<<

Sex, Lies and Marketing: and the Development of the Quality Indie Blockbuster Author(s): Alisa Perren Source: Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 2 (Winter, 2001-2002), pp. 30-39 Published by: University of Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1213686 Accessed: 05/11/2008 07:10

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Film Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org - 1:1 :iuii I I **UIe] : [.1 &YL.I.] 'KU

Alisa Perren

sex, lies and marketing

Miramax and the Development of the Quality Indie Blockbuster

The origins of an American Beauty are in 1989 with doing that kind of movie. -, 20001

In 1989, the world of independent distribution was ceived as central to the development of New Holly- in disarray. While the appearance of the video mar- wood aesthetics, economics, and structure.3 sex, lies ket in the had helped spur the emergence and and videotape ushered in the era of the "indie block- expansion of a number of independent distributors, by busters"- that, on a smaller scale, replicate the the end of the decade several of these same compa- exploitation marketing and box-office performance of nies-including Vestron, Island, and Cinecom-had the major studio high-concept event pictures.4 On a overextended themselves by investing heavily in larger cost-to-earning ratio, Steven Soderbergh's creation budget, in-house productions. Consequently, by 1989, -with its $1.1 million dollar budget and $24 million many within the industry were predicting the death of plus in North American box office-was a better in- the independent distributor. However, what seemed to vestment than Batman, which-at an investment of be the decline of independent distribution was actually $50 million-returned $250 million in domestic box an "independent shakedown," a label presciently at- office.5 tached to the period by Times writer These figures begin to suggest how sex, lies and Daniel Cerone in June 1989.2 Cerone that it was videotape helped to set the standard for low-budget, a transitional time within the independent world. While niche-based distribution in the 90s and to lay the the vast majority of independent distributors who had groundwork for a bifurcation within the entertainment thrived in the 80s were forced to declare bankruptcy by industry.6 In the years following the release of sex, the end of the decade, a few companies were positioned lies and videotape, each major studio or media con- to make a mark significant on the industrial structure glomerate created or purchased at least one specialty and aesthetics of low-budget in the 90s. division. These divisions generally operated relatively At the head of the was pack Miramax. autonomously from the studio in terms of production The 1989 August release of sex, lies and video- and distribution. In the wake of Disney's April 1993 tape by Miramax marked a turning point in American purchase of Miramax, a number of studio-based niche independent cinema. In fact, the film should be per- operations emerged, including Universal Focus, Para-

Film Quarterly,Vol. no. 55, Issue no. 2, 30-39. ISSN: 00 15-1386. ? 2001 The pages by Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Send requests for 30 permission to to: and Permissions, of reprint Rights University California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center Street, Suite 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223. mount Classics, and Fox Searchlight. The studios fo- Because the company's executives were so skilled cused predominantly on the distribution of big-budget at selling positive images of themselves and their films spectacles, while studio-based subsidiaries (which Mi- (including sex, lies and videotape), reconstructing a ramax became in 1993, when Disney purchased the history of Miramax becomes a complicated task. It is company) focused predominantly on smaller-scale often hard to distinguish legitimate claims from exag- quality pictures that centered on the foibles of well- geration. Yet in spite of Miramax's effective integration developed characters.7 While the majors favored pro- of myth and fact, a number of details about the contours jects such as The Rock (1996), Con Air (1997), and of the company's development can be untangled from Enemy of the State (1998), studio subsidiaries devel- the mix. oped such films as Shine (1996), During the 80s, Miramax consistently released (1997), and The Cider House Rules (1999). But it was three to four films per year. Except for a few failed ef- sex, lies and videotape, in the skillful hands of Mira- forts in production, including the 1986 co-directorial max, that redefined the label of "independence" as it effort Playing for Keeps (released through Universal), was used by the press and the entertainment industry. the company focused mainly on acquiring and distrib- During the years that followed its release, a number of uting films produced by outside companies. Miramax films would replicate its financial success and media at- was interested in a range of documentary, foreign- tention. And the vast majority of these would be the- language, and art house-oriented films, basing their atrically distributed in the U.S. by Miramax. choices on three criteria. First, they selected movies that could be promoted as quality pictures-films that Miramaxin the 1980s aspired to the status of "art" in terms of style and nar- rative construction. These movies were often promoted Founded in downtown Buffalo, New York, in 1979 by at least in part on the merits of their director's unique brothers Harvey and Robert (Bob) Weinstein, Mira- vision. Such films-examples are Lizzie Borden's max began, like many low-budget distributors of the Working Girls (1987), Bille August's Pelle the Con- late 70s and early 80s, by booking live rock-and-roll querer (1987), and Errol Morris's The Thin Blue Line acts as well as exhibiting classic films and concert (1988)-had the potential for garnering critical sup- movies. But the Weinsteins soon branched out, first port from the outset, a crucial component for distribu- with film festivals that screened cult favorites and for- tors working with limited advertising budgets. Second, eign-language films, and then by moving into produc- Miramax selected nonclassical films that focused on tion and distribution. They made the kinds of movies unconventional subjects and styles: Working Girls was that the studios weren't interested in but that had de- a hard-edged critique of prostitution, while The Thin veloped into profitable ventures by virtue of the emer- Blue Line was a documentary about a man on death gence of the home video market. As they slowly row whom Morris proved to be wrongly accused. Both expanded during the course of the 80s, the Weinsteins films' documentary aesthetic also set them apart from and their staff grew increasingly adept at selling posi- most slick, glossy product. Third, Mira- tive images of themselves and their company along max found marketing hooks that could help the films with their films. They became known for employing transition from the art house to the multiplex. With exploitation marketing tactics to promote their movies, Working Girls, for example, the Weinsteins "deter- with publicity stunts ranging from encouraging mined how to sell the sex in a film that was utterly, Erendira (1983) actress Claudia Ohana to pose for demonstrably unsexy," while with The Thin Blue Line Playboy to setting up actor Daniel Day-Lewis, who Harvey Weinstein pledged, "Never has Miramax had portrayed cerebral palsy sufferer Christy Brown in My a movie where a man's life hangs in the balance."8 Foot to Left (1989), testify before Congress on behalf Thus, by appealing to multiple niches and using of the Americans With Disabilities Act. sex, violence, and controversy as sales strategies, the

