A shortened week links list this week thanks to two unscheduled days of rest that were spent in bed.
DuckTales invented a new animated wonderland—that quickly disappeared
The A.V. Clubtakes a look at how DuckTales was the massive success that it was, and how it has been all but neglected by Disney since it left the airwaves. A great article but misses the part where Disney bought ABC and exploited the fact that putting shows on your own network was considerably less hassle than syndication.
‘Adventure Time’ actor Tom Kenny on Ice King’s loneliness, tragic past
Having to rest up on the couch all day Tuesday meant that I missed the bombshell of Jerry Beckgetting bought out of Cartoon Brew. Surprised I certainly was but nonetheless wish Amid the best for the future.
That said, the always insightful FLIP blog clearly had the inside line on the story as the very next day, they posted this interview with Jerry where he reveals a few titbits on his time with the Brew and what his plans are for the future.
The Three Kinds of Kids Movie Posters
Canadian website The Sleepy Skunk put out a guide this week the exemplifies yet again how movie posters really do seem to all look alike. Personally, this blogger was surprised by there only being two DreamWorks films in the raised eyebrow category.
You’ve undoubtedly seen it by now; Stephen Silver’s [necessary] rant against working for free, right? If not, it’s a good use of your time, and advice well worth heeding. The only problem with it is that Stephen doesn’t really explain exactly why working for free can be detrimental. So here is an analogy that is easy to digest, understand and remember: why working for free is like sleep.
If Everyone Sleeps, Those That Are Awake Must Work Harder
Think about it. If everyone in a studio was sleeping, those that are awake would have to work much harder to get the work done wouldn’t they? If you consider a sleeping person as someone who is working for free (or close enough to it), then everyone around them must work that little bit harder (read: work for less) to carry them. Right? The more people that sleep, the hard those that are awake must work. The reverse is also true; the less people that sleep, the less the awake people must do. There are sound economic principles behind this concept that require too much to explain, but they are valid, and they really are true.
If you multiply it out over an entire industry, then you can see how even a small amount of sleepy people can have an effect on the majority. You may think that being only one person doesn’t make a difference, but it does.
Sleep At Home, Not At Work
If you were caught sleeping at work, you’d be fired for sure. Most people recognise this and in response, prefer to sleep at home. The same is true for our example. Sleep at home on your own time and on your own projects. Fanart is fine in moderation, but if that’s all you do, you may as well be sleeping. In this analogy, working for free at home is not considered detrimental because you are not having an influence on anyone besides yourself. Your time at home is considered your time, and if you want to sleep then, that’s OK.
Naps Are Healthy, but Don’t Dose Constantly
All this isn’t to say that sleeping (working for free) should be avoided at all costs. Working for free can be beneficial in certain circumstances, in ways such as community service, educational programs and the like. Consider these naps instead of sleeping because they can be healthy if done in moderation. You’ll feel refreshed and ready for when you have to be awake. Just be sure not to nap too much!
Sleeping Employees Are Bad For Studios Too
Yes, free labour can harm studios. Imagine if a studio had a large number of sleeping artists (with a few awake ones). While the studios undoubtedly gains the work, they lose out in other ways too. For one, all those sleeping employees warp the real amount of money that a project costs to make and that makes their accounts unrepresentative of their true financial health. That leads to problems further down the line and the ultimate result is that all the sleeping employees are forced to sleep at home anyway.
The Rule of Thumb: Only Sleep If You Can Afford To
If in doubt about whether you can sleep (work for free), consider yourself driving a car down the road. Are you going to fall asleep at the wheel, or are you going to pull over to the side of the road? It’s safer to do the latter, and other drivers will thank you for it. Remember, your career is the car, and if you fall asleep at the wheel, you’re bound to crash.
The fandom that surrounds My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic has been discussed here on the blog before with the show’s creators and network rightfully being praised for their interaction with it. This was doubly evident once it became known that the show was attracting fans that were, well, far outside the show’s intended demographic. The result was the coining of the term ‘brony’ (bro+pony) and the proliferation of these fans throughout the internet and beyond. Bronies have since spawned many websites, forums and even conventions dedicated to their favourite show.
The phenomenon spurred the creation of a documentary about it after actor John de Lancie became acquainted with it thanks to a role on the show. As with many contemporary projects, a Kickstarter campaign was launched and it quickly reached its initial funding goal. Subsequent stretch goals resulted in a grand total of $322,022 being raised from 2,621 backers.
It was therefore with some dismay (and sadness) that the producers noticed that the completed documentary was available on internet filesharing sites almost immediately after its release to Kickstarter backers:
You may have heard that we are shutting down production. For clarification, this refers to canceling plans to invest more time and money into releasing a disc with additional material and segments that have already been shot but didn’t make it into the film. We have many great stories that just didn’t fit into the flow of what we were creating with the film but thought the Brony community would really enjoy seeing. Because the piracy within the Brony community is rampant and pervasive we’ve come to the conclusion that investing any more time and energy would be not be worthwhile.
