I saw this film the other night, The Broken Circle Breakdown, and I was inspired to write another review. The film is from Belgium, and it came out in 2012. It’s a beautifully realized tragedy. It’s also suffused with fabulous live music. The music is early Bluegrass, a genre that uses beautiful harmonies to mask stories of heartbreak and loss. So the music is a perfect compliment to the story.

It’s not giving anything away to say that the key plot point in the film is the death of a child. It made me cry. It’ll probably have the same effect on you, unless you’re already dead inside. But you should see it anyway. It’s beautiful and dramatic and occasionally funny, but ultimately sad.

The Broken Circle Breakdown should be required viewing for all humans. It might even change you in subtle ways. And that’s the highest compliment that I can give to a work of art.

I’ve been leaving a few nuts and dried fruit in a small bowl on my deck for the squirrel.  He comes by each morning to see what I’ve left him and has some breakfast there.  Sometimes he brings his girlfriend.  Often I don’t see him, since I’ve got my face glued to a computer much of the time.  But occasionally I notice some movement out there and watch him.

He likes to jump in and out of my planters, and he digs around in them.  I think he may be burying some of his stash for later.  He also leaves little puddles of urine around on the deck.  I assume this is some sort of marking behavior.  So now he thinks he owns the place.

I’m wondering what will happen when Spring comes and I want to sit out there again and read.  I hope he doesn’t mind it if I use “his” deck.

This post has nothing to do with Advertising, or Media Production. It’s just about an odd thing that happened to me, and hopefully, a lesson I learned from it. If that doesn’t interest you, then you need not continue reading this post.

I was sitting in my living room the other day, and I saw some movement out of the corner of my eye. Out on the deck, a large squirrel was snooping around. I’d seen him out there before, and usually I would rap on the window to scare him off.

At the time, the window was open, being a warm Fall day. So I got up and yelled at him through the screen. But he didn’t run away this time. He just looked at me for a moment and then stuck his head into one of the planters I have, growing Basil out on the deck.

So I opened the door and went out to shoo him off. When I got out there he ran away, but when I looked over the railing I saw that he was just below the deck clinging to the building, looking at me. It sensed that he wasn’t about to go anywhere. Just waiting me out. Again I told him to get lost, and again he just stared at me, as if to say “what’s your problem, man?”

I considered getting a broom to force him off the building, but decided it wasn’t worth it. So I went back inside and sat down again. Within a few seconds he was back again, sticking his head into the pot where my Basil was growing.

Now I was curious. So this time I just watched, wondering what he could possibly want with my Basil plants. Do squirrels like Basil? It didn’t seem likely, but one never knows.

Then he pulled a large, dead mushroom out of the pot. The week before we had a lot of rain, and a mushroom had sprung up in the pot. I didn’t bother to remove it, and it flopped over after a few days, and was lying on the dirt, rotting.

The squirrel then began hungrily devouring the mushroom, and I watched him eat the entire thing. After he was done, he took off in a flash.

Reflecting on my actions, I felt bad that I had tried to shoo him away. I had no idea that the dead mushroom would be of value to him, but I certainly didn’t wish to deny him a bit of sustenance if he wanted it. I had no use for the mushroom, and in fact, I had forgotten that it was even there.

So I think one of the lessons in this little drama is the old adage “never judge a book by it’s cover.” Just because the squirrel is a different species, doesn’t mean that he’s a pest or a danger of some sort. He’s just a hungry little guy trying to get by like the rest of us. And he deserves my empathy, and to be treated with kindness, and even my respect. It’s not easy being a squirrel, with Winter about to start again up here in the frozen tundra. The least I can do is to let him have that mushroom, which he seemed to relish.

It’s odd how we treat some other species as our confidants, and others as pests. I am constantly seeing posts from friends about their cats, dogs, horses (even geckos), as if they are their most treasured friends. But we routinely kill mice, and spiders, and other undesirable species. It occurred to me that the only difference between our chosen animal friends and the others is an arbitrary preference that is learned behavior, and possibly evolutionary. But it is definitely arbitrary.

Buddhist teachings say that we should treat “all sentient beings” with empathy and loving-kindness. And my squirrel friend is certainly another sentient being. In fact, I’d say that he’s damn smart to have sniffed out that tasty mushroom while passing by my deck. And he was determined to get it, despite my menacing threats.

I’d like to live up to the ethical standards set forth in the Buddha’s teachings, although I surely didn’t in this case.

So I regret trying to chase him off, and I’ve resolved not to do so in the future. I will henceforth consider that squirrel my friend. What’s mine is his … as long as he stays out on the porch.