31 Scandal:Christine Keeler in 1963 Scandal:Joanne Whalley-Kilmer as Christine Keeler

Weinsteins gained a foothold in an increasingly com- producing them. Their first in-house production through petitive marketplace and attracted the attention of pro- this arrangement was the aptly titled Scandal (1989), a ducers and financiers looking for a distributor.As much film about British defense minister John Profumo's af- as Miramax's success can be interpreted as an accident fair with teenager Christine Keeler. The controversy, or side effect of a more broadly shifting industrial struc- with its rumors of the betrayal of state secrets, may have ture, such an interpretation must be balanced by atten- contributed to the fall of the Conservative government tion to the business savvy and acute judgment of in 1963, but it helped Miramax produce a hit. Costing Miramax executives, led by the Weinstein brothers. $7 million in a co-venture with Britain's Palace Pic- Other strategies developed by the Weinsteins through- tures, the film grossed $30 million worldwide, in part out the late 80s further aided the company's growth due to a poster that featured a nude Joanne Whalley- even as most other independent distributors failed. The Kilmer as Keeler provocatively straddling a chair, and Weinsteins limited their spending, opted for continu- in part due to a promotional/talk-show tour by Keeler ing in acquisitions rather than producing their own herself. films, and restricted their release schedule. The factor With the success of Scandal and the help of good that finally motivated the brothers to go into produc- reviews, shrewd marketing, strong festival screenings, tion was an infusion of money in 1988 from Midland and extensive promotions, Miramax began a string of Montague Ventures, an arm of the -based Mid- hits that peaked with Cinema Paradiso, , land Bank. With a $25 million debt/equity package, the and, of course, sex, lies and videotape, which played a brothers moved from acquiring and distributing films to particularly important role in redefining low-budget