So with additional work on the documentary being stopped due to ‘piracy’, how could the brony documentary makers respond to this in a way that not only enables them to continue the additional work, but also attract new fans who may be willing to pay for it?
Dump Kickstarter
First and foremost, this does not mean that they should neglect the people who have funded it through the service. Those that donated with the recognition that they would receive rewards have a legal right to what they were promised. That said, many commentators on the post announcing the stoppage were vocal in their support for an additional campaign to fund the extra features.
That does not make a lot of sense insofar that it is taking another drink from the same trough. Although backers are willing to pay for additional extra features, why would you need to pre-sell it to them? Surely those that will donate will buy them once they are completed? The vast success of the original campaign already proves that the demand exists. In any case, the additional costs that Kickstarter imposes would only serve to lower the funds available to create the features in the first place.
Fix the Downloads
The documentary was made available to all backers who donated more than $30 as a digital download. Since then, it has been released to the general public in three DRM-free formats. The reason it has been made available so quickly is that manufacturing takes time, and the producers (naturally) want the film to be out there as soon as possible.
The only problem is that the download is just the film, nothing more and nothing less. Did I mentioned it costs $12.99? Yeah, that too. Why is that a problem? If you are faced with a choice for something (legality aside for a minute), would you rather cough up $12.99 or $0.00? You’d plump for the latter I’m sure. Here’s a screenshot of the torrent as of writing:
All told, you’re look at under 400 people being involved with this torrent. That’s well below the 2,621 that backed it, and certainly a pittance of the 5,000+ that attend the BronyCon convention. That suggest that the numbers involved are relatively small compared to the size of the overall Brony community. The legal method also does not account for cases like this:
Understandably there are costs associated with digital downloads but there is a convenient way to eliminate those that are discussed further down.
The Discs
As part of the Kickstarter campaign, the rewards included a copy of the documentary on physical media (Blu-Ray and DVD). Those are (as of writing) being produced by the fabricator. However, there is (as of writing) no listing on Amazon (or eBay) for the disc and there is unlikely to be one until it is finished.
The problem with such a situation is that with a release date that is not readily apparent, potential viewers are unlikely to know that it will be available on physical media unless they do some research. Amazon has the ability to feature products for pre-sale, why wasn’t the documentary installed there before now?
Although the main issue is that viewers are moving away from physical anyway, there is an apparent failure on the part of the producers to adequately think out their release plan. As noted with Wreck-It-Ralph, releasing a film in digital format prior to the physical media will do you no good whatsoever. That’s not to say the discs should not go ahead, but that an effort but an extra effort will likely be required.
How to Help the Brony Documentary Make Money
With all the above in mind, it’s time to look at ways that the situation can be improved for everyone involved.
Why not put it on bittorrent?
The first question to answer is why shouldn’t the film be available in bittorrent? There are numerous advantages; namely the elimination of any costs associated with hosting, as individual users do that. They also pay for the bandwidth too, so there’s two significant costs immediately eliminated.
So if your major costs are removed, any monies you do receive will be almost total profit, right? Yes! Of course. So the simple solution is to find a way to extract money from people who view the documentary via bittorrent. Why not include a donation link in the video? Why not include the film’s website where you can sell them things?
Right now there is not a single shred of merchandise available relating to the film. Yes there are copyright issues surrounding the My Little Pony show itself, but not the documentary surrounding it. The film has a distinctive (if unremarkable) logo that could and should be plastered on t-shirts, hats and everything else that companies like to flog these days.
Shows like Adventure Time have been excellent at providing fans with things they desire and represent the contemporary way of connecting with fans and giving them a reason to buy. Why don’t the documentary makers consider this? Fans have already paid for the film, why wouldn’t they also pay for merchandise supporting it?
Reaching outside of the fandom
The documentary has garnered some media attention but that alone will not attract non-fans and non-bronies alone. People who are not intently interested in the topic matter are unlikely, maybe even unwilling, to cough up money to view it. The advantage of it being freely available is that anyone can watch it, with the result being that people outside the brony sphere are much more likely to either become involved themselves or at least take a more positive attitude to the phenomenon.
Larger audience for conventions and festivals
Films usually require large audiences to achieve success and one of the ways they accomplish this is through festival and convention screenings. Such events are sometimes accompanied by the presence of the filmmakers themselves. If the film is freely available online, such screenings will be more popular (fans always like the personal dimension), raising the profile of the film and greatly improving the opportunity to make money.
