Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Reeler Pinch Hitter: Brian Newman, National Video Resources


[Note: Reeler editor S.T. VanAirsdale is taking the week off, but the blog is in the good hands of trusted friends and colleagues; click here for other entries in the series. Brian Newman is the executive director of National Video Resources, a non-profit organization supporting filmmakers and other artists in independent media. He blogs at Springboard Media.]
During a recent dinner with a filmmaker, our conversation turned to the death of the Association of Video and Filmmakers, a non-profit collective better known as AIVF. “What’s wrong with New York that we can’t have one good organization?” she asked, “Austin, San Francisco, even Cleveland all have great film organizations and us? Nothing.”
She was exaggerating, but her point was valid. The conversations about the demise of AIVF have made it clear that they had problems, but also that filmmakers have unmet needs–a place to meet, network, find crew, collaborate, to advocate on their behalf, to find in-depth information and to exhibit their work. Some aspects of these needs are served by certain local groups and by many new online companies and blogs, but many feel that we don’t have a place that is clearly identified as the New York film organization; where a filmmaker new to town can walk in the door and feel like they are connecting to the community. This would seem a bit odd in the supposed independent film (and cultural) capital of the world.
I have posited that AIVF’s demise is just the first fallout of a larger crisis facing similar organizations. At National Video Resources, the organization I manage, we’ve recognized this and are changing our model to adapt to the changing times–things like the decrease of governmental and foundation support, or the impact of new technologies on the needs of artists. Like everyone else, we need to adapt and think differently about our business, and like everyone else, we may fail. Almost every other organization has called me up to deny there is a crisis or that it applies to them. Let’s take this on face value and say that the crisis isn’t affecting everyone; the fact remains that no one has taken a lead at picking up the pieces of AIVF or designing better ones to take their place. This tells me that the field may not be in crisis, but it definitely has a cash flow problem.
Add to this the particulars of New York–chiefly, rising rents affecting filmmakers and cultural groups alike, and it seems that a conversation is needed about where we go from here, and what is on the horizon. We need some more imagination, some dreaming about what New York filmmakers deserve.


What if one of the larger groups in town could add just a few things to their already great programs and become the New York hub for the community? The Tribeca Film Institute, for example, has the power to build a downtown home for filmmakers, and could easily build programs to rival Sundance, but with a focus on the “edginess” of New York. Or IFP could become the perfect organization if it added some advocacy and better networking for its members (kudos to them, however, for the “Do It Yourself” additions to Independent Film Week).
What if some of the smaller groups (the DocuClubs, Film/Video Arts and similar-sized groups) considered mergers to better serve more people? There are benefits to a diversity of groups, true, but there’s too much competition for the same funding and audiences right now. What if just one of these groups would move to Brooklyn (you know, where filmmakers live) and build a home there? What if we all made a case to foundations, the city and the public that independent filmmakers are crucial to New York’s creative economy? What if we used the demise of AIVF to spur a greater conversation about what is needed?
Last week brought news that shows one group is dreaming about “what’s next?” Downtown Community Television (DCTV) announced the receipt of major grants–over $2 million–to build a downtown home for filmmakers and audiences. Plans are still in the works, but they’ll be able to offer education, facilities, equipment, screening rooms, servers and a networking location for documentary filmmakers, audiences and the surrounding communities. DCTV’s focus won’t solve all the issues, but they are clearly dreaming.
What’s needed next are more innovative projects like those at DCTV–to help filmmakers in New York to make their films, have the freedom to create their visions and to have audiences find their work. Undoubtedly, other groups have their own unannounced plans, but I would propose that to really keep New York as the independent film capital, we need a lot more dreaming, and soon.

Be Sociable, Share!

2 Responses to “Reeler Pinch Hitter: Brian Newman, National Video Resources”

  1. Ingrid Kopp says:

    We’re trying some innovative methods at Shooting People to help people network, collaborate and establish a local community of filmmakers who can help each other get their films made and seen.
    But I think you are absolutely right – this is a conversation we should all be having, and groups should work together to find a solution that both serves filmmakers and energizes the creative economy.

  2. Jane Minton says:

    Hi Brian, New York isn’t the only community struggling with duplicating efforts among organizations and huge gaps in other areas in terms of services to filmmakers. Twin Cities media arts leaders have been meeting regularly to assess the weaknesses in our infrastructure and brainstorming on how to address them. We’re currently surveying all aspects of the field: exhibition, festivals, media arts orgs, commercial production, indie production, new digital pioneers and more. As for media arts orgs, reinvention is key to continuing to serve filmmakers. We’re working hard on remodeling at IFP MN. Jane

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon