August 11, 2025 • 51 mins
Episode Summary:
Marc's career is anything but ordinary. Before becoming a powerhouse entertainment attorney at Fox Rothschild LLP, he studied film at the University of Pennsylvania and UCL, made three documentaries—including the Sundance Special Jury Award-winning After Innocence—and helped change legislation in multiple states. In this in-depth conversation, Marc opens up about how he navigated the worlds of law and filmmaking, and the lessons he’s learned from representing clients ranging from Hollywood legends like Joe Pesci to first-time filmmakers breaking out at Venice.
What You’ll Learn in This Episode:
Marc is an entertainment attorney in the 40-member Entertainment & Sports Law Department at Fox Rothschild LLP. A filmmaker, his unique career has spanned Sundance premieres, award-winning documentaries, high-profile distribution deals, and complex cross-border financing arrangements. His clients include top-tier talent, rising stars, and independent financiers shaping the future of content.
Key Links & Resources Mentioned:
Marc's career is anything but ordinary. Before becoming a powerhouse entertainment attorney at Fox Rothschild LLP, he studied film at the University of Pennsylvania and UCL, made three documentaries—including the Sundance Special Jury Award-winning After Innocence—and helped change legislation in multiple states. In this in-depth conversation, Marc opens up about how he navigated the worlds of law and filmmaking, and the lessons he’s learned from representing clients ranging from Hollywood legends like Joe Pesci to first-time filmmakers breaking out at Venice.
What You’ll Learn in This Episode:
- 🎥 Breaking In – How a passion project about the wrongfully convicted became a Sundance hit and changed state laws.
- ⚖ Balancing Careers – Producing films while practicing law at major firms.
- ✍ Why Contracts Matter – The dangers of handshake deals and how to protect your creative work early.
- 🎯 Negotiation Tactics – Why respect, clear communication, and calm articulation win deals in a small industry.
- 🖥 Streaming’s Impact – How Netflix’s early spending spree changed the game, and why Apple’s theatrical push is both exciting and limited.
- 🌍 Global Deals – How to approach cross-border financing, tax credits, and presales in today’s market.
- 💡 Advice for Creatives – What young lawyers, filmmakers, and financiers must understand before jumping in.
- 🔍 Case Studies – Behind-the-scenes legal challenges on The Irishman, The Hunting Ground, The Eagle Huntress, Winter’s Bone, and The Kids Are All Right.
Marc is an entertainment attorney in the 40-member Entertainment & Sports Law Department at Fox Rothschild LLP. A filmmaker, his unique career has spanned Sundance premieres, award-winning documentaries, high-profile distribution deals, and complex cross-border financing arrangements. His clients include top-tier talent, rising stars, and independent financiers shaping the future of content.
Key Links & Resources Mentioned:
- Fox Rothschild LLP – Entertainment Law
- After Innocence (Sundance Special Jury Award)
- Unraveled, The Irishman, Winter’s Bone, The Kids Are All Right
- The Hunting Ground, The Eagle Huntress, Dead Man’s Wire (Venice 2024)
- Use Promo Code "FILMMAKINGSWABY" for all my deals or just click the link:
- 25% Off More Labs
- https://www.morelabs.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 20% Off Strong Coffee Company
- https://strongcoffeecompany.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 15% Off Tussle
- https://www.tusslegear.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 20% Off Eric Javits
- https://ericjavits.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 25% Off Quantum Energy Square
- https://quantumsquares.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 20% Off Long Table
- https://longtablepancakes.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 20% Off HyperNatural
- https://hypernaturalstyle.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 20% Off wearplayground
- https://wearplayground.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 15% Off STAND+
- https://www.standshoes.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 10% Off Molly Bz
- https://mollybz.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
- 41% Off Cozy Earth
- https://cozyearth.com/discount/FILMMAKINGSWABY
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
You are listening to the IFH podcast Network. For more
amazing filmmaking and screenwriting podcasts, just go to ifhpodcastnetwork dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Mark H. Simon is not your typical attorney. A veteran
transactional lawyer, an award winning three time feature documentary filmmaker,
he has built a career at the intersection of legal
position and creative vision. His journey is marked by unique duality,
from producing the award winning documentary After Innocence, a film
(00:35):
that exposed flaws in the justice system and earned him
a spot at the Sundance Film Festival, to serving as
a trusted advisor to some of Hollywood's biggest names. While
his work on landmark projects like Martin Scorsese is the
irishman navigating the legal issues concerning the groundbreaking use of
the aging technology is widely celebrated, his most vital and
(00:59):
often own overlook contribution lies in his mastery of multifaceted
complexities that power the entertainment industry. Here's the architect behind
the deals, the one who understands that the creative vision
is only as strong as its legal and financial framework.
This isn't just about reviewing contracts. It's about structuring development, financing,
(01:20):
and production deals, as well as protecting intellectual property rights
and forging the distribution deals that bring projects to life
on the global stage. On this episode, we dive deep
into his career and his philosophy on negotiation and the
importance of integrity in a cutthroat industry. Yet really for
(01:42):
an insider's look at the deals that shape the industry
and the unseen machinery of the entertainment world and one
of its most respected arpentects, Mark, You've had such a
dynamic career blending law and filmmaking. What drew you to
entertainment law and how did your journey begin?
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I would say I have an unorthodox path into the
film and entertainment law crossover. When I went to law school,
I had had some experience in the film business previously
for the two years between college and law school, and
I had studied film at the University of Pennsylvania and
(02:25):
even in your hometown at UCL. I studied film and
American history at UCL, which was a really really neat
experience to study it across the pond, but American filmmaking
one card. In law school, I knew I was interested
in entertainment and criminal law. What I knew was that
(02:47):
criminal law felt very narrow to me and that the
entertainment field felt very broad. In law school, I worked
for the Innocence Project, which exonerates the wrongfully convicted with
DN eight, which today still remains a big passion project
of mine, and back when I was in law school,
there was very little attention about what happens to these
(03:09):
individuals after they are exonerated. I was graduating law school,
going to a law firm and decided that I wanted
to make a documentary about what happens to the wrongfully
convicted after they're exonerated. And five years later that film
premiered at the Fundamn Film Festival. It was called After Innocent,
(03:31):
It won a special Jury Award, It went on to
be shortlisted for an OSCAR, and it changed legislation in
many states, bringing compensations for the wrongfully convicted. So that
was my entry point to the fact that all of
a sudden, I was an associate practicing entertainment law and
having produced a documentary. And then from there the lawyers
(03:55):
at my firm embraced the fact that I had made
a film instead of you know, being confused and opposing
the fact that this attorney was making a film invited
me to make an other because they weren't trying to
get they were all trying to get their kids into
preschool in Manhattan, which is also like London, quite competitive.
(04:17):
Then the next thing you know, I'm a lawyer and
I've made two documentaries, and then I made a third documentary,
and then all of a sudden, I was an attorney
in the entertainment business with quite a lot of experience
both as a filmmaker and have a lawyer. And here
we are some years later.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Amazing your first entry into the world of film, and
you ended up with a Sundance Jury Award. I mean,
who else has that? That's brilliant.