Conclusion
It’s always disheartening when something does not turn out as anticipated. It happens to everyone and this documentary is no exception. The important thing to remember is that when faced with a situation like this there is more than one way to respond. The music industry found out the hard way that taking a hard line is certainly the one to avoid. Thankfully the producers do not appear willing to go down that road, but it is nonetheless disheartening to see them not consider the many proven alternative that are available to them.
Looking to the future is a theme of the blog, and with this post, we’re taking a bit of a larger leap than normal. Bitcoin is a digital, distributed P2P currency that is slowly gaining prominence. Not sure what Bitcoin even is? Have a read of this introduction and the FAQ before continuing or just watch this animated video:
Why Will Bitcoin Become Useful?
What’s wrong with the currencies we already have? Well, nothing in particular if we’re being honest. However that doesn’t mean that they are perfect. In fact, existing currencies erect obstacles to the free flow of money around the world and in the context of entertainment like animation, that will become a restriction on growth. Here’s some reasons why Bitcoin represents a possible monetary future and why animation could benefit from it.
Future digital markets
We’re right in the middle of the seismic shift in content viewing. Traditional models are out; new ones like Netflix and YouTube are very much in. That’s great right? Well yes, yes it is. However while viewing habits are moving towards the 21st century, the monetary systems that support them remain stubbornly in the 20th century. If we are moving towards a digital model for consumption, shouldn’t we also move towards a digital model for payment?
Trans-national Consumer Demand
National boundaries have long been used by traditional broadcasters and distributors as a barrier to to truly free enterprise. Even in Europe where these barriers have been removed (even currency ones thanks to the Euro), content is still sold and licensed on a per country basis.
The internet has long been a borderless platform. The content therein is available anywhere at any time and it is this aspect that has made the internet so successful as a technology. As content moves more and more online, it will also disrespect national boundaries. Yes, the likes of Netflix, Amazon and iTunes continue to use geolocation, but this is more as a form of market restriction at the behest of corporations than for any technological or economical reason.
In contrast, sites like YouTubethrive on being as freely available as possible. Many other services (like Facebook and eBay) do too, and in many ways, traditional currency models restrict their ability to find success.
Pros
Now let’s take a look at some of the benefits that could be associated with Bitcoin as far as animation creators and producers are concerned.
It’s Borderless
As mentioned above, Bitcoin crosses all borders. This has the advantage of removing the need for converting one currency into another. If you live in the US and you earn money from someone in France, one of you must convert the amount and pay resulting conversion fee. That’s lost money for either party. Bitcoin would eliminate conversions and their fees making international commerce much more efficient.
It Makes Payments Easier
It’s tempting to assume that what is accepted practice in your country is also accepted practice in others. A good example are credit cards. They are widespread in the US, but are much less common in other countries either for cultural or economic reasons. As such, many of the platforms and services that animators and producers rely upon here may not be available internationally. PayPal has an international presence, but they are not everywhere. The same goes for Apple, Amazon and Netflix.
With Bitcoin, all you need is a computer and internet access and seeing as they are viewing animation through those already, there is no need for additional equipment. Kiss PayPal goodbye! Transaction fees do exist within Bitcoin however, but there is no such thing as a free lunch, and you can be sure they are less than what many banks and credit card companies currently charge.
It’s Secure
As a currency and protocol, Bitcoin’s security relies on verifying transactions and cryptography. Essentially that means that transactions must be verified before they are considered ‘accepted’ and each user has unique encryption keys to ensure that only they have access to their Bitcoins. At the most basic level, Bitcoin operates as a sort of virtual cash rather than any kind of account.
Cons
Nothing is perfect and Bitcoin does have a few disadvantages.
Not Widely Understood/Recognised By Consumers
As of writing (February 2013) Bitcoin remains very much on the periphery of the business environment. It has yet to achieve widespread recognition beyond technology circles and has extremely small penetration in mainstream society. This obscurity renders it somewhat unstable as far as its value and likely will until it becomes more widely used.
Fortunately, as Bitcoin becomes more popular, it will become more stable and this con will diminish in importance.
No Legal Status
At present, Bitcoin has no legal status. This does not mean that it is illegal, rather it means that it lacks legal recognition either in law or in court. Facebook credits similarly lack legal recognition yet they are the only method of purchasing things on that social network and widely accepted by its millions of users.
The User is the Security Risk
While the Bitcoin protocol and networks are secure, weak spots remain with the user. If they do not take adequate steps to secure their private key, it is possible for someone else to acquire it and transfer the Bitcoins associated with it. Consider it like leaving your front door unlocked and someone coming in and stealing the cash in your wallet. This is an inherent risk with any currency although there are steps that you can take (if receiving money from customers) to minimize the possibility it could happen to you.