32 filmmaking and marketing. The company rapidly rose potence and sexual paranoia rang true in the late 80s, from being a mid-level independent distributor to be- when AIDS panics were leading the news. come one of the few surviving independent distributors The film gained in popularity throughout the fes- of the 80s. Even as companies such as Orion, MCEG, tival (which at this time had 30,000 visitors and was a and Vestron disappeared from the film scene, Miramax much more low-profile event than would be the case in thrived, turning the very label of independent into a later years), screening in front of sold-out audiences sign of distinction. In this process of differentiation, and receiving rave reviews. Soderbergh more modestly independent films earned more money-and gained observed that the "praise is getting out of hand,"' but more interest from the studios. sex, lies and videotape left the festival with the Dra- matic Competition Audience Award and theatrical dis- tribution offers from several independent distributors sex, lies and videotape: as well as one major studio. Yet in spite of extensive The Beginningof the Indie Boom praise lavished on the film by the press and festival- goers alike, North American theatrical rights for sex, It is notable that Miramax played no role in the initial lies and videotape were not sold until a few weeks later, development of sex, lies and videotape. In fact, the when Miramax purchased them at the American Film company did not have any involvement with the movie Market in Los Angeles. According to Soderbergh, Har- until it premiered at the U.S. Film Festival (later re- vey Weinstein said that he would not go back to New named the ) in 1989. The film York until he had the movie.'2 By 1989, Miramax had was co-financed by RCA/Columbia Home Video and already established a reputation for outbidding the rest Virgin; RCA/Columbia obtained domestic video rights of the independent distributors. Yet when Miramax while Virgin retained foreign video. The producers later reflected on how they "won" the rights to sex, lies were free to seek a theatrical distributor if RCA/Co- and videotape, "the Weinsteins maintain[ed] that their lumbia rejected it upon "first look." This expectation of marketing plan was as crucial as their cash advance."13 earning the investment back by video sales and rentals It is because marketing is as significant as content was a holdover from the early 80s, before the consol- in the building of the quality independent blockbuster idation of the video rental industry. that Miramax's role can be seen as crucial in deter- the Although financiers expected to make back mining the film's box-office success. Ultimately, the their money through rentals, this did not imply that interest created in the film as a result of Miramax's they approved of the presence of the word "videotape" skillful distribution cannot be distinguished from the in the film's title. Even before they saw it, according to interest created in it by virtue of its subject matter and Soderbergh, the marketing people at RCA/Columbia storyline. The company played up sex, lies and video- had asked for a change, believing that "the vendors tape to the press in ways that helped the film move out would that the say buying public would think that the of the so-called art-house ghetto. In the process of mar- film was shot on videotape."9 The film's marketers- keting sex, lies and videotape as a quality independent even before Miramax-obviously believed that an in- as opposed to an art-house entity, Miramax also played movie carried dependent connotations bearing specific itself up to the press in ways that helped to construct but "qualities," although these qualities may have in- the company as the primary force in the film's devel- cluded the more controversial (and hence salable) el- opment and financial success. ements of sex and lies, they did not include the The marketing of the film began months before its suggested "low-quality" appearance of videotape. The August opening. According to , Mira- use of the word in the title was, however, probably max started to develop the pre-release buzz for sex, more of a boon than a bane. As John Pierson producer lies and videotape at the in May the word resonated explains, symbolically: "By using 1989. 4 The film was initially screened for the main in the title . . . and in the film Soder- videotape itself, competition, but it was rejected and subsequently almost ushered bergh literally in the era of the placed in the Director's Fortnight, the venue for new video-educated filmmaker."'0 Thus a film in which films from up-and-coming directors. However, a last- women confess their sexual histories and anxieties on minute cancellation from another American film placed to a central male character him- videotape help satisfy sex, lies and videotape back in the main competition. self was marked as and distinct sexually timely for both Soderbergh worried about the movie being lost in the technological and social reasons. The themes of im- shuffle, particularly as it was competing against Spike

