Linkapalooza - April 21, 2008

Trigger Street was originally some sort of production company formed by Kevin Spacey in 1997 and, quite frankly, I'd never heard of it. So, after 5 years of what I can only assume has been underwhelming success, they founded TriggerStreet.com in January of 2002. Here we are in 2008 and I JUST came across the website... need a bit of help getting the word out there, Kev? Anyhow, I was going to cut and paste a bunch of info from their about us page, but it's a lot of artsy babble. So, is it a good site for horror? I don't know, but scripts are scripts and short films are short films and on this site, you can upload your scripts, short films, books and other stuff, then have people read it, watch it and discuss it. If you're looking for exposure, networking or feedback, go check it out. It may be worth it. I believe there's a bunch of industry professionals involved, you know... besides Spacey.

Quick note, Friday the 13th will be rated R - link at Bloody-Disgusting. Well, thank God. At least it's got that going for it, which is nice... and, by the way, I'm STILL not excited to see it.

Funny that I come by two online film competitions/website film initiatives within a couple days of each other and both are backed by Hollywood professionals. It's just crazy, it's like this internet thing is catching on. Here, I thought it was just a bunch of tubes. Filmaka doesn't have Keyser Soze or K-PAX behind it, but it does have Deepak Nayer, an acclaimed movie producer and Sandy Grushow, the former head of Fox Television Entertainment launching it. What they're trying to do is build a new kind of studio that taps into an aspiring community of moviemakers on the Web to cultivate the next great talents. Similar to Lester Burnham's site, but a lot less artsy fartsy.

Big media slams Martin, FCC on "a la carte" cable issue - link at ars techna. This is just kind of interesting, as they're arguing about the future of cable. Personally, I see positives to both. The 'a la carte' style of programming should, fundamentally, improve the quality of programming by forcing the studios to make products that people will buy, but packaging things up would be cheaper and offer consumers more channels, as well as let lesser known and new shows get air time. You see, if it were 'a la carte', you would be able to pay a premium to see what you want, such as specific sports, movies or big shows. However, other shows that may be fighting for market share may never even get made, as no one would be ordering them. You think that they axe shows without giving them a chance now? I don't know, this is a great debate... My theory is that, eventually, unlimited programming will be available through various providers and it will all be supported through marketing and advertising dollars. We have to move forward as an industry and, if that's the case, I'd say that the 'a la carte' system would work best. Get consumers used to a system where they get what they want, when they want... and have them pay for it as a premium. Then, let it evolve.