Last night the AICP had it’s annual showing of the awards reel here in MN.  The show is co-sponsored by MOMA in New York, and titled “The Art and Technique of the American Commercial”.  It was a great reel, filled with impressive creative work as always.  I’ve seen it every year since they started the show back in 1991.

But this year was different.  The AICP decided a few years back to consider any advertising, regardless of it’s intended media platform.  So this year, for the first time, the majority of the work included in the show was not meant for traditional Broadcast TV.  Each year, over the past few years, there has been more and more work that was recognized which was produced for distribution in theaters or on web sites.  These pieces are usually longer than the traditional :30 or :60, and feel more like short films.  The longer format allows for a richer story to be told, and a deeper engagement with the subject.  This is clearly an advantage for communicating with an audience, and shows how the marketing efforts of Brands and organizations will be presented in the future.

I have written before about the eroding efficacy of traditional “push” marketing on TV.  One wonders why so many advertisers are still relying on that method, but that’s another subject.  What this year’s AICP reel shows us more clearly than ever, is that if one wishes to engage an audience with work that is “best-in-class”, one has to think in terms of longer formats than the traditional :30.  Many of the winning entries ranged from :90 to over 4 minutes, with the median being around 2 minutes, (which seems to be a good length for the average viewer’s attention span).  And since it is impractical for most marketers to buy time on TV or cable channels of that length, this means, by extension, that the media distribution is going to shift to the web.

I see this as a positive development for the audience.  We’ll all have better, and more engaging videos to watch, and they will be more relevant to our interests in a “pull” environment.  Which is not to say that advertisers won’t still try to force you to watch what they want you to see (pre-rolls and mid-rolls in longer form entertainment), but those efforts will inevitably be defeated by technology which will allow viewers to create their own viewing experience.

Standouts from the show included the animated film produced by Chipotle last year, “ Back To The Start”, which was included in multiple categories.  It’s a great example of the new marketing paradigm.  I wrote a post about it when it was first released.  There was also a trio of pieces from Google, who’s Creative Lab put together some of the most moving short films ever, like “Dear Sophie” and “It Gets Better” under the campaign idea that the web is what you make of it.  Hallmark was also represented, as they have often been, this time with a lovely piece of realistic CG animation called “Motherbird”, about having a daughter.

And then there were the hilarious films by K-Swiss featuring Kenny Powers.  In the case of those films, the length may have been a bit too long (at 5 minutes), but the level of profanity was astonishing.  I’m sure folks at the FCC were freaking out when they got a look at that campaign, which proves that the web is truly unregulated in terms of the nature of the content.  There’s no way that would have ever been allowed to run on commercial TV.  Since I have kids that are often on-line watching video, I have mixed feelings about that issue.   But there are good child filters out on the market for those that want to protect young ears and eyes from “adult” humor.

Some of these outstanding examples of communication were new to me, since they were never distributed on commercial TV.    And that’s the way I expect it’ll be from now on.

I recently met with the President and Director of Development of a local non-profit about updating their Marketing / Communications program.  It’s an interesting time to be working in the non-profit world, due to all of the “new media” outlets that are available to them now.

In most cases, non-profit organizations haven’t had the budgets to do the sort of marketing that consumer brands do, and so they often haven’t had modern, industry-standard marketing discipline applied to their efforts in that sphere.  I have done some great TV work over the years for non-profit clients, thanks to the government mandate that the networks run a certain number of PSA’s (part of the deal for using the bandwidth, which is a public asset).  It’s not easy to get the TV produced, since the budgets tend to be a small fraction of what we usually spend, but we always find a way.  And often the work turns out great.  Unfortunately, the government doesn’t mandate when the networks have to run it, so they put the PSAs on in the middle of the night and few people actually see them.

But the spots look good on everyone’s reels.  And now they can be distributed for essentially no cost over the internet, played on the charity’s web site, Facebook page, and anyplace else that can be accessed online (and not part of the traditional payed media environment).  Far out.  Now we can actually afford to distribute that work.

So the marketing challenge in working for non-profits isn’t about resources anymore (or the lack thereof).  Now it’s about the usual concerns of focusing the strategy, producing engaging content, and integrating the message across all of the output channels.  Which are the same issues that crop up in the work we do for big consumer brands.  The playing field has been leveled, and there’s a great deal of discussion about bringing the rigor we apply to traditional marketing into the non-profit world.  There’s some education that needs to happen on both the Client and Agency side to make that a reality.  But that just takes a bit of time, and an openness to learning.

Should be an interesting project, working for a client that isn’t trying to “sell” anything, but only exists to serve a particular population.  They need marketing, too, if they want to expand their services.

I shot a short film last weekend to enter into a contest.  I got a friend to shoot it for me, and he used his Canon 5D.  I love these things as tools for low-budget Production.  They started turning up on small shoots a couple of years ago, but I had never used one myself until now.  It’s funny that the camera manufacturers added video capabilities as an afterthought, but they have become wonderful tools that have expanded the ability of amateurs and independents without big budgets to produce first-rate imagery.

