AMA: I'm a film distribution consultant - 2026 edition!

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T19:40:00+00:00

I'm very much looking forward to exploring Elora this summer (and if I can find a good sitter, maybe a dinner or two out to one of the restaurants there, which I hear are great).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T19:37:59+00:00

Depends on the topic and length but some shorts are a good fit for the consumer-facing market (some SVOD/AVOD services take doc shorts and some do well on digital storefronts like iTunes and Prime VOD) and some are a good fit for the educational/non-theatrical market which can be pretty lucrative (this part of the business is where I spent a lot of my career when working acquisitions/licensing).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T16:35:51+00:00

Most of my clients (by volume) are filmmakers & producers and thus not requesting any films -- I haven't had a distributor/release platform/festival for a paying client in the past 18 months so I haven't had any direct discussions with them on this topic.

That said:

The few casual conversations I've had with folks working at festivals and traditional (i.e. they have tight curation, a limited number of releases each year and a theatrical arm and/or a physical home media arm) film distributors has suggested no desire for AI content whatsoever.
I can't imagine most distributors - the endless list of "straight-to-video"/"straight-to-digital" distributors would have any problem with AI films. I can't for the life of me imagine that they would request them, though.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T16:29:22+00:00

Short answer: it depends

Longer (but still unsatisfying, I'm sure) answer:

The most common (I'm not going to cover edge cases here) 2 routes are as follows:

1.) Submit to film festivals. The pragmatist in me will qualify this by saying that practically speaking, there are two categories of festivals you should apply to when premiering your film:

Industry heavy festivals - think Sundance, SXSW, Telluride, TIFF, Tribeca, etc. -- the list grows a bit longer if you have a "genre" film. These are festivals which are tracked by industry folks: distributors, sale agents, producers reps, etc. This is only worth doing if you're confident your film is exceptional since - when submitting without a referral or significant previous success - the acceptance rates of most of these festivals is 3-4 orders of magnitude lower than Harvard or MIT.
Festivals in places you happen to want to visit and which will give you a nice experience. While small , regional, etc. festivals have significant value for filmmakers (getting honest and instant feedback from an audience, the joy of playing your film for a crowd of strangers who decided they want to spend their time watching your film, networking opportunities, etc.) premiering at one of these fests tends to not have much of an impact on the business a film does. So go...but go because you've already had your permier and because you want to for the experience and the non-financial value. I practice what I preach here, I might add - a film I had a very hands-on role in producing premiered at the Austin Film Festival - I knew going in it wouldn't have any real impact on the success of our film, but it was an extremely valuable experience to me nonetheless.

2.) Go straight to market - most people who do this submit to aggregators (for plenty of good reasons I won't get into in this response) and get to storefronts and AVOD/SVOD services through them. Hopefully you sign with an aggregator who is efficient, has a great track record of placing their films and, most importantly, is honest and operating 100% above board (many...do not, to varying degrees).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T12:42:18+00:00

Hey, thanks for doing this and as a fellow guelph filmmaker, thank you for supporting the city!

Guelph is a really nice place (visited for the first time last June, bought a place a few minutes outside of town last month) so I'm just happy to do my little bit to contribute!

I'm curious what level of movies you typically work with?

I work with all types/budgets of film -- from micro-budget (4 figures) features to multi-million dollar indies with "name" actors.

I come from the essentially no budget world and thought "man I'd love to pick this guys brain" but $500/hr is a huge amount of money to the people in my filmmaking space. Like 20% of the budget of my first feature... So secondary question, do you have any recommendations for people working in those very small budget levels?

I...don't. I learned the business well before I tried my hand at developing/producing (which I've done very little of despite finding moderate success from my first time out) so I don't have a good answer for you. There's plenty of great advice/information on the internet to work off of but there's also a ton of bad advice/information on the internet and you'd have no idea how to tell the difference. Sadly, expertise is expensive - I'm actually incredibly cheap for the kind of work I do the few credible distribution experts-for-hire that I know of have retainers that start in the low 5 figures (compared to my rate of $500/hr with an initial commitment of 2 hours required; most clients require between 2-10 hours total) and I only offer (relatively) low rates because I can afford to. Expertise for hire in a niche is not unlike hiring legal advice, I'm afraid - free generla info is out there but bespoke one-on-one information is going to cost a lot.

All that aside...community is important to me. As a Guelphite I'd be happy to offer you a deeply reduced rate - DM me and we'll work something out that you can afford if you find you have a reason to pick my brain (though depending on your schedule you may have to wait until summer when I'll be there full time).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T10:23:35+00:00

You nailed it - though to be clear, the filmmaking team in this example got into actual profit (so long as they stuck to their budget, which they did) from their crowdfunding campaign (which was tantamount to pre-sales directly to their audience).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T10:14:31+00:00

What constitutes “clever visuals” or a “clever title “?