Speaker 1 (04:42):
It was a fortunate experience. But I can tell you,
in large part why it happened in to any of
the young listeners.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
It's the old hell.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
That people tell you when you're passionate about something and
you're laser focused and you put the time and effort
into it, good thing happened. And for me, nothing else
existed other than bringing attention to the wrongfully convicted. And
you know, through hell or high water, as I say,
I was going to get that film made, and that's
a lot of what it was about. And you know,
(05:15):
it was a privilege to bring attention to the heroic individuals.
Speaker 2 (05:20):
So how did you balance doing that whilst being a lawyer.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Well, by the time we got to the third documentary,
which I skipped for time, but very briefly, the law
firm that I was at called Dryer LLP. The firm
imploded because the head of the firm, the now infamous
name Mark Dreyer, was involved in a PONDI scheme. He
(05:45):
it was his own ponding team. Five days he was
the biggest white collar criminal American history. For me, Off
overtook him five days later. When that film came out,
it was called Unraveled. I owned the Mark under house
arrest from the day he played guilty to the day
he was sentenced. And I directed and produced that one.
(06:08):
Like the second film. When it came out, you know,
the press would day, so what is your next film?
And I would say, I'm not making another film until
I get a wife and a life in no particular order. That, Damien,
is how I balanced that. I at the time did
not have a family, did not have children, and my
life was my two brains. You know, one with the
(06:30):
analytics side representing filmmakers, and the other was making films.
But I consciously and intentionally after the third film hung
up the filmmaker hat and now I just proudly represent
the people in the industry and companies in the industry.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And why exactly is having a wife and having a
family so important for you, especially at that stage in
your life.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
Oh well, there's the funny answer that has a bit
of furiousness to it, and then there's the more profound answer,
the funny answer that has a bit of seriousness to
it for your filmmaker fans out there, And as I
alluded to as it relates to my first film, after Innocence,
(07:15):
when you're a filmmaker, you're all encompassed. Some people might
say there's narcissistic tendency, and I recognized that in myself,
and I just thought I can't continue this. And also
I wasn't willing or didn't believe that I was gonna
(07:35):
take the foot that was on the legal side and
step it over to the full filmmaking side and commit
my life to that. So having that straddle and believing
that I was a probably a better deal maker than
I was a filmmaker that allowed that decision to occur.
The more profound answer is that I felt at that
(07:58):
time it wasn't really the a balanced life, and that
a balance life is giving yourself to others and family
and children, and it's not all just about the work.
And so that allows me to ease into the representation
side of my career. And people sometimes say, do I
miss it making the films? And I'm very comfortable in
(08:22):
my representation life, and clients give me to give notes
on Fizzle, to give notes on deckth to give notes
on and I'm very often involved in the creative process
through them, and I get my fulfillment in that respect.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
It's very great of you to say that, because a
lot of the times filmmakers, especially ones who start out
and have an incredible success, sorry, lose sight of family, friends,
loved ones, potential wife and things like that. But you
seem to be very level headed and were able to
see the important things other than just filmmakings in life.
(08:59):
You've all still worked at several top firms before landing
at Fox. Roth styled what experiences along the way helped
you shape your comment practice.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
The Fox Orrock child I'm at a department that we
have about forty entertainment attorneys, which are a rather large department.
When I first started out, the entertainment attorney group that
I was working with was fairly sparse, and it allowed
me to have a lot of independence and entrepreneurial spirit
to go out and build a practice that was positive.
(09:29):
The negative was I did not have a wealth of
mentors internally, like my associates coming up now have great mentorship.
It's very intentional. So ironically, my best takeaway in my
early years was dealing with my quote unquote adversaries on
the other side of the deals, learning from them, learning
(09:52):
their style, learning how they approached things, and understanding if
there was an area that they sensed or I actually
admitted was a new area, a new issue, navigating with
them the point so something like, well, I'm not familiar
with this issue or this argument that you're making. Can
(10:14):
you articulate it for me? Can you explain to me
of your thought process here? And so I would sum
up my early years as my best mentors being the
individuals that I was negotiating against.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
That's a very interesting way to look at So what
exactly were you learning? Can you tell us one or
two things.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Certainly I would. I think a fundamental philosophical and conceptual
conceptual point that I learned early that absolutely reflect my
practice today is that this is a very small community
and you're not going to win by I don't know
(10:54):
what language we're allowed to use on this podcast, but
you're not going to win in this progression being an asshole.
You're going to winning this profession be respectful of your counterparts,
articulating the issues, explaining your perspective, and explaining why you
think your perspective prevails over their perspective. I found that
(11:16):
again dealing with those adversaries, it was the ones that
approached things respectfully and had thought out their answers and
weren't giving just urf throwways and becoming combatible. Those were
the folks that I wanted to emulate as I grew
in the business and today, whenever there's a frustrating negotiation
(11:36):
of frustrating deal point, I really really try, not always easy,
but really try to win myself in and rather going
to the anger mode, the short mode, the explosive mode,
go to the articulation mode, and really try to explain
why another perspective isn't the best answer. I just did
(11:57):
that via email. I had to Snario where a counterpart
was being very terse and short and essentially not looking
to embrace an issue that I was trying to put
forth for my client and wouldn't park it out, wouldn't
get on the phone, which is another thing that I
had learned back in the day, the importance of conversation
(12:20):
and communication, and so you know, rather than getting into
an email loar, I just bullet pointed out why I
thought their perspective is not accurate and why my perspective
benefits both them. Up now, I haven't gotten their answer yet,
so I'm curious to see if they come around to
my side of thinking, which I sincerely believe is a
(12:41):
win win for both. So that'll be our equal conversation.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
And for those on Familia, what does an entertainment lay
actually do? And what I mean by that is a
lot of people listening our waar, but most are creatives
and they work in television and film or aspired to
a cinematographers right as directors, actors and so forth. But
what do you actually do in layman terms?
Speaker 1 (13:05):
So first I'll give my tip to the creative out there.
Very often I come across very different types and categories
of filmmakers and creatives out there, from the inexperience to
the legendary. I represent a broad spectrum. Often in the years,
I've come across folks that say, you know, we just
(13:26):
don't have the money. You know, we're just starting out,
so we're just doing it on a handshake or on napkin,
And I always say that is not good invest in
that opportunity cost Get a professional to look at that
understanding between you and your partner, because if that thing
(13:48):
that you guys are building together become successful, very often
people with the best of intentions when they look back,
they each have a different understanding of what they agreed to.
So it doesn't have to be complicated. But you know,
agents and lawyers can be very helpful. It's setting forth
and it can be a very basic term sheet one
(14:10):
or two or three pages. What the intentions are of
the parties, who owns the piece of property, who's going
to make the decision making, how are the fees going
to work, how is the back end going to work,
all of the things, so you know, to your audience,
I really really want to emphasize the importance of when
something seems small, it's really still important to get it,
(14:33):
to get it put down on paper and have an understanding. Now,
in terms of what entertainment attorneys do and what I do,
it's a vast ecosystem, So I like break it down
between category. So there's music entertainment attorneys and they're film
and TV. Now I call it really content entertainment attorneys.
