Era of Short Film Reborn on the Net

High in the Glendale hills, a scrappy film crew is shooting the pivotal scene of a 6-minute movie called “Iguana Love.”

Digital camera rolling, the lead actress tiptoes into a bedroom and catches the man she covets in bed with an iguana. At first she recoils, but then a smile spreads across her face, and she disrobes to reveal a lizard-skin bra. The iguana, utterly upstaged, scampers away.

“Cut! That’s the shot,” shouts Donna Kuyper, a struggling screenwriter who is counting on two things to jump-start her career: the screen appeal of a reptile and the surging demand for short films on the Internet.

“A year ago I wouldn’t have made this film because there was nowhere to put it,” Kuyper said later, while editing the film on her home computer. “But now it seems every week there’s a new Web site showing these films.”

Not just showing them, but clamoring for them; building businesses around them; showcasing them in film festivals; nominating them for Academy Awards; and, perhaps most significantly, paying for them.

The sites--including Ifilm, Atomfilms, Nibblebox, Pop, iCast and Reelshort, just to name a few--have relatively tiny audiences so far. Their films often sputter as they “stream” through Internet congestion, appearing onscreen in frames the size of a postcard. And it’s unclear whether any of the sites will ever become profitable.

And yet these sites are turning the entertainment industry on its head.

Agents are combing them for new talent. Hollywood moguls are backing them with million-dollar investments. Students at USC, UCLA and other film schools are being offered stock options for projects previously worth little more than a few units of college credit.

Struggling filmmakers are hoping exposure on the Net will be their ticket to the big time. Meanwhile, the very icons they idolize--Steven Spielberg, David Lynch, Tim Burton and others--are themselves directing Internet shorts, largely because they don’t want to be left out of the online buzz.

New Era of Shorts Could Be Brief

For the short film, a form that has been declining in audience and stature for decades, the Net has triggered a startling resurgence. The question is how long it will last.

After all, the frenzy is largely a function of technological pragmatism by entertainment Web sites. Shorts are in vogue again because, until high-speed access spreads and computers converge with televisions, few people are willing to sit at their computer screens for anything long.

“The Internet really has breathed new life into the short format,” said William McDonald, vice chairman for production at the UCLA film school. “But is this just a blip? Someday, when I can access feature films over the Net and play them on my television, will the shorts disappear again?”

Whatever happens, aspiring filmmakers are seizing the moment.

Every weekend, Southern California is teeming with Internet productions--films being shot with rented equipment by volunteer crews working on breakneck schedules and minuscule budgets.

Bry Thomas Sanders, 31, the director of photography on “Iguana Love,” has worked on five short films so far this year, every one of them for the Net. “All of it’s paying damn close to nothing,” said Sanders, a USC film school graduate and aspiring director. “But I’m doing exactly what I want to be doing.”

For Web sites showing short films, submissions are pouring in from all over the world.

Ifilm, a Los Angeles company that was one of the first to begin showing short films on the Net, has received more than 1,500 submissions over the past year, and new ones are arriving at the rate of about 100 a week.

Ifilm will post any film it gets--making it available online 24 hours a day--as long as it’s not pornographic, and has proper copyright and music clearances. Unlike other sites, Ifilm doesn’t pay for shorts. But the submissions keep pouring in anyway, because many filmmakers are happy just to find an audience.

Jennifer Wilke, a 25-year-old student at Northern Michigan University, recently submitted a documentary called “Gymp” about a young man with muscular dystrophy. “It was exciting to put it on the Net,” she said. “I got reviews from people I don’t even know, e-mails from people telling me they found my story enriching.”

Atomfilms, which has received more than 6,500 submissions over the past year, typically pays between $500 and $2,000 for works it acquires. It also gives filmmakers 300 shares of the still privately held company’s stock.

Other sites are going even further to encourage aspiring filmmakers.

Nibblebox.com, a Santa Monica company, is setting up programs on college campuses across the country where it will help students--and not just film students--make movies.

Nibblebox wants proposals, even raw outlines from would-be filmmakers. If an idea is approved, its author will be loaned camera and computer equipment, set up with a production budget and paired with a Hollywood mentor who will help see the project through.

“Don’t you wish you were still in school,” said David Bartis, a former HBO executive who is founder and co-chief executive of Nibblebox. He said the company plans to have up to 50 ideas in development at any given time, and as many as 15 shorts in production. The company hopes to make money through advertisements, but also by licensing ideas and shows to cable channels such as HBO, MTV and Comedy Central. Other film sites hope for similar offline payoffs.