33 Lee's high-profile Do the Right Thing. Yet his film and videotape reveals several characteristics of Mira- ended up playing to standing ovations and shutting out max marketing. In the one-sheet for the film's do- Lee's film for awards. By the conclusion of the Cannes mestic theatrical distribution, Miramax tried to appeal festival, sex, lies and videotape had won the presti- to several markets simultaneously. First they pursued gious Palme d'Or, given Soderbergh and his film enor- the art-house audience-a group consisting of cine- mous free publicity, and added to the cachet of festivals literate baby boomers who had grown up on a blend of as valuable sites for building word of mouth. international art cinema and New American Cinema. Cannes marked just the beginning of the summer This niche, which was presumed to be knowledgeable marketing blitz initiated by Miramax. The original of the status of festivals as sites for the celebration of 1989 press kit for sex, lies and videotape hints at the global cinema, was sought through the text of the ad- image the company tried to craft to the press and pub- vertisement. At the top of the one-sheet, the most sig- lic: "The Weinstein brothers built their company with nificant festival honors bestowed on the film were an aggressive marketing and distribution strategy, in- listed. Below the list of awards, a number of positive dividually tailoring each film's release to suit its par- press responses were listed, including opinions from ticular strengths." The very notion of "tailoring" a film some of the best-known reviewers from the New York on the basis of its strengths reveals the company's de- Times, the Chicago Sun-Times, and Time magazine. pendence on niche marketing. "Marketing is not a dirty The second niche targeted by Miramax was the word," Harvey Weinstein told the youth audience-college students and twentysome- in May 1989. He continued, in what may be seen as a things. The largest print in the ad, aside from the film's shorthand manifesto for Miramax as well as a more title, came from two critics' statements that constructed emphatic articulation of previous conceptions of qual- two different visions of the film. The first comment, ity independents: "One of the Best of 1989," associated the movie with the kinds of films that receive such as Although we market artistic films, we don't usually kudos, dramas. Meanwhile, the second comment, "An use the starving-artist mentality in our releases. Edgy, Intense Comedy," suggested a lighter movie well suited Other distributors slap out a movie, put an ad for the August release date. The movie was thus dif- in the newspaper-usually not a very good ferentiated as more serious than its summer one-and hope that the audience will find it being blockbuster counterparts even as it was drawn closer to by a miracle. And most often they don't. It's studio product by its association with Mean- the distributors' responsibility to find the comedy. audience. 5 while, the images depicted in the advertisement-of multiple couples embracing and kissing-contributed For sex, lies and videotape, this amounted to an to the film's edgy mystique. Along with the film's title, attempt to give the film the specialized attention that these images conveyed raciness, excitement, some- so as if Soderbergh desired, packaged it was a major thing more adult-and not coincidentally, something studio release. Just one of the means by which Mira- more commercial. These images also conformed to the max accomplished this was by tapping into the high "exploitation" marketing tactics so characteristic of the in even the concept lowest-budgeted film.16Thus when company at this point in its development. As one re- his Soderbergh developed own , Miramax porter observed of Miramax's effective print , the quickly rejected it, telling him it was "arthouse death." company eagerly hinted at sexual desires that were not Although Soderbergh saw his trailer containing "a necessarily apparent in the films themselves.'7 mood the mood of the perfectly emulat[ing] film ... To many within the industry, Miramax's attempts not like other trailer [and] any [he'd] ever seen," Mi- to find the high concept in low-budget films-while ramax demurred. Soderbergh finally reached a com- still targeting specific niches in the market-was a wel- with Miramax in which the promise company used its come approach to a then-struggling own but also filled in trailer, some additional footage scene. As one public relations spokesman stated, in a shot as a transitional device. by Soderbergh manner that summed up the sentiments of many, "The All this that Miramax suggests although may have marketers of quality independent films aren't doing as sold each film on its the merits, company nonetheless effective a job as they might be doing."'8 Hence the had certain ideas about what worked in promoting logic of Bob Weinstein declaring that "Some guys run niche films. trailers Clearly avant-garde were not part from controversy, we run toward it."19By of the establishing company's conception of good marketing. An this renegade image, Miramax differentiated itself of one of the analysis print advertisements for sex, lies within the marketplace.

34 Exploitation marketing for sex, lies and videotape:James Spader with Andie MacDowell (left) and Peter Gallagher with LauraSan Giacomo-posed to pump up the film's sexuality.

The Weinsteins may have penetrated multiplexes Press and IndustryDiscourse in but nonetheless remained aware of their 1989, they on sex, lies and position relative to the studios. Specifically, they rec- videotape ognized that their films had to complement rather than To Steven Soderbergh, the overall impact of his film compete with the studios' product. They had no illu- was jarring. In 1990, he returned to Sundance to find sions that they could match the studios in terms of ei- a far different scene, one to which he responded neg- ther financial investment or marketing scale. Thus they atively. "I'm a little concerned by what sex, lies might relied heavily on free publicity, word of mouth, and have wrought here," Soderbergh told the Associated counter-programming strategies.20While they eventu- Press, adding, "this can become more of a film market ally released sex, lies and videotape on about 350 than a film festival." Soderbergh's opinion seemed to screens, they opened it slowly and let it build on pos- be in the minority, however. Many more of those work- itive reviews and reactions over more than six months. ing for independents, as well as those writing about They scheduled a platform release for the film, open- them, looked favorably at the mutually beneficial re- ing it first only in Los Angeles and New York, and then lationship developing between independents and fes- later moving it into nationwide release by the end of the tivals. Few could have anticipated that this relationship month. Thus sex, lies and videotape had its broadest would evolve to the point where the pervasive attitude opening in the time period when the studio block- at Sundance 2000 would be described as "Buy low, but busters were fading and quality product was in short buy, dammit. Fail to snap up a certain movie and you supply. might miss out on the next $140 million dollar cash

