We’ve just been informed that Marcus Theaters is dropping April Showers over our iTunes deal so closely following the release of the film in theaters.
Restaurants are not afraid of people eating at home why are theaters afraid of people watching movies at home?
April Showers opens in theaters April 24th. 2 weeks later the film becomes available on iTunes for download and on IndieFlix for DVD and Blu-ray. Our goal with this model of collapsing windows very quickly allows us to maximize the exposure, minimize the marketing dollars and create word of mouth in order to drive sales at a much more accelerated rate rather than to open in one market until it fizzles and then to re-engage the audience all over again in the ancillary markets when people have moved on to other content. It’s a model that makes sense to me but clearly not to all. The exhibitors have been the hardest to convince to come aboard even as many of their theaters sit empty and dark. I commend and applaud the exhibitors who have embraced us with open arms and I am sure it is only a matter of time before this model is truly supported by all. In the interim it’s a shame that the schools that were to benefit from a percentage of proceeds being donated from our portion of the first week’s box office can no longer receive that money. We set up our theatrical screenings as a sort of community fundraiser by working with the local schools and communities to encourage students and educators to attend knowing ticket sales would be shared with the schools. It was an opportunity to open dialogue and bring the community together on an issue that needs addressing now; understanding and putting an end to violence in our schools. we felt this was the most responsible way to use our film as an agent for change and to make a difference.
I am unclear why the fear of having the film available on iTunes soon after the theatrical is such an issue for Marcus theaters especially since there is so much support to fill the theater and to afford the exhibitor the opportunity to give back to their own community? I guess its every company for themselves. In the online space I have found our partners who are also I guess considered our competitors to be very different. Each of the companies we work with and they are the biggest in the worlsd have taken off their competitive hats and have rallied to support our film for the greater good of the project; to raise awareness on the effects of school violence. They recognize their role and place in participating on all levels. I guess that’s the difference between the online space which is forging the path and taking risks to finding new ways of reaching audiences and the off line exhibitors who can only think within their 4 walls. We can and should all work together to motivate people to experience film however they choose to watch it. There needs to be coordination and strategy. This is what we are doing.
I share this letter written by April Showers director, writer and Columbine survivor, Andrew Robinson and I encourage you to see the film in theaters the way it was meant to be seen or by any means you wish to view it. It is an important film. We are getting it out there and we are working hard to convince theaters to work with us. we’ve been told the studios would like to see us fail. They make their money holding back content and trying to control how and when you can see movies. Our model doesn’t support their proprietary philosophy. So, for those who have been asking why April Shoes is not playing in your city please know we are trying. Let your theater owners know you want to see the film April Showers. Help us to convince them to not be afraid.
Scilla Andreen
Marcus Theaters Drops April Showers over iTunes & Colorado Theaters Explained
Tags: Andrew Robinson, April Showers, DIY, hybrid distribution, IndieFlix, iTunes, Marcus Theaters, new models of distribution, scilla andreen, self distribution, standard distribution, theaterical distribution
Research has determined that from the Moment of Commitment (the point when a student pulls their weapon) to the Moment of Completion (when the last round is fired) is only 5 seconds. If it is the intent of a school district to react to this violence, they will do so over the wounded and/or slain bodies of students, teachers and administrators.
Educational institutions clearly want safe and secure schools. Administrators are perennially queried by parents about the safety of their schools. The commonplace answers, intended to reassure anxious parents, focus on the school resource officers and emergency procedures. While useful, these less than adequate efforts do not begin to provide a definitive answer to preventing school violence, nor do they make a school safe and secure.
Traditionally school districts have relied upon the mental health community or local police to keep schools safe, yet one of the key shortcomings has been the lack of a system that involves teachers, administrators, parents and students in the identification and communication process. Recently, colleges, universities and community colleges are forming Behavioral Intervention Teams with representatives from all these constituencies. Higher Education has changed their safety/security policies, procedures, or surveillance systems, yet K-12 have yet to incorporate Behavioral Intervention Teams. K-12 schools continue spending excessive amounts of money to put in place many of the physical security options. Sadly, they are reactionary only and do little to prevent aggression because they are designed exclusively to react to existing conflict, threat and violence. These schools reflect a national blindspot, which prefers hardening targets through enhanced security versus preventing violence with efforts directed at aggressors. Security gets all the focus and money, but this only makes us feel safe, rather than to actually make us safer.
Some law enforcement agencies use profiling as a means to identify an aggressor. According to the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Department of Education’s report on Targeted Violence in Schools, there is a significant difference between “profiling” and identifying and measuring emerging aggression; “The use of profiles is not effective either for identifying students who may pose a risk for targeted violence at school or – once a student has been identified – for assessing the risk that a particular student may pose for school-based targeted violence.” It continues; “An inquiry should focus instead on a student’s behaviors and communications to determine if the student appears to be planning or preparing for an attack.” We can and must assess objective, culturally neutral, identifiable criteria of emerging aggression.
For a comprehensive look at the problem and its solution, http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/White_Paper_K-12/
Continue the dialogue: http://aggressionmanagement.blogspot.com/
Hello! Just had to chime in. I truly enjoyed your post. Keep up the phenomonal effort.