I'm on the content side. So if you ask me
(14:55):
a detailed question about the music industry and music royalties,
I'm not going to be a lot of help. It's
like I'm the orthopedist. Don't ask me about the the
guycology question because I'm not expertise. So you have you
have music, and you have content. You have litigators, and
you have transactional attorneys. The litigators are involved in dispute
(15:18):
and or dispute resolution on the transactional side, like me
a deal life. I'm in private practice, so I'm not
working for a studio representing actors and content creators, writers,
directors in helping them get their bills made, their projects sold.
And there's also clear into attorneys. So for your documentarians
(15:41):
out there, my firm, for example, we will pre clear
it's called pre publication will clear that documentary for fair
use and for defamation and all of those issues. But
you know, most to thinkly, I'm someone who helped navigate
creatives while they're trying to develop their properties, buyant their properties,
(16:05):
produce their properties, and then get their projects out into
the world dire exploitation and marketing.
Speaker 2 (16:12):
Could you walk us through a typical negotiation for a
film or TV project.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
Well, there's no typical. First is the cookie cutter independent
model has an original idea, not based on IP. It's
an original script they wrote, so they own it. And
then they're going to go out and independently raise financing
(16:38):
for their film. And they're going to do that maybe
through equity. You know, people who are investing in their business,
which happens to be the production of the film. And
sometimes there can be grants or fiscal sponsors to taking
money that's not recouped bill. They've written their script, they
raised their money, they're now ready to shoot. By the way,
(17:00):
I wish it was this easier. Right in two minutes,
they now have a movie. We will navigate the production.
So everything as simple as the location and appearance releases
and actor agreements. Do you know, the more for bigger films,
the more complicated issues that involve lenders and completion guaring
(17:22):
toward and collection accounts. But at the end of the day,
it's your your writer deals, your directing deals or actor
deals or producing agreements. Everything helped produce it. As then
once it's made and hopefully we're going to Thundance or
we're going to can or we're going to Venef or
even you know, a more modest festival, then that that
(17:44):
the deal navigation, that the distribution navigation, and you know,
we're in a very changing landscape of distribution. But it's
helping to navigate those options that the filmmaker. I don't
let's not use the word options. TH's opportunities that the
filmmaker has. Sometimes it's the golden goose. You know, you're
at a big festival and some of the big buyers
(18:06):
are interested in you. And sometimes it's far more modest.
You're not at those big festivals, and you have to
navigate a type of self release or a digital release
or an educational release. And my team and I are
able to help navigate those choices and make the best
fields for the project, for the financiers and for the filmmaker.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
And your client list includes everyone from Added Baldwin to
Joe Pesky. How do you approach representing such a diverse
group of personalities and needs.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Well, certainly referencing back to the early part of our
conversation and the fact that I come from a filmmaking background,
I have great respect and appreciation for the creative process
for standing out on that ledge, for taking that risk,
for coming up with that original idea, and having the
(19:02):
real advocacy for that client, you know, whether it's a director,
whether it's a writer. I have a client who I'm
going to owe him. I'm gonna say his name because
it's a phenomenal story. I have a writer client named
Austen Colodney whose first feature is going to venice this
for fall. It's called dead Man's Wire and Gus van
(19:26):
Zan directed it. Often prior to this film was literally
cleaning cages at the La Zoo to make ends meet.
So when you have a creative client that is doing
all that he can to realize his creative vision and
then you know, working at the La Zoo, I don't
(19:48):
know how you can't be passionate to represent them and
get the best deal and be a strong advocate. So
whether it's a celebrity or a legendary celebrity like Joe Peshi,
or you know, it's an up and comer, it's like
really in my DNA. And because I've made films, I
just understand the difficulty and challenges and you know, to me,
(20:09):
it's like a privilege to be in the represent representation
game and help these individuals exceed, you know, in the
deal and professionally.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
And you mentioned you've made films. What exactly inspired you
to make documentaries like After Innocence.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
After Innocence, It was certainly the individuals, you know, the
stories of these heroes, I think alter just growing up
and having an understanding of the Holocaust and people being
imprisoned for something they didn't do and being able to
(20:47):
survive that and have the perseverance and the persistence. It
was just something as the young child, always resonated with
me when I learned about the Holocaust, and I just
it was so unfathomed ball that people were put into
these cancer and so you transition that to wrongful conviction
in American prisons, and it's literally, you know, the unimaginable.
(21:10):
There's been films and books about it, the people who
languished for decades or a crime that they didn't commit,
and sometimes the most enous crimes. I felt that it
was my duty to bring a spotlight to these individual
stories and help their journeys. So, you know, it was
(21:31):
less intellectual and more emotional for me to and and
then there I was making a movie. And as I
said earlier, it's that passion and that determination that pushes
those doors open.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
And you've worked on The Irishman, Winter's Bone and the
Kids Up? All right, can you share the behind the
scenes legal complexities or one or two of them at
least involved in bringing those projects to life?
Speaker 1 (21:59):
Sure? I think The Irishman is a good example because
as your fans, hey remember, as your audience may remember,
there's that daging technology that we make the actors you know, younger.
And this was, you know, even though it was just
a handful of years ago, this was before AI was
(22:22):
taking over the conversation where you know, now a lot
of my conversation and my research is about AI perspectively
and leaning into it. There, it was very protective because
if we are giving access to Joe image and likeness
or digital modification. I wanted to ensure the protection of
(22:47):
that data. And that was one, you know, very very
interesting issue on the documentary side, there's always thorny and
interesting issues there. I'm trying to think of what one
lily interesting one would be. It's more of like a
(23:10):
war story, but on the hunting ground that Kirby Dick
directed that dealt with college campus assaults. It was released
by CNN Films. At the time, we were having weekly
calls with the Standard in Practice as group of CNN
because you have a lot of pressure from the universities
(23:32):
about this film that's talking about, you know, assault on
their campuses. So CNN was under a lot of pressure
about how those stories were told, and the filmmakers were
under a lot of pressure to tell their stories unfiltered,
and so that was a very interesting process. Currently, I
(23:55):
you know, I represent Sharmino be Chenoi, who the two
time winning filmmaker from Pakithan who asked her documentary s
directed very successfully Miss Marvel and then got a lot
of studio interest. And this has all been reported so
I can talk about it, including from Lucasfilms and the
(24:15):
film Brilliant for Paramount. So the other interesting part or
another interesting component of my professional life is that crossover.
You know, a filmmaker who crosses over from the documentary
medium to the you know, big budget feature medium, and
that's equally exciting.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Today, I could imagine there's not too many that I've
spoken to that I've done that. So for you to
work to someone like that must have been very, very
exciting for you. I can certainly understand that. And the
Eagle Huntress and the sentence above critically acclaimed what was
your role in those and how do you support filmmakers
beyond just contracts?