A Theortecical Bitcoin Scenario
Consider this scenario: someone in a far off country sees your short and wants to throw something in the tip jar. How can they do that today? If they don’t have a credit card at all, they are SOL. If they do, it may be difficult or even impossible for them to give you money. To go one further, the platform your video is on may not even handle monetary transactions at all. Would you expect a cheque from them instead? Of course not.
That is how things work today, and while there usually are platforms in place, they are extremely convoluted and time-consuming. Consider the alternative: the user above can instead transfer funds in Bitcoin form to you from their internet-enabled computer directly to you no matter where you are. There are no conversion fees that are skimmed off and the funds are available to you almost instantaneously.
Your film can now be seen and enjoyed by anyone around the world with no upfront (merchant or service) fees on your end to worry about. Isn’t that awesome? More money for you, right?
Now think about the merchandise you can sell using Bitcoins; think about how you can take advantage of local manufacturers to sell that merchandise locally instead of shipping it internationally. Wanna sell T-shirts in Turkey? There’s no point in shipping them from America is there? Instead, pay a local manufacturer in Turkey with your Bitcoins whose value you know and reap the rewards when they are sold.
Conclusion
It’s still very early days for something like Bitcoin and it remains to be seen if it will ever catch on. That said, it’s an interesting technology and one that could benefit media consumption in conjunction with the internet. It is something to keep an eye on.
This past Tuesday, I had the pleasure of attending an evening organised by the Irish International Business Network and Animation Ireland at the Irish consulate in New York City. It was an enjoyable evening and an excellent opportunity to meet many of those from the Irish industry who were in town for the annual Kidscreen summit.
Among the many highlights of the evening was seeing the reel with which Ireland is being pitched as the ‘Animation Nation’. Given the proliferation of studios over the last 15 years, it is not surprising that the animation industry is now an employer of note in a country of only 4 million people:
The focus of the event was much more on the business side of things than the creative one and it was clear that the studios present are well aware of the changes currently taking shape in the media landscape and the many challenges that will come with them.
That said, it was great to see that they all have a deep passion and commitment to animation that will hopefully bring them many successes in the coming years.
Awards season is well and truly in swing (with the Annie Awards being the most relevant to this post) with plenty of back-slapping, schmoozing and thankfulness going on. However, a recent post by Ariel Seidman got me thinking; why is so much emphasis placed on awards? Shouldn’t rewards be the more important thing to desire?
Award shows are deeply confusing to me. We reward the creators of movies, music, and now technology with a metal object. That’s not the reward. The reward is when people use the products we create. That’s it. There is no better high than seeing people enjoy the thing you created.
Codecademy founders get this. They won a Crunchie and had a customer accept the award and tell a story about how she is using Codecademy to advance her career by developing new skills. Beautiful.
I hope we all start doing this.
Why Ariel Is Right About Awards
While Ariel isn’t an animator, he’s got the right idea. As creators, it is much more desirable from a number of standpoints to see what you create being used as it was designed. Sure it’s nice to be appreciated by your peers, but at the end of the day, they will not be ones supporting you (financially or otherwise). Does it make sense to pander to them?
Imagine if you will, my film winning the Annie Award for best feature. Now I could get up there and thank a whole bunch of people, but how would that benefit my audience; my fans? It wouldn’t really, would it? Awards like that do a good job of stroking the egos of everyone involved, but they do not make better films nor do they endear audiences to the films.
The Future
What I’m getting at here is the fact that the rapid splintering of the entertainment business is rendering awards ceremonies kind of moot. That’s not to say they won’t exist, plenty of web awards are out there, but there is a huge difference between receiving an award for your hard work, and receiving praise/gratitude from fans.
I was buried in one of those sketches (a Catwoman I believe) when I looked up to see–and I apologize if I should have known or remembered who this was but my mind had become the consistency of tapioca pudding by that day–a fairly large man standing at my table holding a Cleo book wanting to buy it. Not for himself, which I immediately found out, but for his daughter too shy (or scared) to purchase it from me herself and who was currently hiding behind this fairly large man’s frame. She was maybe five? Six? Seven years old? I’m terrible at identifying age. She was young for certain. At any rate, this man asked if I would sign the Cleo book which of course I did and he handed me a five and I handed him back the book and then he handed the book to the little person standing behind him who MADE THE LOUDEST MOST EXCITING SCREAM OF GLEE revealing herself from behind her body guard clutching at what you would think was the greatest ice cream cone in the history of ice cream cones (sorry, when my mind goes to something really great all I can think of is ice cream). With a giant grin plastered to her face, staring at the cover, she ran down the aisle with another girl who magically appeared out of nowhere or who I simply didn’t notice (most likely the former). Then the fairly large man quickly thanked me and made his way down the aisle in the direction his daughter had ran off to.
So as a creator, would you rather have a lump of metal on your bookshelf or the knowledge that your creation is proving enjoyment not only to one person, but to millions all around the world? I know which one I would rather have.