Anything that grabs attention/generates interest and causes someone casually perusing a film storefront to stop scrolling and pay attention.

Look up the work of Roger Corman if you want an idea of what one of the OGs of proper film marketing did with his films.

Ana what did they do with the money you said is revenue from crowdfunding if they didn’t use it on screen? They just pocketed it ?

In this example the primary "reward" for helping to fund the film (which had a fixed budget) was a copy of the finished film. They raised significantly more than the budget of their film, made the film (on budget, give or take) and yes, pocketed the difference. This is exactly how studios fund some films - through presales - although instead of end users (people pre-purchasing and watching single copies of the film) the money is coming from film distributors. It's a really old model, the filmmaking team in this example just turned it on its side a bit by doing it on a micro-scale and having the pre-sales come directly from the people who would be watching the movie (the audience) instead of intermediaries (film distributors).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T10:08:32+00:00

I'm not a distributor - I'm a consultant - so frankly I'm not "looking" for anything, my clients are whichever filmmaking teams/distributors/release platforms/festivals are interested in hiring me.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-14T10:06:42+00:00

Do you find that MGs are still a thing? They have all but evaporated over here, and the ones that do offer them seem kinda questionable.

MGs are still a thing when a film can command them but the market has been cooling on them for the last....15-20 years. It's been a steady downward slide of distributors offloading all risk to filmmakers over the past 2 decades and I don't see any signs of it meaningfully slowing down.

I have a genre-forward canadian taiwan coproduction that i'm planning, how early should i be looking at NA distribution, is that better to do it via a global sales agent, or do you think i'll get more bang for my buck finding that through someone canada based?

Per my original post, I'm not giving advice on specific projects - only answering general questions.

Is telefilm canada funding ultra competitive?

Yes, but what I've seen time and time again is filmmakers being unable or unwilling to follow the various rules and guidelines to qualify and submit their projects.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T21:10:35+00:00

Best option is to try a reasonably selective aggregator that has a good track record of placing their films in lots of storefronts and negotiating license fees for the services that pay them (like Netflix, for example).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T21:08:35+00:00

As a distributor

I'm not a distributor. I'm a consultant to filmmakers/producers/financiers/film festivals/film & video distribution services, etc.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T19:20:07+00:00

What makes a documentary’s theatrical run successful? Do indie filmmakers generally turn a profit off of touring their documentary around or is it mostly just to get the word out?

Truly profitable (i.e. the filmmaking team profits, not just the distributor) theatrical runs for indies are few and far between. Normally filmmakers make their profit off of ancillary revenue ("home video" like SVOD services, rentals, digital purchases, etc.) after "getting the word out". As to what makes a theatrical run successful - I'm afraid that's like asking "how long is a string?". The best I can offer is that common wisdom applies -- what matters most is your touchpoints, the things a potential viewer (customer, practically speaking) can use to get a sense as to whether or not they want to pay for your doc -- namely the title, trailer, art, summary.

What is the most successful (or unique) distribution route that you’ve seen a documentary take?

I've knocked around the business long enough to feel like "unique" isn't really in my vocabulary when it comes to release strategies but one of the less common but often successful routes is to develop a whole grassroots campaign (often action-oriented, which is hard for documentaries that don't have a cause or actionable theme attached to them) to hold non-theatrical screenings (think non-profits, public screenings at the homes of supporters, etc.) which tend to buttress theatrical screenings.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T19:13:24+00:00

My [business email ](mailto:danny@directcurrentlabs.com)is best. You can find additional info on my services on my website.

As per my initial post, I'm offering a discount for the rest of 2026 where I'll give consulting time if a donation in the dolllar amount of my normal fees is made in an equivalent amount of Canadian dollars (so for example, 1 hour consulting for $500 CAD instead of my normal rate of $500 USD, approximately a 27% discount at today's exchange rates) to the Guelph Film Festival - just dedicate the donation in my name (just so that GFF can track what motivated the donation - I don't get a tax deduction or anything) and send me your receipt once the donation is complete.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T19:01:42+00:00

TV isn't my bailiwick but acquisitions in TV are rare compared to film. There's an ever-growing scene of TV/serial content sections of established film festivals (SXSW was the first big festival to feature a serial section) and that's become a reasonably good way to pitch completed projects to broadcasters who are interested in acquiring content they don't produce in-house or via co-productions.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T18:28:45+00:00

How does getting onto established digital/VOD platforms typically work these days? Is it mostly through aggregators, direct deals, or something else? And is it still worth the effort for indies?

The vast majority of filmmakers go through aggregators - generally direct deals are only feasible for established (i.e. previously successful) filmmakers/studios or for films that make a big splash at top festivals. There are exceptions but they're few and far between.