The sudden interest in shorts reverses a long decline in their stature, dating back to 1915, when D.W. Griffith unveiled his 165-minute “The Birth of a Nation,” and made it clear that Hollywood’s future was with feature-length films.

Studios continued to make shorts, and they were still routinely shown in tandem with feature films into the 1960s. But by the 1970s, shorts had been all but abandoned by theaters, forgotten by mainstream audiences and essentially relegated to art houses and film festivals.

But shorts have a window of opportunity now online largely because the technology isn’t ready for anything else. Downloading a 2-hour film would take days for most Internet users. And watching one would probably mean staring at a small screen far from the comfort of the living room couch.

Until those barriers give way, entrepreneurs have turned to shorts because they can be acquired cheaply, delivered swiftly to consumers with PCs hooked up to high-speed lines, and watched in a few idle moments from almost any den, dorm room or cubicle.

Some entrepreneurs believe that even when feature length movies can be delivered over the Net, there will still be growing demand for shorts as people look for quick bursts of entertainment in their increasingly hectic days. Mika Salmi, founder of Atomfilms, believes people will be willing to watch shorts on elevators or in gas stations. His company is exploring wireless delivery systems that will enable consumers to watch shorts from grocery store lines, the waiting room at the dentist’s office, and almost anywhere.

No Profit Yet in Online Film Sites

Entertainment sites have attracted millions of dollars in investments from such heavy hitters as Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen and former Viacom Inc. and Universal Studios executive Frank Biondi, who now manages a $240-million fund.

Flush with cash, many of the sites have gone on acquisition binges, thrown splashy parties and colonized such events as this year’s Sundance and Cannes film festivals.

But it’s unclear how long the online film sites can sustain their spending. None of them are profitable. Most rely heavily on advertising revenue, but their revenues and audience levels so far are tiny. Atomfilms had 472,000 unique visitors in March, according to Media Metrix. Most others didn’t even show up on the firm’s rankings, meaning they failed to attract 200,000 visitors.

The sites’ prospects have grown grimmer in recent months, as Wall Street’s appetite for money-losing dot-com stock offerings has waned. Some sites, such as Pop.com, still haven’t officially launched. One high-profile entertainment site, Den.net, which produced its own short shows, has already folded.

Even major investors such as Biondi expect an eventual shakeout, and, as high-speed Internet access spreads, a gradual move away from shorts.

“If three or four of these sites [survive that transition] it would be terrific,” Biondi said. “And I believe the content of the old media is going to be the predominant content on the Internet.”

Hoping Someone Out There Will Spot Talent

Succeeding in Hollywood has always involved beating long odds. Young filmmakers know that better than anyone. The Net has heightened that competition, but many believe it is making it a bit more meritocratic.

Until now, aspiring filmmakers spent the bulk of their creative energies making movies that few people would ever see. They put their best work on tapes that they sent around Hollywood, just praying that someone of influence would actually pop it into a VCR.

Filmmakers still do that. But now they also send their works to Web sites, where their fate is in the hands of a growing online audience. Their work is sure to be seen by somebody. And if it starts to generate buzz, it will probably be seen by somebody important.

That is what sustains young filmmakers such as Keith Lowry, 29, who spent four months this year holed up in a low-rent office downtown that he converted into a miniature movie set.

Using a digital camera and working alone, he shot a stop-motion animation film frame by frame. It took him a month for every minute of footage. Called “Twice Daily,” the piece is about the secrets and superstitions of two neighbors.

“Hopefully thousands of people will get to see this on the Internet,” Lowry said. “If it’s seen by someone in Alaska just browsing through, that’s fine. If it’s Tim Burton and he wants to do side projects, that’s fantastic.”

Already, there are tantalizing online success stories. The creators of a short called “Sunday’s Game” were awarded a development deal at Fox Television last year immediately after their gruesome comedy--about old ladies who play Russian roulette--debuted on Ifilm.

Another short that became an online sensation last year--a double-edged parody called “George Lucas in Love”--has since been released on videotape. In April, it briefly became the top seller on Amazon.com.

Many Hollywood executives believe that the next generation of star filmmakers will be discovered online. Brian Grazer, a top executive at Imagine Entertainment who is the driving force behind Pop.com, is convinced that the Net is poised to punch holes in Hollywood’s insiders club.

For aspiring filmmakers, “Hollywood can seem like the walled city of Siena--there’s no way to get inside,” Grazer says. “These short film sites are like planks over the walls.”

