don’t want our efforts and focus on cash-flow to distract from the bigger picture of creating and developing our own internal ideas. Here are some of the specifics that were discussed:

• Making services that we provide internally for the development of our own ideas available to outside parties. Script or treatment breakdown and development, conceptual artwork, storyboarding and previsualization for outside projects; from other films to commercials, to even other forms of storytelling, such as theatrical plays, comics and graphic novels.
• Pre-marketing of films and the stories behind an individual, particular story. This would include transmedia (a popular topic of late), which might include behind-the-scenes vignettes, web-shorts, radio plays, comics, access to animatics, and other media that helps draw an audience for a project while that project is still in development or production. This could also include more traditional marketing avenues, such as merchandising on films and the ReCinema brand itself. Something as simple coffee mugs with the ReCinema logo to limited edition ‘Avengerella’ Superhero Trading Cards. As a more non-traditional means, auctioning props and items from the film, before the film goes into production; the winning bidder would receive the item after the film has finished production.
• Development of over-arching projects, that benefit ReCinema in the end, but may have larger development cycles up front. These are the least attractive because they will ultimately distract us from the big picture, but hopefully the long-term payoffs out-weight the alternative. Examples of this might be creating our own distribution channels for non-ReCinema content, or creating websites offering products and services which are of a broader benefit to the filmmaking industry, but which would be utilized internally by our own team; for example, online script analysis and storyboarding tools. These don’t require the same level of maintenance and continued involvement as the first bullet point, but it would require a much bigger initial investment in the design and development of that product.

Of course, the tie to finding collaborators is an obvious, though by no means idealic conclusion. Ultimately, to be in a position to hire and maintain a staff of collaborators. But, I think even in the long term, these potential opportunities offer collaborators the opportunity for a revenue stream, even if a meager one. But, I think it also provides a more immediate opportunity for collaborators to have their contributions realized and appreciated by a larger audience (which I believe is one of the core, if rarely stated, issues that we face.)

So, keep an eye out over the next few weeks or months for new opportunities to help support our initiative.