Speaker 1 (24:57):
So the Eagle Hunter is an interesting one because I
really packaged that project, which means that I literally saw
that the sivil reel for it. The filmmaker Otto Bell
came to me and he said, Hey, I think I
(25:17):
have a project that's really interesting, you know, will you
take a look, And he sent me the sizzle reel,
which was this young teenage girl from Mongolia going to
capture her eagle and then to train it, the eagle
to be a hunter, and she left the Eagle Hunter
and it was the most captivating fizzle reel I had
(25:39):
ever seen. And I told him and so I helped
bring in the producing team, the executive producing team, and
the financing. And I served in that project as an
executive producer in addition to being a lawyer. So that
you know that film was an extraordinary experience from at Sundance.
(26:00):
It was released by Sony Pictures Classics. You're hoping for
an Oscar nomination, but we didn't make it, and that's
how they pick. You crumbled sometimes, But that was another
another good one.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
And with the Ryanzol streamers and digital platforms, how entertainment
deals evolved over the last.
Speaker 1 (26:18):
Decade, Well they're still evolving, you know. On the positive side,
I repworsent a lot of content creators for a company.
This is a very American company, but it called Friday
Beers and it's like, instead of college humor, it posts
(26:40):
college humor. And the way that deal structure works is
it's almost like old Hollywood. So the company engages their
their talent, both writers and on air and on camera
talent in like employee and agreements like the way the
old studios just and would work. And because of the
(27:02):
rise of digital explication, it is short form content and
it's very successful and the company's growing and my clients
are getting a lot of acclaim and recognition, and then
we their agent and the attorneys are able to over
these individuals and the more traditional content and they're writing
(27:25):
for long form epathodic and for features, and they're getting
branding opportunities. So you know, something like that certainly did
not exist a decade ago, and it's exciting. And when
I talk about my broad practice, that's another example. So
you know, you go from a legendary Starlight Joe Keshi
to you know, young creator that are really inventing it,
(27:48):
doing it on their own on short form visual platforms,
and the crossing over to traditional that's very interested. On
the from my perspective, the negative side, six years ago,
like you know, right around right before the pandemic and
then certainly through the pandemic, people were talking about the
(28:10):
golden era of documentary and everything was great for independent
cinema and Netflix came along and was paying huge amounts
of money to the filmmakers and back ends were gone
and people were looking the other way. And for me,
it was like the pied piper and everyone just following
(28:30):
and going right off the pier. Because if we look
in the very short period, I guess that's six years
ago or seven years ago. Right right around then to now,
theatrical has sort of collapsed and digital streamers are now
paying traditional distributors a lot less money for that pay
(28:53):
one window. You know, distributors used to rely on home video,
and then it was the pay one video, the pay
one window, which is that cable or streaming platform that
can pay a big license fee. Now those license fees
are lower, and it's just one or two of the
films that have to be a unicorn to get a
big significant payment. And now Netflix, which was paying all
(29:15):
of that money to capture the digital footprint, failed back
and they're not paying these big amounts, and they're being
far more selective and the content is far more moder rated.
It's like, it's general, it's for the middle, it's not
(29:36):
taking big swings. So you know, it's concerning, and it
has been concerning, and the pendulum hasn't swung back totally
yet and right now everyone in our industry is trying
to find their footing and waiting for the pendulum to
switch and them are and you know, I'll stop there,
(29:58):
but so digital streaming has completely changed the ecosystem.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
Mark, how do you feel about Apple taking the transition
from a streaming platform to going more towards theatrical in
the future.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
So right now, you know, we've talked about from the
challenges in the marketplace and the collapse or the reduction
in the theatrical marketplace. So as someone who is a
professional in this business, and certainly please and happy to
(30:34):
see Apple leaning into its theatrical business, you know, and
it had at the myths and then it regrouped and
it came out with F one, which by all accounts
is a significant success or Apple and it and it
touches on Apple's vertical integration ambitions. It it reflects on
(30:57):
apple broad footprint in terms of its brand. Right the film,
this film shows Apple products in it's it The film
utilizes Apple products to be got in terms of their cameras,
and the film feels sleek, if field on brand. And
(31:23):
in so doing, they took a big swing because if
it didn't work, this would not be good for their
expansion plans. So I'm very happy to see it because
it's putting it's putting energy into theatrical. But on the
foot side, if you hear me being a little hesitant,
(31:44):
it's because at the end of the day, this is
pushing forward what we're seeing in theatrical, which is the
event sized theatrical, which is the imax theatrical. It's about
the spectacle. It's not about dare I say, cinema. Now,
there there can be some tailwinds that it has to be.
(32:09):
Let's say, like, let's be not let's be optimistic. There
has to be tailwinds for the larger cinematic community and
filmmakers if if a tech company like Apple really leans
into the theatrical experience. But Apple is going to be opportunistic, right,
They don't currently have their own distribution arm they're using
(32:34):
third parties to release their film. That's not going to
change over day, you know, overnight. But what I do
like seeing is it's a tech company that's leaning into
theatrical and making it important. And it's and you know,
Netflix to me respectfully feel you know, it's like Walmart.
You know, it's just like middle of the road. And
(32:56):
I think, you know, Apple is trying to need more
like aname and market for you know, some tell me
what that higher brand is and and we're seeing it
in the visual, we're seeing it in the cinema and
we're seeing it with their products. So it's the positive.
It's definitely a positive, and I want to see more
of it, But it doesn't change the landscape for independent
(33:17):
film and independent filmmakers.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
Can you tell us why do you think Apple have
done there and why do you think Netflix is so
lukem at the moment?
Speaker 1 (33:26):
Well, you know, Apple's in an interest in position. If
we kind of zoom out right, we have the legacy
studios whose entire economic structure is based on storytelling. Right here.
A legacy studio, all you do is make doled and content,
(33:48):
and you have an entire ecosystem to do that which
is built under studio and your sometimes your theme parks
and your theatrical and then you're putting it out into
the world. You know, Netflix is not that it's not
a legacy studio. It's its own sort of tech company.
(34:08):
But it's in a very narrow path. It is a platform,
and it's currently not trying to be anything more than
a platform, and it's trying to appeal to the math.
Is add this storytelling platform? Okay, Well, in the middle
of those two things is Apple. And Apple is a
(34:29):
robust tech company that does a lot more than storyteller. Right,
it's in the hardware business, it's in the service business.
It has a lot of ways to be very successful
and has done so. But at the end of the day,
it's technological basis is also in a way storytelling. Music
(34:52):
is storytelling, and then you know five or six years ago,
Apple TV Plus is storytelling. But it doesn't have the
life that the Legacy Studios has, It doesn't have the
library that Netflix has built in a short amount of time.
So I think it's trying to find its footing by
saying we are a tip, We're a very identity based brand.
(35:16):
We are premium, we're slick, we are a higher class.
So if it can then create opportunistic content that serve
that brand, that serves that vertical integration that brings audiences
in to their streaming platform, then that's the success story.