35 cow. Turn up your nose at a trend and the future might why standard studio fare (or the so-called middle-class pass you by."21 films) would be the least cost-effective. Such movies, What is apparent in retrospect is that the "small is which at the time of sex, lies and videotape included beautiful" mentality that was beginning to become thrillers such as Pacific Heights (1990) and romances omnipresent at festivals as well as for promotional pur- such as Joe Versus the Volcano (1990), based their ap- poses was, in fact, the beginning of a larger industrial peal primarily on their stories or their stars. The stu- shift. Rather than Batman and sex, lies and videotape dios' event films, conversely, based their appeal on representing anomalies at both the mass-market and action, special effects, superstars, and simple market- niche levels respectively, they were signals of broader ing hooks.23 Event pictures drove up the marketing, structural and aesthetic changes afoot in New Holly- production, and distribution costs of all studio films. wood. Even as the studios were reviving the same However, from the mid-70s onward, the studios in- high-concept formulas with such 1990 releases as creasingly viewed them as worthwhile because of their Rocky V, 2, Back to the Future III, and Days broader international appeal and synergistic potential. of Thunder, the independents seemed comparatively To a growing number of industry executives, mid- fresh and cutting-edge with such films as Longtime dle-level films did not offer the same global opportu- Companion, Pump Up the Volume, Henry V, and The nities as event films. If event films failed at home, they Grifters. The dichotomy between these two types of could still make money abroad; a Stallone film-typ- films indicates the widening split in the kinds of films ically an event due to his superstar presence-could being produced. The movies that were starting to re- easily be translated across the globe, guaranteeing in- turn the most profits with the smallest risks were either ternational box-office success even if its fate was un- the high-budget, high-concept franchises that had certain in the U.S. If middle-level films failed at home, broad international appeal, or low-budget indepen- they were not likely to perform any better abroad, since dents that could be targeted to a number of audiences they had neither the effects and action nor the simple and promoted relatively inexpensively through festi- marketing hooks that were the high-concept founda- vals, word of mouth, and positive critical response. tions of the globally oriented Hollywood product. With Thus, although independent releases were down Disney estimating that by 1996, 60 percent of studio 15 percent in 1989 from the previous year, and box- revenues were coming from abroad, and with many office receipts were down 7 percent, the slump was executives predicting that the international box office short-lived. The continuing global expansion of the in- could increase to 80 percent of total entertainment dustry, rather than contributing to what many predicted revenues by the first decade of the millennium, event would be the demise of independent and/or low- films continued to become more desirable. Meanwhile, budget filmmaking, actually contributed to their middle-level -genre vehicles-the types of films growth. The conditions of social diversity, along with that were the staple of the Hollywood studio era- a post-Fordist market structure, similarly led to the de- continued to lose value. velopment of niche markets as byproducts of the film The second reason for the foresight in Malin's industry's ever-expanding global orientation. At the comments comes from his exploitation of the rhetoric same time that many industry analysts predicted the of quality. In using the label "sophisticated" to describe inevitable demise of all but the high-concept block- sex, lies and videotape, Malin employed language in a buster, then-Cinecom president Amir Malin explained manner similar to the Weinsteins. In other words, he more precisely why niche films would remain attrac- depicted these movies as special films rather than as tive culturally and economically: industry products. More important than the actual in- dustrial circumstances Just because someone sees Indiana Jones within which a movie such as sex, lies and was is the doesn't mean they won't want to see a so- videotape produced manner in which it was constructed its team and the phisticated film like sex, lies and videotape or by marketing press. Companies such as Miramax could take terms Scenes from the Class Struggle [of Beverly such as Hills]. The fallout will occur with the standard "independent," "quality," "specialty," and "so- phisticated" and use them as of studio fare that cannot compete with the points distinction, Raiders, Ghostbusters and Batmans.22 helped by the fact that in the late 80s the studios were frequently portrayed in the media as ever-expanding Malin's comments were prescient for two reasons. monoliths cranking out cookie-cutter sequels with ex- on the level of First, industrial structure, he suggests cessive action and minimal plots.