The main difference between the DSLRs and an inexpensive video camera is the size of the sensor inside.  Most small video cameras have sensors that are around 1/3 of an inch wide, whereas the DSLRs are typically 4 times larger.  That means that the sensor is about the same size as an old-fashioned 35mm film frame.  And that means that you can get the same shallow depth of field that we used to get shooting film.

Plus, you can use all of your old SLR lenses, as long as the mount is the same.  (most of us who have an interest in photography have a drawer somewhere filled with nice lenses that have been collecting dust for the last few years).  They all work on the new cameras, and they don’t need to be autofocus either.  So dig out those expensive old primes and put ‘em to work!

So this week I’m shooting a group of commercials for a major national retail chain, but the project is a bit “budget-challenged”.  Guess what we’re shooting it on … a Canon 5D.  Why not?  It’ll look great.  Not that I wouldn’t rent an Arri Alexa if we had the money, but we’ll do just fine with the DSLR.

Technology is a wonderful thing.

I was having lunch the other day with an old friend and we were discussing the general lack of respect that we see these days for what Producers do.  He’s a Creative Director now, so this is not a phenomenon that’s only noticed by those of us who work in Production.  It seems the folks hired these days to handle the Producer role are younger and less experienced all the time, and their main advantage as employees is the fact that they will work for little money.  I have heard many complaints from Production Companies and Editors about inexperienced Agency Producers being generally clueless, and that they have do their jobs for them.

It’s not like there’s a shortage of experienced Producers around, but Agencies seem to think that any warm body will do, so the cheaper the better.

So my old friend challenged me to define exactly how I (and other Producers with significant experience, and years in the business) add value to projects, and to the Agencies and Clients for whom we ply our trade.  And I did so, and will recap some of that discussion here.

Kara Harris has a website for freelance Producers called “center-of-everything.com”.  This represents the view of a Producer as Project Manager, who’s job is to function as a communications hub, making sure all of the stakeholders are connected and informed about needs and progress though the life of the project.  This is an important function, no doubt, and if it’s not performed well can be disastrous to the success of a project.  But I would argue that anyone with sufficient communication skills and professionalism can perform that function adequately.  You don’t need 10 or 20 years in the trenches to be able to do it.

Another important aspect to producing is the hiring and supervision of out-of-house suppliers of all sorts, and the maintaining of supplier relationships (which, if done right, is a two-way street).  Proper attention needs to be paid to this task, and negotiating with suppliers (either before the job is awarded, or during the production) is an important task and needs some finesse.  But again, I don’t think it’s the most important thing that Producers bring to the table.  One could certainly argue that familiarity with the various Production suppliers available to us, and long relationships with the Principals in those companies are an advantage.  Trust is hard to come by, but an essential lubricant when friction arises.

And it would also be accurate to say that experience in negotiating can be an advantage for the entire team, and that it helps, not only in keeping costs down, but also in ensuring successful and timely deliverables.  (I won’t go into the theory of successful negotiation, but there have been many books written on the subject.)

But I think that the most important added value that an experienced Producer can bring is the management of risk.

Broadcast Production, and Filmmaking for any medium, is inherently risky.  I’d say the process is the perfect embodiment of “Murphy’s Law”.  You can be sure that shit’s gonna happen, you just don’t know exactly what or when until it’s occurred.

The reason is that there are just so many moving parts.  Especially as the number of spots in a package increase.  Most projects these days are packages of multiple distinct finished spots, and as the number of shoot days goes up, and the number of cast members and locations increase, the risks rise exponentially.  Add to that the truncated schedules we are often forced into, and you have a perfect recipe for confusion and errors.  There are so many separate departments doing so many related (but distinct), interconnected actions, that something’s bound to get lost in the shuffle.  And keeping the circus running smoothly takes enormous attention to detail and diligence of effort on the part of all involved.  Especially the Producer who is, after all, at the “center of everything.”

An experienced Producer can not only get the project back on track once some unforeseen disaster strikes, but often they will be able to see the problem coming from a long way off.  This gives the team time to either change course, or (when that’s not possible) prepare a back-up plan in advance.  I have occasionally conspired with my Production Co. partner to create a viable “Plan B” without anyone else’s knowledge (so as not to be seen as pessimists).  If the back-up option is ever needed, we’re Heros, and if not, no one else needed to know.

So that’s how an experienced Producer adds value:  by steering the ship of the project around the inevitable shoals that await it.  And by ensuring that the lifeboats are in working order.

Happy Holidays to all, and may the New Year be better than this last year for everyone.