Not screening in a Theatre? No problem…

We are at a stage in the distribution of Abraham’s Children were we hold grass-roots semi-theatrical screenings. What that means is we go to non-traditional venues, like school auditoriums and class rooms, mosques, meeting halls and living rooms to show the film. Last weekend I had the good fortune to show Abraham’s Children twice myself. Once at a high school auditorium and once in a 1-12K private school whose auditorium also functions as a prayer room.

Early on, Caitlin Boyle of Film Sprout had warned a bunch of us filmmakers at her (awesome) workshop on grass roots distribution outreach for social change documentaries, to let go of having the film screened in a ‘perfect’ setting. I took that to mean, that the film might be shown in 4:3 format rather than the intended 16:9 (widescreen) or that the sound was not going to be perfect, etc. I also assumed that I would not be there to have to witness it.

SO on Friday and Saturday I made sure we had it all set up perfectly – right aspect ratio, sound as balanced as possible with the sound system available, room darkened, temperature right, etc. Friday: perfect! Saturday? Not so. For reasons beyond my control it was decided stop the film after it was only about 80% done. Whaat?

Reason being, they had simply run out of time and needed the room for something else. I was dumb folded. Why invite me to attend? Why go through the trouble of holding a screening of a film whose length is known? Why schedule a speech and Q&A session with the director? The Q&A turned into a discussion in the hallway with a few interested parties and I was back at my car before I knew it. It was a bizarre experience and something tells me: not the last.

Moral of the story: you can only control so much and then you have to let go. You where right, Caitlin (and Mom).

All I can say: donate $50, get the DVD shipped to your home and FINISH watching it!

Screening Photos - Abraham's Children Premiere

I can't tell you how wonderful it was to see (nearly) all the kids and their families in the same place and have them all meet and then have them up on stage with the crew! Thank you for all that came to the Premiere of Abraham's Children at the New World High School in the Bronx! It was a trek for those not from the hood, but I hope it was worth it.

And please, don't be shy ACT! and donate to get this film into classrooms! Thank you.

Photos are courtesy of Bob Cowin and Marc Seago.

Yasmine, Susan, Isma, Teresa, Claudia, Terry, Marc, Saraj, Tariq, Kasem & Ahmed

Terry, Claudia, Saraj, Tariq, Kasem, Ahmed, Haleema, Anam, Dareen, Nina















Yasmine with Teresa Pereira and Sister Susan

Ahmed and Saraj

My friend and supporter, Betsy holding up a donation envelope.

Visibility

When I go out biking I tend to wear bright clothing so I’m easily visible in traffic. Today I go out into Central Park for my lunch ride in my favorite screaming yellow fluorescent top. On my way out of the park I’m horsing around at a red light and loose my balance and can’t clip out in time from my pedals and I hit the pavement like a potato sack. I’m intact, only slightly bruised ego. However, as I’m dressed in bright fluorescent yellow, EVERYBODY in the four-way intersection takes note of my fall. Everybody it seems stares at me as I pick myself up and try to look concerned for my bike and not my elbow – I don’t dare make sure I don’t have a scraped elbow until two blocks up the road.

Visibility is a great thing – if you want it.

It got me thinking about a company’s visibility which of course ties in with their economic well-being and I got a new found appreciation for the work of PR firms. How do you spin the fall? Negative PR or no PR at all would spread the word that "Nina has lost her Mojo and fell with her bike, like a beginner at a red light". With good PR we could let word out that "Nina is developing this amazing new fall-proof clothing line for a high end cycling gear retailer and wanted to test the merchandise personally". See? Cool, no?

So: if you saw me fall at the red light with feet still clipped into the pedals (it’s super awkward when that happens, let me tell you), please assume that it was for the good of some kind of ultra cool and rad ‘research’.

What we share and what we don’t

A few months back I read this article in the New York Times science section by John Tierney and marked it because I thought it very interesting. When the topic of viral video distribution came up in our Think Tank “Quo F Vadis” that my friend Wilder and I started, about the future of the film industry on the internet, I had to go back and dig it out.

When it comes to newspaper articles, it seems that the ‘awesome’ factor out ways the ‘cool’ factor and that the stronger the emotions the more the article will be shared – interestingly enough in the newspaper world longer articles did better than shorter ones and I think with visual content we see the reverse. “Short, shorter, shortest” is the recipe for a viral hit.