(35:38):
And at the end of the day, Tim Cooks talked
about they're in the storytelling business, and right now we're
in a culture of storytelling, aren't we. So Apple is
leaning into that. I do think it's a positive. But
this is working at a very high level. This is
premium and I can I just hope that we will
get tailwinds across the industry. But you know, at the
(36:00):
end of the day, Apple not in the slate model.
You know, this is not going to be a volume
business anytime scene. It's opportunistic, but it is driving people
at the theaters. From an event heids perspective, Are.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
There any major legal trends or issues that filmmakers should
be paying attention to right now?
Speaker 1 (36:21):
I mean, certainly, the conversation about around back end for
the last few years has been significant, and we're seeing
different approaches and we're seeing different changes to it. It's
everything from a back end buyout, which can happen with
the streamers, like most recently, I did a feature deal
(36:44):
at Apple and they did, meaning there's a price, the
back end pool will participate in it, and regardless of
the success or lack of success, that's how it's going
to work for feature. There's a point system also even
at Apple, which was not unique to Apple, but there's
(37:07):
a point system where and it's more atcheing to episodic
right now, where the back end is based on how
long how many seasons the project stays on Apple, and
then if it stays on a very long time, there's
like another legacy pool and back ends at all of
the streamers are just everyone's trying to the reps, the
(37:31):
deal makers on the filmmakers side are trying to push
for something, and we're trying to find metric that makes
sense that are not arbitrary. You know, when we had
box office bonuses, that was very objectives. The film either
reached that box office number or it did not. Now
(37:51):
is it based on toscriber growth? Is it based on
hours viewed? How long does a viewer have to watch?
With all of these issues and playing out, and you know,
I'm always a believer in having mutual SIXCEPTH opportunities. You know,
if a project does well, the creators should be incentivized
(38:14):
to do their best work to make it a strong project,
et cetera. And that over the last you know, five
or six years, as eroded considerably and the theatrical markets
are rooted considerably, and you know that is not a
positive trend.
Speaker 2 (38:30):
Given so much brilliant and great advice on this podcast
so far, it's amazing learning from you and hearing about
your own stories as well. As a filmmaker. You've spoken
at major law schools and universities. So what do you
tell young lawyers or creatives trying to break into entertainment.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
You know, I get those calls a lot, and I
try to have them focused on, you know, a topic
that we've brought up a few times on where their
passion is. So sometimes get a call from someone in
law school and they say they want to be an
entertainment attorney, and I say on the music side or
on the film side, and they say, you know that,
(39:09):
Then the answer might be I'm not sure. I like
number one. It doesn't work that way. If I go
back to the orthopedics kind of college technology example, you
gotta pick one. You know, I'm going to be an
obscutrician kind then an orthopedis So you gotta you have
(39:31):
to be totally passionate about it. You have to understand
the industry, read the trades, and listen to podcasts. You
have to talk to people in the industry and really
mess yourself in that space to become sort of an
expert about it and really understand it. You know, that's
(39:52):
where it begins. On the on the filmmaker's side. You
have to be doing it for the right reasons. You
have to understand the challenges and it's about you know
what separates the really good creators from the others, you know,
from from the pack, so to speak. It's about that
(40:13):
unique voice, it's about that unique approach, and it's about
just like to be successful in any industry, it's about
putting in the reps. So you have to be doing
that work as a filmmaker, as a writer, as an actor.
You know, the great new thing is social media and
the short form that is available now through social media.
(40:37):
So if you're a creator, you can break in through these,
you know, previously unconventional channels. That that's the positive and
you can be your own entrepreneur. That's also a positive right.
You can build a following audience on social media. At
the very positive trendom, we're going to continue to see
(40:59):
how social media and workforum content and being your own
boss and getting your own brand endorsements and building your
own audience and building your own channel. How does that
transition into more traditional and mainstream compat That will be
super interesting.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
And one of the trends that has happened throughout the
history of film, I think, especially for some of the
people listening to this podcast, is trying to get funded,
trying to get a film funded as best as possible,
But how do you approach working with finances who are
new to the entertainment industry but bring capital from other industries.
Speaker 1 (41:37):
Super interesting in that regard, and I believe this anecdote
is emblematic of what's happening in the industry ten years ago,
twelve years ago, eight years ago, I was focusing on
representing a lot of independent financiers. But we just talked
about how like netflicking in and everything was being shut
(41:59):
up in the streamer took over to the independent film
financing model really dissipated, and then all of.
Speaker 3 (42:06):
A sudden in the last six to nine months, not
even through intention, but through like incoming referrals and intri
all of a sudden, I'm representing more independent financiers.
Speaker 1 (42:19):
And why is that? I think that's because when one
door shuts, meaning the streamers aren't just throwing money at
content and acquiring, another door opens, and that that is
a bit of a pendulum. And I think we're going
back to an independent financing model and financiers are back,
and when or growing back. It's not black and white,
(42:44):
But when I speak to independent financiers first and foremost,
again a similar theme that's come up in this podcast.
I talk about doing it for the right reasons, being
passionate about it, wanting to support, wanting to support creators,
if you're not there to support careers. And it depends
like what is your financial capacity. You know, it's very
(43:07):
hard to be a financier in this industry if you
do not have significant capital. I mean, that's just the reality.
If you have significant capital, we can be really strategic
about what kind of projects you're going to make, how
you're going to make them. One of the have a
client right now that's doing something really interesting, which is
(43:28):
and this has been talked about over the last fall
fifteen years and hasn't sixteen and the independent financing model
for episodic television hind or screening, and we see in
it coming ways where it hasn't ever really attached well.
Now with Volume Capture VR, I have one client that
is fully leaning into independently financing and producing an episodic
(43:53):
serials and the licensing it to the different buyers all
over the world. So what's your level sophistication, what's your
level of capacity, and how do you want to approach it?
And depending on that, I talk about the ability to lose,
right you have to have the wherewithal to lose the money.
You can't go into this thinking that it's going to
(44:14):
be a win win and that's going to all these
sunshine and rainbows. But you can have a major impact
right now, especially independent financiers can have a major, major
impact because money fuel, you know, economic fuel is needed
to support creators. Right now. It is a tough time.
Speaker 2 (44:34):
Incredibly tough, that's for sure. I can feel it. I
am feeling that I should say sorry, but you're clearly
a go to entertainment attorney for complex financing and distribution deals.
When did you first start working on cross border transactions?
Speaker 1 (44:49):
A long time ago? Because it's just the nature, you know,
I mentioned Ermine, who's from Pakistan. We have several international clients, Scandinavia, Brazil,
so it's just sort of a natural outgrowth as you
grow your practice. And again it's a necessity you have
to be able to as both as a funding theories
(45:12):
a gillmaker. You need to be able to be expanse
those and so you know, that's just a component of
the business. And I go to can every year. I
go to Toronto, you know, to understand the international marketplace.
Speaker 2 (45:24):
Was there a project early on that really tested your
understanding of international finance and tax law.