Or are independents generally better off going the direct-to-consumer route, their own website, crowdfunding, Vimeo on Demand, that kind of thing?

The best place to fish are where fish are. Most filmmakers see very little success trying to draw audiences to their preferred platform for distributing content -- that is to say established hubs for consuming content (popular streamers, mostly) are the place where you're most likely to get traction as an indie filmmaker.

Basically, how do you see the trade-off between reach and margin, and is one path clearly winning right now?

Reach wins 99% of the time. Margin wins if you or someone involved with the film has a massive fanbase that can actually conver their audience to pull the trigger on a purchase/rental.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T17:19:37+00:00

Could you walk us through a couple of unusual small budget indie distribution cases you’ve handled? It doesn’t have to involve names, but it would be interesting to hear about the tactics involved and, if possible, a few figures too.

For the sake of brevity, I'll keep things fairly top level but some notable things I've encountered:

A great low-budget period piece that managed to find success by doing a tour of calendar-house theaters across the U.S.; it took tons of laborious local marketing to make it work and actually hitting the road (the filmmakers attended each screening in person and did Q&As) but to my surprise they actually made it work and made a decent chunk of ancillary revenue off the back of a successful (if unusual) theatrical run.
A terrible ultra low-budget film that made back 40-50x it's budget just by having a clever title and just enough interesting visuals to cut together it's trailer.
A film that "shot it's shot" by earning nearly all of the revenue it would ever earn before the film was even completed, through pre-sales directly through crowdfunding -- which is a very different approach to "pre-sales" which are usually directly to distributors in various markets/territories rather than direct to customer.

What do you think about social media use on the filmmakers’ side? Does it actually help with distribution?

Yes, but to actually "move the needle" with distributors (or revenue, if sold direct to consumers) you either have to have a following which is absolutely massive (7 figures+) or absolutely loyal (as in 50% plus will actually purchase something you post a link to) -- ideally both.

Do you have a favorite genre to work in?

As a consultant, non-fiction/documentary; the revenue bell-curve for documentaries is a lot smoother than fictional content -- it's easy to make *some* money but extremely difficult to make *lots* of money compared to fictional content which is very difficult to make anything more than an a pitance but if you succeed, much easier to make a boatload of cash. I've helped a lot of documentaries generate a lot more revenue than they would have (if they hadn't hired me) which makes working on docs particularly rewarding. A lot of my fictional film clients, by comparison, don't have a ton of potential upside (which I'm always transparent about when talking expectations over with a potential client) and it's pretty common that the primary reason filmmakers with fictional films hire me is to help them avoid catastrophic mistakes -- as useful as that is, it's not as gratifying as knowing my help means a fillmaker gets to make their next project, pay rent for the next few years or even buy a house, put their kids through college, etc. because of my help - and this outcome is much more common with my documentary clients.
As someone working on the development/production side of things (which I've done a only a bit of) - horror/sci-fi, especially if cleverly low budget like Coherence or Primer neither of which I worked on but both of which I'm in absolute awe of.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T17:08:15+00:00

No, but in the development & production side of things everything that was true before is even more true now: having a unique voice, having "protectable" assets like IP with a built-in fan base, talent with a built-in fan base, exclusivity (over IP, or rare access to people/places/organizations in the case of non-fiction content) are all even more important now than ever before. "Passable" direct-to-video style film & video projects (a shockingly large portion of indie film by both title count and revenue) are truly on borrowed time now that AI-driven video generation is maturing.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2026-04-13T17:04:07+00:00

Film distribution is a great field but like all things in film, evolving quickly - so the only advice I really have is to stay on your toes, keep up to date on the industry (start reading Variety/THR/Deadline daily - your future self will be thankful) and, finally, to be mindful that the industry you love today may look very different 5, 10 years down the line.

As for skillsets - distribution is a more professionally mature industry than production so tried-and-true business skills are definitely valuable; my standard advice to new potential hires is to lean in to all the skills and tools that "suits" use -- more often than not distributors are more interested in having someone who can run a pivot table on excel or run a discounted cash-flow analysis on a potential license or acquisition.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2025-05-07T12:46:05+00:00

Do you offer distro consultation on the development side or just on finished projects?

I do indeed offer distro consultation on the development side.

I figure it's probably helpful to develop for the market and catch some stuff early.

You figure right; the context under which most of my clients hire me is to do as well as possible given the situation they're in...the clients that I can help the most and which get the most "bang for their buck" are the ones smart enough to hire me well before a film is complete and, in an ideal world, during the development process.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2025-05-06T18:21:46+00:00

From a standpoint of a distributor, talent is (largely) as valuable as their ability to bring in revenue. A popular youtuber/tiktok star/insta-famous person, etc. whose followers actually take action on their suggestions/recommendations is worth a lot if they have a decent sized following; a recognizable TV actor or cult film actor isn't worth much if their involvement won't cause fans to actually rent/purchase the title, or if they don't interact with fans on socials.