36 Miramax's rapid growth stemmed largely from Thus a term that was introduced by the press making itself and its films favorites of the press with its during the late 80s as a descriptive label to explain emphasis on how films such as sex, lies and videotape structural and aesthetic changes afoot in the New were different from Hollywood product. Yet at the Hollywood morphed in the next decade into a publicity same time, the company broadened the audience of tool for Miramax and its many imitators. The surpris- these same movies by portraying them as what Holly- ing fact was that even though by the mid-90s the label wood had to offer and more: full of sex, violence, and no longer held any definitional value, the press con- risky content.24 This marketing sleight of hand, in tinued to celebrate the companies and the films as if which the films were at once similar and different from they were guerrillas and renegades fighting Evil Holly- Hollywood, helped Miramax and other low-budget dis- wood. The most blatant example of this came from the tributors carve out an often financially lucrative and consistent declaration by the mainstream press that "In- aesthetically viable space for independent cinema from dependents Day" was afoot during the 1995 Oscar the late 80s and into the 90s. nominations. In this oft-titled "Year of the Indepen- The $24 million earned by sex, lies and videotape dents," four low-budget indies-The English Patient in its U.S. theatrical release was, however, a small sum (Miramax/Disney), Breaking the Waves (October/ compared to the $80 million-plus earned by the qual- Universal), Fargo (Gramercy/Polygram), and Shine ity indie blockbuster hits released later in the decade- (Fine Line/Time Warner)-allegedly trounced the stu- movies that included (1994), Good Will dios, which could only muster up one nominee, Jerry Hunting, and The Talented Mr:Ripley (1999). Artisan's Maguire (Columbia). The irony was that all of these The Blair Witch Project, released almost exactly ten independents were released by subsidiaries owned by years after sex, lies and videotape, represented the cul- major media corporations. Yet attention to this shift mination of the independent blockbuster trend. came much more slowly. During most of the 90s, the In its cost-to-profit ratio, its application of exploitation mainstream press continued to depict the relationship marketing tactics, its cinema-verite aesthetic, and its between independents and majors in terms of conflict use of the discourse of independence to differentiate and opposition. It was not until Miramax tried to pro- itself, The Blair Witch Project could be considered the mote (1998) as an independent cinematic descendant of Soderbergh's 1989 film. that the tide truly started to turn. It was at this point If a strict structural definition of quality indie that a significant portion of the press began to ques- blockbusters were to apply, then very few independent tion the use of the label of independence by specialty films would qualify for it. Clearly, from an industrial divisions-and by themselves. standpoint, Pulp Fiction, Good Will Hunting, and The Talented Mr. Ripley are not independent; aesthetically, their independence is also questionable. In the New sex, lies and videotape:The Templatefor Hollywood as it evolved in the age of Miramax, indie the Distributionof the 90s Niche Film films increasingly employed established stars and fea- tured classical filmmaking and scripts from established The critical and financial success of sex, lies and video- talent. In other words, 1990s indies-if such Miramax tape not only served as an initial step in Miramax's as- movies as Citizen Ruth (1996), Copland (1997), and cendance to the status of top specialty distributor of Rounders (1998) are included-could be considered a the 90s, it was also an indication of a changing indus- hybrid of the 's A picture and the post- try. The bifurcation of the industry came with some studio-era exploitation film. This suggests the extent repercussions. First, the two Hollywoods each devel- to which "independence" (or its hip offspring, "indie") oped interrelated but fundamentally distinct aesthet- served as a discursive tool employed by the press and ics. While superstars and super explosions defined the the industry. In addition, such indie examples provide high-concept films, quality independents became de- further proof that, by the late 90s, the industry's focus fined by well-known actors working for scale because was divided between two types of films: niche-targeted of their belief in the script's explosive subject matter. and high-concept. Within this context, the niche arena If high-concept films became known primarily for their functioned as the key site in which new styles and glossy look and high production values, quality inde- modes of storytelling were blended to varying degrees; pendents were distinguished by virtue of their gritty all the while, established talent merged with newer, look or edgy content. Following in the tradition estab- up-and-coming actors, writers, and directors. lished by sex, lies and videotape, independents of the