Speaker 1 (45:31):
Well, when it comes to tax law, I don't come
to me. I have tax partners that I consult with
on the international tact implications. In terms of the deals,
you know, they're just they can be complex that they
can also be straightforward. So I don't have a deal
to you know, to reference and say, like, you know,
here's a story that made it quite compelling. I would
(45:53):
just point to several deals in Canada that take advantage
of the Canadian tax credit. There's a client of mine,
Sonya O'Hara right now, who's in genre director, and you know,
we're able to tap into territories in Canada where there's literally,
in this case, a one million dollar grant that's non
(46:14):
recoupable that bring production to Canada. You know, those opportunities
aren't present in the United States. And again, it's just
about being able to fitt and handle those deals and
understand how they work, and having filmmakers be able to
lean into that.
Speaker 2 (46:34):
And we've previously spoken about how things have changed in
terms of distribution and the filmmaking industry as a whole.
But in your experience, how important is pre sales in
secure in finance today compared to ten or fifteen years ago.
Speaker 1 (46:48):
We've ran on how the package is being put together.
I would say now in the last year it's sort
of reverted back to what it was fifteen years ago,
where the models are prevalent again and they're necessary or
put together film projects, Whereas in that period three years
ago to eight years ago and everything is just being
(47:09):
set up, and you know, Netflix and buyers are just
throwing money at it to get films made. It became
I really wouldn't have been I would not have wanted
to be a foreign sales agent at that time. But
I feel like now that pendulum is swinging back to
that model, you know, where you have a foreign sales agent,
you get Askimich, you get a lender, then you get
a little bit of equity, and then you have financed
(47:31):
the gap and the pre sales.
Speaker 2 (47:33):
Okay. And a lot of people listening to the podcast
our producers early in their career. If you were advising
a first time producer, for example, today, what's the one
thing they must understand about cross border financing before they
take a dollar or foreign investment.
Speaker 1 (47:49):
They should be working with producers from the local region
who understand what those regents have to offer and understand
whether the region those foreign regions that they're looking at
the crew that lends itself to the tax credit. In
other words, if there's some very beneficial tax credit but
(48:13):
that local area doesn't have the crew to support it,
then all that tax credit savings is going to flying
people and crew to that area, and that's not worth it.
Speaker 2 (48:22):
Yes, that makes sense, because you're just bringing in people
from abroad when you could what were the people there,
and all the money going in a place where it
might not be necessarily best spent in that In that way,
and your job is very full, very very good. What's
someone rewarding part of your job and what's the most misunderstood.
Speaker 1 (48:43):
Currently, The most rewarding part is find you know, helping
my clients find success on a deal and seeing a
phenomenal project come to fruition. You know, there's no doubt
about that, and it happens, and it's worrying, you know.
The challenge is dealing with volume, number of emails and
(49:07):
the time pressure on your multiple deals happening, and being
response to being a lawyer is a sort of a
twenty four to seven job in terms of responsiveness and fielding.
Speaker 2 (49:20):
Yeah, deal well, And one of the things that a
lot of the filmmakers on this podcast also struggle with,
and I'm imagining you may have heard this before, some
of the technical and legal hurdles that happen when filmmakers
are trying to make the documentaries or narrative films. So
beyond the legal documents, there are often technical requirements for delivery,
(49:44):
things like master files, QC reports and captioning. Do you
find these technical details often cause delays? And if they do,
how much of a problem is it for you?
Speaker 1 (49:55):
The day that, even though I've mentioned your films, which
sets me apart for most attorney, I deal so little
with technical delivery and try so hard not to keep
up with technical advances and or delivery itself. Just I
find that, you know, I just talked about the volumes,
like I don't want to get into that and let
(50:17):
the producer do it. And he said that, of course,
if you're unable to deliver a film correctly, it's gonna
set you back. So the young filmmakers out there, you
definitely have to your data and your content properly managed
and stored it and organized, or you're gonna have a
nightmare on the other end.
Speaker 2 (50:38):
Too true, Too true, I can't disagree with that one
nightmare at the other end. And lastly, if you had
to sum up your philosophy on law and storytelling in
one sentence, what would it be.
Speaker 1 (50:47):
Oh, I had a law school professor who had this
great little line factor. It was three p's, and I'm
forgetting one of the piece, maybe your audience consoling. But
it was practiced with passion, provision, and another P I'll
say persistence. Practice with precision, passion, and persistence. I think
(51:10):
got both law and creation right.
Speaker 2 (51:14):
I like it, I really do. Mark, thanks so much
for coming on the podcast. I really appreciate you taking
the time to talk to me. I've learned a lot.
I know the listeners have learned a lot too. And
it's always amazing to talk to someone who's a filmmaker
and an attorney, because genuinely, a lot of the times
people don't think attorneys would make films or do make films.
(51:36):
So it's a special kind of person that can do both.
And I hope you would make a film again one
day that we can all go and watch and see
You are listening to the IFH podcast Network. For more
amazing filmmaking and screenwriting podcasts, just go to ifhpodcastnetwork dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Mark H. Simon is not your typical attorney. A veteran
transactional lawyer, an award winning three time feature documentary filmmaker,
he has built a career at the intersection of legal
position and creative vision. His journey is marked by unique duality,
from producing the award winning documentary After Innocence, a film
(00:35):
that exposed flaws in the justice system and earned him
a spot at the Sundance Film Festival, to serving as
a trusted advisor to some of Hollywood's biggest names. While
his work on landmark projects like Martin Scorsese is the
irishman navigating the legal issues concerning the groundbreaking use of
the aging technology is widely celebrated, his most vital and
(00:59):
often own overlook contribution lies in his mastery of multifaceted
complexities that power the entertainment industry. Here's the architect behind
the deals, the one who understands that the creative vision
is only as strong as its legal and financial framework.
This isn't just about reviewing contracts. It's about structuring development, financing,
(01:20):
and production deals, as well as protecting intellectual property rights
and forging the distribution deals that bring projects to life
on the global stage. On this episode, we dive deep
into his career and his philosophy on negotiation and the
importance of integrity in a cutthroat industry. Yet really for
(01:42):
an insider's look at the deals that shape the industry
and the unseen machinery of the entertainment world and one
of its most respected arpentects, Mark, You've had such a
dynamic career blending law and filmmaking. What drew you to
entertainment law and how did your journey begin?