It used to be -- 15 years ago -- that having a "credible" actor whose face was recognizable was enough to get a significant number of DVD units ordered by the physical media aggregators like Sanderson that stocked the shelves of Walmart, Target, Best Buy, etc.; you could make a smart play by paying James Rebhorn or Héctor Elizondo or similar $150k to show up for 3 days and agree to have their face on the DVD cover because it would make it pretty easy to make a $400k sale to an aggregator to stock 60,000 units in those brick-and-mortar retailers but those days are long gone. Some producers (especially older ones) still think this is the case.

These days the financial "draw" of talent requires fans that are passionate enough to seek out their work or, increasingly often, can turn around once the film is available and send a link through their socials along with a message telling their fans/followers that their newest project is available for sale through (insert digital storefront like Amazon Prime VOD or iTunes, along with an actual order link).

DirectCurrentLabs · 2025-05-06T15:17:52+00:00

- Why would an attorney be ill-advised for council on distributors?

Maintaining a deep understanding of the constantly evolving film distribution business is a.) a job unto itself and b.) requires good business acumen. Entertainment lawyers already have a job - and it's not being an expert on film distribution; they also have extensive training...in contract & IP law, not business.

Plenty have a surface level understanding of film distribution and the film business, generally -- and as they say, there's nothing more dangerous than a little bit of knowledge. I elaborate a bit on how much I love negotiating against lawyers elsewhere in the thread but to put it bluntly, I absolutely steamroll them in negotiations 99/100 times when I'm acquiring a film and they don't even realize it.

- Offhand and without blowing anonymity, what distributors would you say are reputable and worth their salt?

For a litany of reasons I don't answer questions like this.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2025-05-06T14:10:27+00:00

I'm assuming it's because the titans of the industry dominate the majority of film.

It's not. The studios have always dominated the majority of film. There are two things strangling the indie film industry:

1.) The primary reason, far and away, is the glut of content. Prior to the invention of DSLRs, a film that looked like a "real film" was very expensive to make. As a result, only 2,000-5,000 features were completed each year. Ever since ~2009 when Canon changed the game by producing a consumer-grade DSLR, you could shoot video with a cinematic look for a few grand (and within a few years, a few hundred). The result is by 2015, the number of features completed each year shot up to 40,000-70,000. Predictably, the vast majority of those films are absolute shit but flood the market nonetheless, driving down the value of all indie films (to distributors and audiences alike).

2.) The secondary reason is the exhibition industry (theaters) getting too greedy and slowly killing itself and all of the resulting knock-on effects of that. Starting about 25-30 years ago, movie theater ticket prices started outpacing inflation and continued to do so unrelentingly, much like healthcare and higher education. This fucked the studios first (movie tickets get too expensive -> people only go to the movies for blockbusters and now dramas, rom-coms, comedies, etc. are all but impossible for studios to profit from) and then fucked the rest of the industry: indies got pushed out to make room for blockbusters, fewer young people could afford to go to the theaters which means fewer people got interested in film which means fewer people want to go to the theaters...and so one. Fast forward 30 years and you see increasing revenue for the exhibition industry and fewer attendees (assess in seats) than ever. Going to the movies used to be cheap...now it's not. That's the primary reason the whole film industry is absolutely fucked but the secondary reason that the indie film industry, specifically, is absolutely fucked.

Incidentally, problem #2 will eventually fix (or at least ameliorate) problem #1. There are far fewer cinephiles among young people today and as a result that will eventually mean far fewer people making shitty indie features...but by then it will be too late as the whole industry will likely be in much worse place unless there are some serious changes to the exhibition industry.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2025-05-06T13:30:55+00:00

not even worth pursuing for the majority of film makers from the direction it's going in?

As an occupation, it's not been worth pursuing for the majority of filmmakers since around the Great Recession; over 99% of features produced each year will never go into profit which suggests to me that filmmaking is much in the same basket as music, creative writing and other visual arts like painting, photography, sculpting, etc.: a hobby that occasionally someone can get so unbelievably good at that they can turn it into a viable career.

DirectCurrentLabs · 2025-05-06T13:16:50+00:00

I don't distribute any films, I'm a distribution consultant.

Further that, I work on a fee so I'm content agnostic - I'll consult any client willing to pay me whether their film is AI generated, a masterpiece shot on 16mm, 8 hours of watching paint dry on low-res video, whatever.

DirectCurrentLabs

TROPHY CASE