Conclusion
Awards serve a purpose, but they are in no way a way a means to an end. They are instead a dead end. They acknowledge achievements and creativity, but they do not encourage it; they don’t imbue creators with the sense that their creations are being appreciated by the people for whom they were meant for. Feedback and gratitude from fans and casual viewers alike are rewards that all creators should aspire to.
Do you agree or would you still rather have an Oscar to keep under your pillow? Let us know with a comment!
Amazon Studios is the retailer’s original content division that has been covered before here on the blog because it appears to have some merit to it even if it’s far from perfect. Announced just recently is the news that they have officially sanctioned five new animated shows to move forward with the production of pilot episodes. The notable thing about them is that they are all aimed at pre-schoolers; none will appeal to a kid who can appreciate the summer holidays. So what kind of pitfalls can the Amazon Studios animated series’ present for the would-be hit maker? Let’s take a look.
Only One Episode Of Each Is Being Made: The Pilot
It’s tempting to think that Amazon Studios has announced five different series, but they’ve actually only announced five different pilots. That’s a big difference and one that’s clearly aimed at keeping costs down. The downside is that they’re only producing one episode that may not be very good at all. Pilot’s are test beds, proofs of concept and a chance for executives to see how a show might play out for real. Pilots serve a valuable purpose, but here, it’s hard to see why they are treated so heroically.
No details are given as to whether these pilots will even see the light of day as far as the public is concerned. One would hope that they will be given trial runs with mainstream audiences to see how well they resonate with them, but you can never be sure. Plenty of pilots have been buried never to see the light of day. while conversely, they can also be jaw-droppingly awesome and yet still fail to get picked up.
They Picked the Toughest Market Segment
Yup, pre-school is the hottest market segment as far as animated shows go. Everyone is in on the act from monstrous conglomerates like Disney and Viacom to independent studios run by husbands and wives. Of all the ages of people to create for, why did Amazon choose this one to focus on?
Would it not be easier to aim for older kids or teenagers instead? One would think so, and yet the company has so far only announced one pilot for that audience. Were there really fewer ideas submitted? Hardly.
It’s Not Quite As Lucrative As You Would Expect
That’s not to say that Amazon Studios won’t make a lot of money through pre-school shows (it will), the problem is that pre-school shows have pre-school audiences. Once they reach a certain age, they leave and never return. Related merchandise sales also stop, and it becomes necessary to constantly market to new entrants.
This can become problematic when you realise that pre-school shows themselves have a terrifyingly short lifespan. Sure Sesame Street and Dora the Explorer have been around for ages, but the vast majority of pre-school animated shows don’t tend to bridge generations very well. Part of the reason is that child psychology and parent’s demands are continuously changing. For example, in my day, there was much more of an emphasis on entertainment whereas today, it’s seriously difficult to get a pre-school show made and out there if it does not contain a significant amount of educational content.
So with such a limited audience, won’t that limit Amazon’s potential to make money from the series? The answer is yes, because unlike Disney, Viacom et al, Amazon does not also have animate shows aimed at older kids. The result is that once they “graduate” from their pre-school shows, there is nothing for them to transition to. Now bear in mind that at this point, such circumstances are circumstantial; Amazon can afford to wait before it announces shows for older kids, yet the fact remains that it is foregoing those audiences now.
Netflix is Still The One Amazon Studios Has To Beat
Although Amazon is focusing on creating original content, pseudo-competitor Netflix already has a large headstart. Sure they lack the original programming, but they have a massive library to draw upon. More so than that, they have become synonymous with the words “online streaming” and have a commanding lead over Amazon in the public’s mind. Netflix is also available on more platforms, already has a dedicated kid-friendly service (so Mummy and Daddy don’t have to play the progamming for the child) and has all the programming for the young audience once they get older.
Conclusion
I’ve lauded Amazon’s initiatives before and they’re logic remains solid for the most part. (I won’t go into the differences between their ‘pilot’ strategy and Netflix’s ‘all-in’ approach.) Their decision to aim for pre-school audiences remains a mysterious one. No doubt they will be drawing upon their vast amount of data on sales of toys to help them finesse their approach.
Would you rather see Amazon make an animated series for older viewers? Let us know with a comment!
I’ll admit it, I enjoy the commentators on the A.V. Club simply because they exhibit a decent sense of humour as well as an above-average level of intellect for an internet community. When news broke yesterday of the new Powerpuff Girls CGI special was being made, things were made all the more interesting with the simultaneous realisation that superhero shows Young Justice and Green Lantern: The Animated Series were not announced as returning. Such news is not the purpose of this post however, instead, here is a selection of though-provoking comments from the article.