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I would say I have an unorthodox path into the
film and entertainment law crossover. When I went to law school,
I had had some experience in the film business previously
for the two years between college and law school, and
I had studied film at the University of Pennsylvania and
(02:25):
even in your hometown at UCL. I studied film and
American history at UCL, which was a really really neat
experience to study it across the pond, but American filmmaking
one card. In law school, I knew I was interested
in entertainment and criminal law. What I knew was that
(02:47):
criminal law felt very narrow to me and that the
entertainment field felt very broad. In law school, I worked
for the Innocence Project, which exonerates the wrongfully convicted with
DN eight, which today still remains a big passion project
of mine, and back when I was in law school,
there was very little attention about what happens to these
(03:09):
individuals after they are exonerated. I was graduating law school,
going to a law firm and decided that I wanted
to make a documentary about what happens to the wrongfully
convicted after they're exonerated. And five years later that film
premiered at the Fundamn Film Festival. It was called After Innocent,
(03:31):
It won a special Jury Award, It went on to
be shortlisted for an OSCAR, and it changed legislation in
many states, bringing compensations for the wrongfully convicted. So that
was my entry point to the fact that all of
a sudden, I was an associate practicing entertainment law and
having produced a documentary. And then from there the lawyers
(03:55):
at my firm embraced the fact that I had made
a film instead of you know, being confused and opposing
the fact that this attorney was making a film invited
me to make an other because they weren't trying to
get they were all trying to get their kids into
preschool in Manhattan, which is also like London, quite competitive.
(04:17):
Then the next thing you know, I'm a lawyer and
I've made two documentaries, and then I made a third documentary,
and then all of a sudden, I was an attorney
in the entertainment business with quite a lot of experience
both as a filmmaker and have a lawyer. And here
we are some years later.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Amazing your first entry into the world of film, and
you ended up with a Sundance Jury Award. I mean,
who else has that? That's brilliant.
Speaker 1 (04:42):
It was a fortunate experience. But I can tell you,
in large part why it happened in to any of
the young listeners.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
It's the old hell.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
That people tell you when you're passionate about something and
you're laser focused and you put the time and effort
into it, good thing happened. And for me, nothing else
existed other than bringing attention to the wrongfully convicted. And
you know, through hell or high water, as I say,
I was going to get that film made, and that's
a lot of what it was about. And you know,
(05:15):
it was a privilege to bring attention to the heroic individuals.
Speaker 2 (05:20):
So how did you balance doing that whilst being a lawyer.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Well, by the time we got to the third documentary,
which I skipped for time, but very briefly, the law
firm that I was at called Dryer LLP. The firm
imploded because the head of the firm, the now infamous
name Mark Dreyer, was involved in a PONDI scheme. He
(05:45):
it was his own ponding team. Five days he was
the biggest white collar criminal American history. For me, Off
overtook him five days later. When that film came out,
it was called Unraveled. I owned the Mark under house
arrest from the day he played guilty to the day
he was sentenced. And I directed and produced that one.
(06:08):
Like the second film. When it came out, you know,
the press would day, so what is your next film?
And I would say, I'm not making another film until
I get a wife and a life in no particular order. That, Damien,
is how I balanced that. I at the time did
not have a family, did not have children, and my
life was my two brains. You know, one with the
(06:30):
analytics side representing filmmakers, and the other was making films.
But I consciously and intentionally after the third film hung
up the filmmaker hat and now I just proudly represent
the people in the industry and companies in the industry.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And why exactly is having a wife and having a
family so important for you, especially at that stage in
your life.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
Oh well, there's the funny answer that has a bit
of furiousness to it, and then there's the more profound answer,
the funny answer that has a bit of seriousness to
it for your filmmaker fans out there, And as I
alluded to as it relates to my first film, after Innocence,
(07:15):
when you're a filmmaker, you're all encompassed. Some people might
say there's narcissistic tendency, and I recognized that in myself,
and I just thought I can't continue this. And also
I wasn't willing or didn't believe that I was gonna
(07:35):
take the foot that was on the legal side and
step it over to the full filmmaking side and commit
my life to that. So having that straddle and believing
that I was a probably a better deal maker than
I was a filmmaker that allowed that decision to occur.
The more profound answer is that I felt at that
(07:58):
time it wasn't really the a balanced life, and that
a balance life is giving yourself to others and family
and children, and it's not all just about the work.
And so that allows me to ease into the representation
side of my career. And people sometimes say, do I
miss it making the films? And I'm very comfortable in
(08:22):
my representation life, and clients give me to give notes
on Fizzle, to give notes on deckth to give notes
on and I'm very often involved in the creative process
through them, and I get my fulfillment in that respect.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
It's very great of you to say that, because a
lot of the times filmmakers, especially ones who start out
and have an incredible success, sorry, lose sight of family, friends,
loved ones, potential wife and things like that. But you
seem to be very level headed and were able to
see the important things other than just filmmakings in life.
(08:59):
You've all still worked at several top firms before landing
at Fox. Roth styled what experiences along the way helped
you shape your comment practice.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
The Fox Orrock child I'm at a department that we
have about forty entertainment attorneys, which are a rather large department.
When I first started out, the entertainment attorney group that
I was working with was fairly sparse, and it allowed
me to have a lot of independence and entrepreneurial spirit
to go out and build a practice that was positive.
(09:29):
The negative was I did not have a wealth of
mentors internally, like my associates coming up now have great mentorship.
It's very intentional. So ironically, my best takeaway in my
early years was dealing with my quote unquote adversaries on
the other side of the deals, learning from them, learning
(09:52):
their style, learning how they approached things, and understanding if
there was an area that they sensed or I actually
admitted was a new area, a new issue, navigating with
them the point so something like, well, I'm not familiar
with this issue or this argument that you're making. Can
(10:14):
you articulate it for me? Can you explain to me
of your thought process here? And so I would sum
up my early years as my best mentors being the
individuals that I was negotiating against.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
That's a very interesting way to look at So what
exactly were you learning? Can you tell us one or
two things.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Certainly I would. I think a fundamental philosophical and conceptual
conceptual point that I learned early that absolutely reflect my
practice today is that this is a very small community
and you're not going to win by I don't know
(10:54):
what language we're allowed to use on this podcast, but
you're not going to win in this progression being an asshole.
You're going to winning this profession be respectful of your counterparts,
articulating the issues, explaining your perspective, and explaining why you
think your perspective prevails over their perspective. I found that
(11:16):
again dealing with those adversaries, it was the ones that
approached things respectfully and had thought out their answers and
weren't giving just urf throwways and becoming combatible. Those were
the folks that I wanted to emulate as I grew
in the business and today, whenever there's a frustrating negotiation
(11:36):
of frustrating deal point, I really really try, not always easy,
but really try to win myself in and rather going
to the anger mode, the short mode, the explosive mode,
go to the articulation mode, and really try to explain
why another perspective isn't the best answer. I just did
(11:57):
that via email. I had to Snario where a counterpart
was being very terse and short and essentially not looking
to embrace an issue that I was trying to put
forth for my client and wouldn't park it out, wouldn't
get on the phone, which is another thing that I
had learned back in the day, the importance of conversation
(12:20):
and communication, and so you know, rather than getting into
an email loar, I just bullet pointed out why I
thought their perspective is not accurate and why my perspective
benefits both them. Up now, I haven't gotten their answer yet,
so I'm curious to see if they come around to
my side of thinking, which I sincerely believe is a
(12:41):
win win for both. So that'll be our equal conversation.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
And for those on Familia, what does an entertainment lay
actually do? And what I mean by that is a
lot of people listening our waar, but most are creatives
and they work in television and film or aspired to
a cinematographers right as directors, actors and so forth. But
what do you actually do in layman terms?