37 90s often stood out either because of an excessiveness established by Miramax in the late 80s and early 90s: in style, sex, and violence, or because of a minimalist aesthetically and topically challenging films can be aesthetic that emphasizes dialogue over camerawork. commercially successful with skillful marketing. Second, as these films developed in the hands of The future, however, does not seem quite so bright studio-based specialty divisions, they needed to have for many newer filmmakers and independent distrib- a clearly defined niche-whether it was teens, African- utors struggling to find a space in today's marketplace. Americans, Latinos, women, or the art-house audience. With the industry now dominated by a combination In the process, there was a decline not only in the types of studios releasing big-budget films and specialty dis- of low-budget films that attained distribution, but also tributors handling niche films, independent distributors in the production of the so-called middle-range prod- such as Cowboy Booking International, Winstar, and uct-the standard star-genre formulations that were New Yorker Films are fighting to acquire films and the bread and butter of the studio system. By the late secure available screens. Meanwhile, several of the 90s, such films were typically only placed into pro- most influential independent distributors, including duction based on the influence wielded by such Trimark and The Shooting Gallery, have succumbed powerful stars as Jim Carrey, Tom Hanks, and Julia to today's market pressures and ceased to exist. All of Roberts. this translates into a much more competitive and un- At the beginning of the new millennium, Mira- certain terrain for filmmakers working outside of the max-as well as the independent scene that it fos- studio environment. While Miramax led the way in tered-has changed dramatically. After years of transforming Hollywood aesthetics, economics, and financial support from Disney, the company has grown structure during the 90s, the company has now be- from an independent to an industry powerhouse in its come a crucial part of the system. It remains to be seen own right. Miramax regularly releases more than 25 what the next sex, lies and videotape will be-and films a year. Films like , , and what as yet unidentified company will help drive its Chocolat help the company bring in over $500,000,000 success. at the box office annually. Occasionally Miramax ac- quires smaller, independently produced pictures like Alisa Perren is a doctoral candidate in the Department Human Traffic and Committed; however, such films of Radio--Filmat the University of at are no longer a priority for the company's executives, Austin. nor are they the focus of its marketing muscle. Mira- max now focuses on developing its own stable of tal- ent-writers, producers, and filmmakers with whom Notes the company had nurtured relationships during the 1. JeffGordinier, and Entertainment 1990s. Many of these people, including Quentin Taran- "Defy Conquer," Weekly SpecialEdition: Our 10th Anniversary, 2000, 31. tino, Kevin Williamson, Robert Wes Spring p. Rodriguez, 2. Daniel Cerone, "IndependentFilm Makers,Marketers, and Craven, Anthony Minghella, John Madden, have ConfrontBox-Office Crisis," Los AngelesTimes, 15 Sep- seen their careers blossom in large part due to Mira- tember,1989, sec. 6, p. 4. max's support. 3. I employthe New Hollywoodlabel as it is usedby Thomas "TheNew in The company, as well as much of the talent it has Schatz, Hollywood," Film TheoryGoes to the Movies, ed. Jim Collins, Hillary Radner,and Ava supported, has long since moved beyond the bound- PreacherCollins (New York:Routledge, 1998), pp. 25-32. aries of the independent film world. The styles, sub- For an extensivediscussion of the intersectionof aesthet- jects, and talent that defined the quality indie scene of ics and marketingof big-budgetHollywood films, see the early 90s have now been incorporated into the Hol- JustinWyatt, High Concept: Movies and Marketing in Hol- TX: of lywood system. Films that earlier might have been la- lywood(Austin, University TexasPress, 1994). 4. Theterm "indie" has been used trade beled quality indies are now widely by journalists regularly produced by to includefilms from studio andniche subsidiaries studio subsidiaries such as Fox specialty Searchlight, Fine Line such as Miramax,Fine Line, andParamount Classics. Pictures, and of course, Miramax. The content and dis- 5. PaulD. Colford,"Movies Are Their Game; Miramax Steers tribution of Boys Don't Cry, Dancer in the Dark, and SmallFilms into the PublicConsciousness," Newsday, 20 Soderbergh's own Traffic replicate that of sex, lies and February,1990, part II, p. 8. 6. Scholarsand have thatthere videotape. And, as Harvey Weinstein observes, Amer- journalists acknowledged has been a split within the in recent between ican Beauty is a direct cinematic descendant of sex, industry years low-budgetniche films andhigh-concept event films, but lies and These films continue the videotape. tradition in general,scholarly work on the emergenceof indepen-