Not that bronies actually caused this, but the conspiracy that Cartoon Network is aiming to ape the success of My Little Pony with a show from 10 years ago is surprisingly strong.
See, I liked Powerpuff girls when they were on. It was a good show despite seeming like it was only for girls.
But I didn’t start a goddamn movement.
Which begs the question, if the Powerpuff Girls were launched today, would they garner a similar cross-demographic audience as MLP does? Would the fact that the internet is far more developed today than in 1998 be the key difference? My vote says yes.
Powerpuff Girls used to be the show 10 year old boys used to watch in secret out of fear of alienation from their peers.
..and brings up that whole topic of discussion. Boys loved the show yet were totally afraid to admit to watching it. Craig J. Clarks experience rates slightly better:
I had a couple friends that I watched it with (one of whom had to overcome his initial reluctance), but I didn’t exactly go around broadcasting my love for the show.
I was a boy in middle school, you damn well better not let on that you like anything the least bit girlly
So the question here isn’t so much that Sailor Moon appeals more to girls, but that genderisation deems it as the exclusive preserve of girls. What the hell is right with that situation? Who cares if a boy likes to watch Sailor Moon? The bigger question though, is why did middle school kids feel the need to “teach him a lesson” so to speak for liking the show he likes? Your comments are welcome.
I was working daycare, with four-year-olds, when PPG was still on the air. One day, I heard three of the little boys playing Powerpuff Girls. They weren’t playing any of the male characters, they were each one of the girls. They had no problem identifying themselves as Bubbles, Buttercup, or Blossom.
I try not to interfere with what my son likes because the rest of the world will try to do that for him. He likes My Little Pony and Spirited Away in equal measure and it makes me glad.
Goodness knows kids today are subject to enough external pressures, telling them what to like and what not to like.
Seriously? Why is there no Adventure Time Swatch watch out there? Why can’t I buy them? Why can’t anyone buy them? Why hasn’t anyone thought of doing it yet?
Well, here’s a few reasons for someone to get on it.
Swatch Is Cool
Alright, yes, that statement is coming from a child of the 80s when Swatch was the watch to have. Cheap, cheerful and created solely as a tool to ward off the crushing Japanese digital threat that almost sunk the entire Swiss watchmaking industry, Swatch watches become the epitome of hautecouture for those wishing keep up with fashionable 80s taste.
Fast forward to 2013, and Swatch watches are nowhere near as ubiquitous as they used to be, but, they’re still being made in just about every colour/pattern imaginable and they still exhibit they same classic design that made them a worldwide icon.
Adventure Time Is Cool
This is already a given, right? The show has done wonders for Cartoon Network and continually manages to outdo itself. Besides that, we’ve noted here on this blog that the show has not only been superb at embracing its fans, but also embracing novel merchandising ideas such as T-shirt competitions and limited edition wallets.
On top of that, the show has a near-perfect cast of characters. This eclectic bunch appeals to a wide range of fans in all sorts of demographics and ages. Merchandise released so far has done well to either include most of the cast, or utilise them individually to great effect.
Why Bring Adventure Time and Swatch Together Though?
Ah, the real question. Why bring a style icon of the past together with a cultural icon of today? The answer is pretty simple actually; both things complement each other. Don’t believe me?
They’re Fun
Adventure Time is known as a fun show with fun characters engaging in all sorts of fun adventures in the Land of Ooo. Swatch staked their brand on being the fun watch, the watch that was cheap and cheerful, the watch that stood out amongst a sea of boring digital timepieces. What’s wrong with bringing two fun things together?
They Suit Each Other
Swatch watches are famous for being brightly coloured, simple watches. Sure there are more sophisticated models, but your basic Swatch watch is about as plain as they come:
This plain style is just crying out to be adorned with Pen Ward’s creations. Tragically, I cannot create the mockups necessary to visually explain what’s in my head (please, any Photoshop wizzes out there who’d like to help out, be my guest), but imagine an orange swatch watch with an elongated Jake along the entire length of the band. His bellybutton could be the centre of the dial!
Also being of benefit is that fact that Swatch watches are practically indestructible thanks to their simplicity and are inexpensive enough to be suitable for kids to have. Not that we’re focusing solely on kids, but being inexpensive means that people are likely to buy more than one.
They’re Desirable
Yes, they would be desirable. Don’t pay attention to those old bitter folks who claim that Swatch watches were a fad. Ignore the notion that nobody wears watches any more because they can just look at their phones. Gloss over the fact that a Beemo Swatch watch may not be entirely accurate.
Watches have long been surpassed as the primary method by which people tell the time. Yeah we have phones, computers, clocks and so on, but such a mindset completely ignores the reason people still wear watches: their fashionable. Yes, that’s right, I said fashionable. They’re objects of fashion for men and women, young and old. Watches are a mainstay of the fashion accessory industries and that situation is highly unlikely to change any time soon.
