There's a convergence afoot, between Hollywood and hi-tech. I mean, besides the obvious. Yes, channels are mixing, distribution models are blurring, the means of production are democratized, everyone's a filmmaker, Apple TV this, Netflix that…
No. I mean the actual, cultural convergence of two groups of people who set out to make…things. The two worlds, one started by Jewish immigrants and the other pioneered by uber-cerebral Midwestern geeks, are starting to resemble each other.
All my evidence is experiential and circumstantial. And, in the spirit of bad social science methodology, I am selecting on the dependent variable - I see what I see, and I'm calling it a pattern. But so what? I know it's true. And this convergence isn't because of the democratization of media. It's from the democratization of technology.
I'm going to briefly list my background, not because it establishes me as an authority, but because it justifies a level of intimacy with both the tech and film worlds. I was a co-founder of BlueLight.com, an opportunity for which I turned down an offer to be employee number twenty-something at PayPal (I know, I know, believe me I know.) I left the tech world briefly to go to film school, where I wrote and then directed the feature film Saint John of Las Vegas. The film had a brief theatrical run, thanks primarily to the star power of the lead actor Steve Buscemi and a strong supporting cast. If you like indie road movies, Netflix has it on-demand. I'm still involved in technology, and I still make movies. And it's from this perspective that I glibly analyze the two cultures:
Go to a film industry event - a film festival, a social meet-up, a screening with celebrities. You have one group of people who are great at doing something (writing, drawing, painting, directing) but who need resources in order to "do" that thing. You have another group of people who have resources, or access to resources, or access to that access. It's trite and cliche to hold the "artist" above the "facilitator." The system has evolved natural roles to manage the stress of potential doers dwarfing the resources available to do.
Now, go to a tech meet-up or a pitch conference. You have entrepreneurs who want to do things that require resources. And you have facilitators who, one way or another, control access to those resources. But beyond that, coders and developers are starting to look, dress, act and speak like writers or artists. VC's and investors more and more resemble producers and agents. My friend Tom Chernaik, founder of Cmp.ly and former media exec, described a surreal scene at SXSW where not only was the same hotel being used to broker media and tech deals, but that you couldn't tell the difference between one group and the other, except the tech folks preferred daylight and the media people operated at night. Similarly, a developer here in NY complained that he wasn't comfortable going to tech meet-ups anymore, because they were full of flashy, charismatic non-technical people, and no one was "sitting around, drinking beer and talking code."
For film, where did the over-supply of doers come from? I don't know, but it's been that way since the earliest days of the industry. Read "Hollywood Babylon" or "Day of the Locust" for insight into how little has changed about film culture in the last 100 years. Everyone has a story to tell, most Americans know how to write, and any one of us might be a movie star if we get discovered.
In the first internet wave, there were not too many doers. There were not enough doers. My friend's girlfriend was a classical musician who got hired by Netscape right out of college. Apparently the Valley had drained all local schools of computer science majors, so the big firms were hiring classical musicians and teaching them how to code, banking on the similarity between programming and symphonic structure. But now, anyone (relatively speaking) can code. The languages are more accessible, and the platforms are kinder. You don't need a graduate degree in comp sci, you need a spare weekend and a how-to book. And as technology becomes more accessible, the supply balance tips, and you have glut of potential doers seeking limited resources. Enter the power brokers, the resource allocators, the facilitators.
There are some obvious implications for tech, which are already in motion. You already have the beginnings of talent agents, first-look deals, and celebrities with "green lighting" power. But there's also a sadder implication. If technical ability becomes a commodity, other factors, such as looks and style, may become deciding factors. Tech, once the bastion of the physically and socially awkward, will get invaded by technically competent beautiful people. Everyone knows that film stars are attractive. What's surprising is how attractive the writers, producers, cinematographers, agents, sound recordists and digital intermediary colorists are. A highly acclaimed sound designer summarized the pressure he felt to be physically attractive this way: "it's not enough to sing like Usher. You've got to look like Usher and dance like Usher."
Comments