Meanwhile, those already inside the walls are working on Internet shorts of their own. Burton, the director of “Batman” and other movies, has agreed to create a series of animated shorts for a site called Shockwave.com.

He gets a piece of the company for his work, but says he was mainly drawn by the chance to explore ideas outside the Hollywood system.

“I have ideas that are feature ideas, but there’s a whole cloud of ideas that don’t kind of fit anywhere,” he said. “This medium just seemed perfect. I get the opportunity to do shorts with a character I want to explore, to do something quickly without a lot of meetings.”

In recent months, Burton has been joined by dozens of other major Hollywood players venturing online. David Lynch and the creators of the “South Park” cartoon show have deals with Shockwave. Directors Spielberg and Ron Howard are doing Internet shorts for Pop.com, a site they co-founded.

All of the sites are riding advances in technology that are driving down the cost of making films.

Quality digital video cameras can now be purchased for a few thousand dollars. Editing capabilities that were once the domain of elaborate studios can now be duplicated on personal computers. Apple Macintosh G4s--equipped with software called FinalCutPro--are proliferating faster than piercings among hip young Hollywood filmmakers.

Some fear that filmmaking may be getting too easy, that an unprecedented volume of wretched work is about to be unleashed.

“There’s this attitude that anybody can make a film,” Sanders said. “We’re going to be inundated with a tremendous amount of crap people will have to wade through to find compelling work.”

Others fret that the technology of making films is too far ahead of the technology for displaying them. Jodi Gibson, 32, said she refuses to allow her documentary, which won an award at Sundance this year, to be shown online.

“If you want me to direct a short film for the Internet, I will do it,” Gibson said. “But don’t take this movie that is my heart and my soul and distort it on a Web site.”

Even if Gibson had buckled to dot-com temptation, it’s unclear whether her highbrow film about a breast cancer victim would have found much of a following on a medium that so far favors the gross, the profane and the sexually suggestive.

Adolescents and college students form the largest online audience because they tend to have the time, the inclination and high-speed access. Their influence can be seen on almost every site’s most-watched list.

Atomfilms’ internal ratings records were recently shattered by a series of short shows called “Bikini Bandits” about, to quote the site, “pistol-packin’ hotties who rob, steal and terrorize the landscape while wearing nothing but bikinis.”

Young filmmakers who can supply such hormonally-spiked content are in growing demand.

Eli Roth, a 28-year-old graduate of the film program at New York University, recently got $40,000 from a new site called Z.com to deliver a 5-minute pilot. The stop-motion animation, called “Rotten Fruit,” is about a rock band whose members are pieces of produce.

Roth describes the show as “the Monkees but with fruit. Onstage they play bad music and seem like nice guys. But backstage they beat each other up, shoot up and stuff. People will be so shocked at fruit having sex with groupies and shooting drugs that they’ll have to watch.”

And why not? Americans already buy 1.4 billion movie tickets a year, rent 2.9 billion videotapes and spend an average 1,400 hours per person in front of the television. Surely they can find a few moments to log on and watch “Rotten Fruit.”

Or “Twice Daily.”

Or “Iguana Love.”

Kuyper, the director and financier of that film, said she’d been toying with the idea for years, but decided to turn it into an Internet project after seeing other shorts online last year. “Lightbulbs were definitely going off,” she said.

She found her crew by placing ads in local trade publications. She cast the Iguana on the Net by posting queries in a herpetology newsgroup. The production budget was spartan, consisting mainly of $600 for food, $800 for insurance, $200 in equipment rentals and several hundred more for the few crew members who actually got paid. Most were compensated solely by having another credit for their resumes.

Like most Internet projects, the shooting pace was frenetic. The crew worked from 4 p.m. Friday to 10 p.m. Sunday to produce 2 hours of footage that would be boiled down to a 6-minute movie.

After wrapping up the crucial scene with the actress, the actor and the iguana, the crew members piled into their cars and raced up the Glendale hill to shoot another scene that required a setting sun.

“This is the heart of guerrilla filmmaking,” said director of photography Sanders, who was scheduled to start another Internet shoot a few days later.

“Right now the Internet is so sexy,” he said. “There’s so much demand. Everybody’s films are being bought up. People finally have a venue for their work. I think it’s going to get even better.”

He paused as if surprised by his own optimism, and laughed, “Or potentially worse.”

*

NOT FUNNY

Fewer job openings, episodes ordered and development deals mean competition is fierce among sitcom writers. F1