If anything, an Adventure Time Swatch watch may help younger kids become interested in watches. After all, they’re cool looking and have their favourite characters on them, right? Even among older fans, ones who do remember Swatch’s earlier heyday, they would be a nostalgic item.
They would also play into the current trend of personalisation. IPhone covers, clothing, jewellery and plenty of other pieces of merchandise play on the idea of making a personal statement. Swatch has been advocating that marketing line for years; a range of Adventure Time watches would only be the latest incarnation of their corporate mission.
Just Make Them Already!
Cartoon Network is missing out on an opportunity to create a range of merchandise that it truly memorable, appeals to fans, and promotes the proliferation of Adventure Time even further into the public realm beyond its fans. Why they haven’t considered this already is beyond me. But hey, if they decide to take it up, and Ice Queen one is all I ask for.
What do you think? Would you wear an Adventure Time Swatch Watch?
David OReilly is infamous for the unique style of animation in his personal films and the particular brand of comedy that inhabits them. As an independent animator, David is a master at understanding how they become a brand onto themselves and he uses it to his benefit. Such a move is often the result of necessity but rarely is it pulled off with the pastiche that OReilly manages. With his latest venture, David illustrates yet again, how independent animators can engage with fans and earn a living at the same time.
The Fans
OReilly has acquired an audience (or devoted mass if you prefer) through his short films and commercial works. These include the films Please Say Something, The External World and his initial foray, Octocat. Videos for the likes of U2 have heightened his public profile among non-animation fans too.
These fans not only provide an audience for every new thing that he creates, they also function as his makeshift publicity department. The advantage to this is that word of mouth is by far the most reliable and effective form of advertising even if it may take a while to reach large numbers of people.
Acquiring fans is one thing, but OReilly also manages to keep them, chiefly through continually honing, improving and experimenting with his craft. His reasons for not repeating himself bear remembering in this regard and his ever increasing profile within the animation industry is proof of that. They will culminate later this year when his episode of Adventure Time hits the airwaves.
The Content
Although fans are important to any independent animator, it is necessary to interact with them and continually present them with new and exciting material. The risk is that if you do not, they will move on to somebody else who does.
OReilly is only one Irishman however, and animation being the slow process that it is, it would be impossible for him to create new animated films constantly and within short time frames. Instead, he opts to create new animation when it is possible, and in between, keeps his fans happy and engaged through other, non-animated creations.
OReilly’s twitter and instagram feeds exemplify his unique sense of humour and provide the primary channels of engagement. They are a practically free way of maintaining his profile without any additional cost to himself.
David is also the master at engaging his fans in conversation through them. A clear example was his recent pondering of why critically acclaimed content garners tiny viewership on YouTube and yet videos of cats can garner millions. His response was as much genius as it was entertaining: he posted a video of puppies and then decried it as a despicable act for which he was truly sorry.
The result?Nearly 12,000 views but a ton of interactivity with fans as they eagerly entertained the notion that the video was ‘disgusting’ even though it clearly was not (click to enlarge):
The latest idea (and the one that prompted this post) was the recent announcement that David had designed 40 T-shirts. “OK, so what” I hear you say, “that’s not a big deal”. Well, no, it probably isn’t, but since he has decided to also sell them, it sort of is.
Why? Well quite simply, these T-shirts bring fans and content together in a way that allows OReilly to make money. Firstly, the T-shirts are a way of proving that he values his fans and secondly, they adhere to David’s unique style without the need to create new animation. The result is that you have happy fans, with a David OReilly creation and all without the need to create expensive, time-consuming animation!
Of course the true genius of these T-shirts is that they exhibit not only OReilly’s unique sense of humour (and his desire to lead a Comic Sans revival), but also his interest in animation too. Observe:
Needless to say, the use of these copyrighted characters would fall under the parody rule of fair use.
The Payoff
(no pun intended)
What is there to be gleaned from all of this? Well, a few things:
OReilly creates animation that garners fans of his work
He engages with his fans on a constant basis
He creates non-animated content as a way to satisfy fans until new animation can be created
The content he creates is exciting and of equal quality to his animation.
The result is that David OReilly succeeds at things where plenty of others fail. Yes, anybody can create a T-shirt and sell it online without much overhead, but simply offering T-shirts is not enough. Neither can you rely upon merchandise sales alone to bring in money or keep your fans engaged. Again, simply offeringit is not enough. David demonstrates that you must keep fans ‘primed’ for new content and when you deliver, it must be exciting enough for them to want to purchase it.
In addition, the T-shirts themselves are broad enough in appeal so that non-fans and people who may have never heard of him before will get to know him; i.e. they will grow his fanbase. Imagine that, growing the potential audience for your animated properties without creating any new animation. Genius!
