I don’t mean Sofia Coppola indies (Lost in Translation). I mean real indies that’ve been shot by a low/no budget filmmaker.
One example is Waterborne, an indie flick about bio terrorism. Apparently, the filmmakers behind it passed on a lucrative (?) offer of $125,000 for the theatrical distribution (North American market, I’d assume).
Instead they went with Google video and reportedly the movie got 25,000 views in its first two weeks of streaming. The “premiere attracted an “average of 1,000 page views and hundreds of paid downloads”, according to Ben Rekhi, Waterborne’s writer/director. There’s an video interview with the filmmaker - Filmmaker Ben Rekhi discusses “Waterborne,” pioneer Google Video feature film.
So far, so good. I still have to see the numbers before I can say I buy Google’s hype. The indications are pretty strong though. For example, Samaritan, an indie “feature” shot with HVX200 in 2 nights (81 setups) could find Google video as the only viable distribution outlet. Another must-see is Steve Ballmer’s Developers video.
Update: Google will be launching pay-per-click video ads - could they appear next to “regular” Google videos?
Update: I’ve been to Google Video again and it seems to me that most of the videos there are junk. Yet, occasionally you get to some original stuff: like the Mentos Coke video or Steve Ballmer’s Developers video. You can even get a fake Diablo 3 trailer (although Blizzard are sneaky about a Diablo 3 release).
0 Responses to “Google video as a vehicle for indies?”