38 dents and specialty houses has been limited. The majority 18. Cerone, "Independent Film Makers, Marketers Confront of attention has been on the evolution of the high-concept Box-Office Crisis," p. 4. blockbuster and big-budget product of the major studios. 19. Cerone, "Taking an Independent Path, p. 1. For examples, see Tino Balio, "'A MajorPresence in All the 20. These tactics would change significantly by the late 90s as World's ImportantMarkets,': The Globalization of Holly- Miramax became the prominent studio subsidiary with a wood in the 1990s," in ContemporaryHollywood Cinema, solid stable of prominent talent such as , ed. Steve Neale and Murray Smith (London: Routledge, , and Kevin Williamson. At this point, both 1993), pp. 8-36, and Schatz, "The Returnof the Hollywood their product as well as their financial output altered some- Studio System," in Conglomerates and the Media, ed. Erik what, as vast sums of money were directed at marketing Bamouw (New York: The New York Press, 1997), pp. 73- more commercially viable such as Scream 106. While Balio, Schatz, and others have addressed the (1996), (1997), and (1998). Yet growth of specialty houses to an extent, Justin Wyatt has in terms of quality independents, Miramax's strategies re- done the majority of work on low-budget product. For ex- mained remarkably stable during the 90s, altering only to amples, see his discussions of Miramax and New Line in the extent that the company had more capital to invest in "Economic Constraints/Economic Opportunities: Robert production and marketing. Altman as ," The Velvet Light Trap 38 (Fall 1996): 21. Jeff Gordinier and Chris Nashawaty, "Film's Next Fron- pp. 51-67; "The Formation of the 'Major Independent"' tier," , 11 February,2000, p. 20. Miramax, New Line and the ," in Con- 22. Cerone, "Smaller Films Seek a Summer Place," p. 1. temporary Hollywood Cinema, pp. 74-90; and "From 23. See Wyatt, High Concept, chapter 1. Roadshowing to SaturationRelease: Majors, Independents 24. The tension between presenting something "different"from and Marketing/Distribution Innovations," in The New the majors-and yet also more of the same-was a crucial American Cinema, ed. Jon Lewis (Durham, N.C.: Duke element in Miramax's rise and its attractiveness to Disney. University Press, 1998), pp. 64-86. Yet paradoxically, it has also been the source of much con- 7. I use the word "quality"throughout in much the same way sternationbetween Disney and Miramax as well as between it is used by Jane Feuer, Paul Kerr, and Tise Vahimagi in Miramax and the press. The subsidiary and its parent have MTM 'Quality Television' (London: BFI, 1984). In "The been repeatedly forced to test the threshold of what the MTM Style," Feuer, for example, writes that "The very public could handle in terms of risky and controversialsub- of is concept 'quality' itself ideological. In interpretingan ject matter on numerous occasions, including most dra- MTM programme as a quality programme, the quality au- matically Kids (1994), Dogma (1999), and O (2001). With dience is to permitted enjoy a form of television which is both Kids and Dogma, the public outcry over Disney's re- seen as more literate, more stylistically complex and more lationship to these films compelled Miramax to sell the psychologically 'deep' than ordinary fare. The quality au- rights to both projects. With 0, which portrayedracial con- dience gets to separate itself from the mass audience and flict and violence in an American high school, Miramax can watch TV without guilt, and without realising that the kept the project shelved in the wake of the Columbine in- discourse that double-edged they are getting is also ordi- cident. There was scarcely any media outcry about Mira- TV" nary (56). Quality independent films functioned in a max handling this film; rather, the company pre-empted similar sense for theatricalfeatures released in the hands of any such public conversation by continually pushing the Miramax. film's release back until finally independent distributor 8. John Pierson, Spike, Mike, Slackers and Dykes: A Guided Lion's Gate took over the film's theatricaldistribution. This Tour Across a Decade American of Independent Cinema is just one furtherexample of the way that a corporatepar- (New York: Hyperion/, 1995), pp. 84, 87. ent has played a role in shifting the content and marketing 9. Steven sex, lies and Soderbergh, videotape (New York: strategiesof Miramax in recent years. The same story could Harper& Row, 1990), p. 21. In the decade between the re- easily be told with other studio subsidiaries as well. lease of sex, lies and videotape and The Blair Witch Pro- ject (1999), this attitude shifted to a certain extent. By the end of the 1990s, it often became a means of product dif- ferentiation that a movie was shot on digital video. 10. Pierson, p. 131. 11. Aljean Harmetz, "Independent Films Get Bigger but Go Begging," New YorkTimes, 1 February, 1989, p. C17. 12. Soderbergh, p. 225. 13. Colford, p. 8. 14. Ibid. 15. Cerone, "Takingan IndependentPath," Los Angeles Times, 3 May, 1989, part 6, p. 1. 16. I apply the label "high concept" in much the same manner as it is applied by Wyatt in High Concept. He writes: "High concept can be conceived . . . as a product differentiated throughthe emphasis on style in productionand throughthe 777t; integration of the film with their marketing" (23). Z777K 17. Colford, p. 8.

39