Although by no means a model that can translate to any and all independent animators, what David OReilly conducts is a high-wire act that constantly entertains his fans, keeps them engaged and interested in what he’s doing. the result is that he can create merchandise that not only sells, but increases his profile further. He is a model for others to follow.
Ah, the fine print. Almost nobody actually reads it, but when they do, surprises abound. Today, we’re taking a look at the recently announced Nickelodeon Animated Shorts Program; basically Nick’s effort to find new animated programming because whatever system they’ve used since giving Random! Cartoons the boot clearly isn’t working. However, we’re not interested in what kind of content they’re looking for, or even the reason why they’re doing it at all. Nope, we’re interested in the fine print, because the devil really is in the details.
What it Does Say
You acknowledge that there does not now exist, nor has there ever existed, nor will there exist, a fiduciary relationship between you and VMN. You requested this opportunity to submit your Material to VMN and you make this submission voluntarily and on an unsolicited basis. You and VMN have not yet reached an agreement concerning the use of the Material and you realize that no obligation of any kind is assumed by, or may be implied against, VMN unless and until a formal written contract has been entered into between you and VMN (if ever), and then the obligation shall be only as is expressed in the formal written contract.
Basically, we don’t have to pay you a cent until we sign a proper contract. A fair enough arrangement and pretty standard for this kind of thing.
You warrant that you are the sole and exclusive creator, author and owner of the Material, and that to your knowledge no one else has any right to the Material. You further warrant that no rights in the Material have previously been granted to anyone nor has the Material otherwise been exploited in any way. You believe your Material and its features to be unique and novel.
In other words, you are the only person who created what you submit, and you didn’t include material belonging to someone else. Again, that’s a standard thing. There’s a TON of fanfiction out there that networks won’t touch with a 10 foot pole simply because there are too many licensing issues to deal with.
The biggie (any emphasis mine):
However, you cannot and will not assume or infer from the fact that VMN will accept your offer to submit your Material to VMN, that VMN regards your Material, or any part thereof, as novel, valuable or usable. You recognize that other persons including VMN employees may have submitted to VMN or to others or made public, or may hereafter originate and submit or make public, similar or identical material which VMN shall have the right to use, and you understand that you will not be entitled to any compensation because of VMN’s use of such other similar or identical material. Subject to the foregoing provisions, VMN will not make any use of any legally protectable portion of your Material unless you and VMN have agreed in a writing signed by both parties concerning your compensation for such use, which compensation shall in no event be greater than the compensation normally paid by VMN for similar Material from comparable sources.
With this, Viacom are essentially attempting to preclude themselves from any compensation claims that arise from using an idea that is very similar to a submission. This is common for studios who might well get 50 submissions about a cat chasing a mouse. The kicker is the use of the term “legally protectable”. That is something that has to be hashed out in a court with a judge (usually) and doing that is certainly not a cheap thing to undertake. Although they mention compensation, do note that studios love to bend the rules about as far as they will go with creations and you can be sure that if you have a great idea, they will alter it just enough so that they don’t have to pay anything.
The really important clause:
You are executing this Release voluntarily, without coercion or undue influence from any source, and do so with complete understanding of all of its terms and effects, and every portion thereof. By signing this Release, you acknowledge that you have either consulted an attorney or have waived your right to do so.
Read that again because you may have missed it the first time around.
You are executing this Release voluntarily, without coercion or undue influence from any source, and do so with complete understanding of all of its terms and effects, and every portion thereof. By signing this Release, you acknowledge that you have either consulted an attorney or have waived your right to do so.
Did you get that? They’re basically telling you that if you haven’t consulted an attorney about this then you cannot do so further down the road. What that means is that if you find something about the release that you find objectionable, then Viacom (Nickelodeon) can say that you should have known better, leaving you up the creek without a paddle.
What it Does NOT Say
What the release does not say, and what is particularly troubling, is that they do not have any kind of time limit set out. In other words, nothing in the release precludes them from holding onto your idea indefinitely. They can use your idea ten years from now and it’s contained within the release that if they do “inadvertently” use your material, you have only 6 months to make a case.
That is troubling enough, but the release also fails to disclose how you can handle your creation outside of the program. Can you pitch it to anyone else in the meantime? What do you suppose happens if another studio decides to pick it up while Nick is still considering it? These are all questions you should be asking yourself before deciding to commit.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, these kinds of solicitations smack of a mix of ineptitude and desperation. Nickelodeon has easy access to many fine creators whom they can solicit from any time. Why the need to go to the general public for new ideas? I can’t help bu smell the reek of sleaziness that comes with filling people’s eyes full of stars (or dollar signs). If Nickelodeon were serious about soliciting ideas, they would be weeding the garden before looking to plant any flowers.