I think where an article might have an advantage over a video is that it’s “scan-able”; a video is a linear affair. I also think that a forwarded article has a notion of “look how cool AND smart I am by forwarding you this awesome intellectual article about optics of deer vision” (no kidding – read the article). Whereas a video sub-text would be “look how hip and cool I am” OR “how outraged I am by this injustice”. No wonder Mashable has near daily list of top YouTube hits. This Sunday: 10 best wedding dance videos. Tomorrow: (educated guess) 10 funniest dog tricks.

Where does that leave us, content providers? Are we all decimated to 2 minute one-offs or webisodes? How will long format content be consumed in the future? Who will pay for it; consumers, aggregators, advertisers?

Have you watched yourself lately watch content on line? How long is tour attention span, when do you decide to commit or skip to the next video or task? What are you willing to pay for and what do you expect to be free?

Tell me…

One Educator = $1

We are launching the "ONE EDUCATOR = $1" Campaign!

We are raising funds to help us distribute Abraham's Children to educators and get the film into as many American classrooms as possible. Act! and help us achieve our goals. $1 pays for a postcard to an educator and we are sending out over 3,000 cards. Share, educate and contribute!

Donating is easy. Go to our "Donate" page. One dollar, hundred dollars, what ever you can give. Get a DVD copy of Abraham's Children, a "thank you" credit on our website, a poster and we have other cool thank you gifts. Check it out.

What is your message?

"When does the wisdom of crowds give way to the meanness of mobs?" http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/science/12tier.html.

Interesting article, but really what caught my eye was the first sentence. As I spend quite a bit of time with social networks, updating the Abraham’s Children website and blogging I sometimes feel like I’m losing sight of what I should do.

What should I do? These days, it’s getting a film out into the world.

Am I relying on the wisdom of crowds, or am I delivering myself to the madness of crowds? And where does “madness” start?

I’m building a brand and getting a message out – does that scream cliché or what? It would be easiest so say: “watch my film, its awesome”. That’s like Pepsi saying “drink Pepsi, its good”. That’s not a brand, not a message, not a life style, nothing exciting and why should you bother? There are millions of films out there and roughly 6,000 documentaries alone are produced in the US alone each year. Gotta do better than that.

What I learned in the last few months is nothing new but I never had a chance to put it into action with ONE PRODUCT (or service) in hand. Having only one product, my film, I had no choice but to concentrate on IT – obviously.

My first instinct was to create more product. As making another film is not practical I started thinking about merchandising. How do you merchandise a documentary about Muslim children? How do I pay for that? What is the risk of money spent upfront versus potential income? It didn't seem worth the risk, so I ditched that idea.

Long story and many detours later I (re)-learned this: Focus: one message, one goal, one product. If you manage to get that one message over right; minds open, opportunities arise and people HEAR you. Once you’re there – you can go back (gingerly) to being your enthusiastic supporter of your own film with ideas to boot.

Once you have your message and your product all primped and ready – then you can unleash the crowds – because now you know where you are going and what your vehicle is. You still will possibly lose yourself in one mad crowd or the other – be it virtual, real or imagined. But at least your message is always the same and your product has integrity.

With your message straight you also have a better gauge when you are being taken over by the crowd(s). How many hours are you spending on Twitter, Facebook and your blog, when you could be making very targeted phone calls?

Run a test by announcing something that requires feedback, a sign up, anything where your 'crowds' need to act. Do they act? That only works if your message is on target. Otherwise your contaminating your social media 'trials'.

So, either you change your message to fit your crowd or you change your crowd to fit your message... and sometimes you just bang your head against the wall - I did.
What is your message? What is your goal? What is the integrity of your product?

For Abraham’s Children?
→ Abraham’s Children bridges the gap between the Muslim world and the West.

→ Our goal is to get Abraham’s Children into as many classrooms as possible in America.

→ Abraham’s Children is beautifully produced, wholesome and its modular set up is ideal for a learning environment.

The Difference Between Recipe and Restaurant

A thought brought forward by Chris Brogan (link) on his daily blog on social media and business. I might use that the next time I have one of those “why does it cost so much to make a film” discussions. It’s a great analogy for a bit of a foodie.

KFC vs. Nobu, anybody?

Talking of which, the new DOUBLE DOWN? What was KFC thinking? Two deep fried chicken pieces with bacon and cheese and don’t forget, the sauce, Colonel’s sauce, oh sure. “Only” 540 calories, and more sodium than the dead sea.

Did anybody at that company listen to Michelle Obama, or watch “Supersize Me”, or “Food, Inc.” or “King Corn”, or “What’s on your Plate”….. It’s like a spit in the face of everybody who’s trying to get America off its obesity ride. It’s not the fact that the Double Down has “only” 540 calories – it’s about the message it sends and it’s all totally wrong – as far as I’m concerned.