Speaker 1 (13:05):
So first I'll give my tip to the creative out there.
Very often I come across very different types and categories
of filmmakers and creatives out there, from the inexperience to
the legendary. I represent a broad spectrum. Often in the years,
I've come across folks that say, you know, we just
(13:26):
don't have the money. You know, we're just starting out,
so we're just doing it on a handshake or on napkin,
And I always say that is not good invest in
that opportunity cost Get a professional to look at that
understanding between you and your partner, because if that thing
(13:48):
that you guys are building together become successful, very often
people with the best of intentions when they look back,
they each have a different understanding of what they agreed to.
So it doesn't have to be complicated. But you know,
agents and lawyers can be very helpful. It's setting forth
and it can be a very basic term sheet one
(14:10):
or two or three pages. What the intentions are of
the parties, who owns the piece of property, who's going
to make the decision making, how are the fees going
to work, how is the back end going to work,
all of the things, so you know, to your audience,
I really really want to emphasize the importance of when
something seems small, it's really still important to get it,
(14:33):
to get it put down on paper and have an understanding. Now,
in terms of what entertainment attorneys do and what I do,
it's a vast ecosystem, So I like break it down
between category. So there's music entertainment attorneys and they're film
and TV. Now I call it really content entertainment attorneys.
I'm on the content side. So if you ask me
(14:55):
a detailed question about the music industry and music royalties,
I'm not going to be a lot of help. It's
like I'm the orthopedist. Don't ask me about the the
guycology question because I'm not expertise. So you have you
have music, and you have content. You have litigators, and
you have transactional attorneys. The litigators are involved in dispute
(15:18):
and or dispute resolution on the transactional side, like me
a deal life. I'm in private practice, so I'm not
working for a studio representing actors and content creators, writers,
directors in helping them get their bills made, their projects sold.
And there's also clear into attorneys. So for your documentarians
(15:41):
out there, my firm, for example, we will pre clear
it's called pre publication will clear that documentary for fair
use and for defamation and all of those issues. But
you know, most to thinkly, I'm someone who helped navigate
creatives while they're trying to develop their properties, buyant their properties,
(16:05):
produce their properties, and then get their projects out into
the world dire exploitation and marketing.
Speaker 2 (16:12):
Could you walk us through a typical negotiation for a
film or TV project.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
Well, there's no typical. First is the cookie cutter independent
model has an original idea, not based on IP. It's
an original script they wrote, so they own it. And
then they're going to go out and independently raise financing
(16:38):
for their film. And they're going to do that maybe
through equity. You know, people who are investing in their business,
which happens to be the production of the film. And
sometimes there can be grants or fiscal sponsors to taking
money that's not recouped bill. They've written their script, they
raised their money, they're now ready to shoot. By the way,
(17:00):
I wish it was this easier. Right in two minutes,
they now have a movie. We will navigate the production.
So everything as simple as the location and appearance releases
and actor agreements. Do you know, the more for bigger films,
the more complicated issues that involve lenders and completion guaring
(17:22):
toward and collection accounts. But at the end of the day,
it's your your writer deals, your directing deals or actor
deals or producing agreements. Everything helped produce it. As then
once it's made and hopefully we're going to Thundance or
we're going to can or we're going to Venef or
even you know, a more modest festival, then that that
(17:44):
the deal navigation, that the distribution navigation, and you know,
we're in a very changing landscape of distribution. But it's
helping to navigate those options that the filmmaker. I don't
let's not use the word options. TH's opportunities that the
filmmaker has. Sometimes it's the golden goose. You know, you're
at a big festival and some of the big buyers
(18:06):
are interested in you. And sometimes it's far more modest.
You're not at those big festivals, and you have to
navigate a type of self release or a digital release
or an educational release. And my team and I are
able to help navigate those choices and make the best
fields for the project, for the financiers and for the filmmaker.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
And your client list includes everyone from Added Baldwin to
Joe Pesky. How do you approach representing such a diverse
group of personalities and needs.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Well, certainly referencing back to the early part of our
conversation and the fact that I come from a filmmaking background,
I have great respect and appreciation for the creative process
for standing out on that ledge, for taking that risk,
for coming up with that original idea, and having the
(19:02):
real advocacy for that client, you know, whether it's a director,
whether it's a writer. I have a client who I'm
going to owe him. I'm gonna say his name because
it's a phenomenal story. I have a writer client named
Austen Colodney whose first feature is going to venice this
for fall. It's called dead Man's Wire and Gus van
(19:26):
Zan directed it. Often prior to this film was literally
cleaning cages at the La Zoo to make ends meet.
So when you have a creative client that is doing
all that he can to realize his creative vision and
then you know, working at the La Zoo, I don't
(19:48):
know how you can't be passionate to represent them and
get the best deal and be a strong advocate. So
whether it's a celebrity or a legendary celebrity like Joe Peshi,
or you know, it's an up and comer, it's like
really in my DNA. And because I've made films, I
just understand the difficulty and challenges and you know, to me,
(20:09):
it's like a privilege to be in the represent representation
game and help these individuals exceed, you know, in the
deal and professionally.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
And you mentioned you've made films. What exactly inspired you
to make documentaries like After Innocence.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
After Innocence, It was certainly the individuals, you know, the
stories of these heroes, I think alter just growing up
and having an understanding of the Holocaust and people being
imprisoned for something they didn't do and being able to
(20:47):
survive that and have the perseverance and the persistence. It
was just something as the young child, always resonated with
me when I learned about the Holocaust, and I just
it was so unfathomed ball that people were put into
these cancer and so you transition that to wrongful conviction
in American prisons, and it's literally, you know, the unimaginable.
(21:10):
There's been films and books about it, the people who
languished for decades or a crime that they didn't commit,
and sometimes the most enous crimes. I felt that it
was my duty to bring a spotlight to these individual
stories and help their journeys. So, you know, it was
(21:31):
less intellectual and more emotional for me to and and
then there I was making a movie. And as I
said earlier, it's that passion and that determination that pushes
those doors open.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
And you've worked on The Irishman, Winter's Bone and the
Kids Up? All right, can you share the behind the
scenes legal complexities or one or two of them at
least involved in bringing those projects to life?
Speaker 1 (21:59):
Sure? I think The Irishman is a good example because
as your fans, hey remember, as your audience may remember,
there's that daging technology that we make the actors you know, younger.
And this was, you know, even though it was just
a handful of years ago, this was before AI was
(22:22):
taking over the conversation where you know, now a lot
of my conversation and my research is about AI perspectively
and leaning into it. There, it was very protective because
if we are giving access to Joe image and likeness
or digital modification. I wanted to ensure the protection of
(22:47):
that data. And that was one, you know, very very
interesting issue on the documentary side, there's always thorny and
interesting issues there. I'm trying to think of what one
lily interesting one would be. It's more of like a
(23:10):
war story, but on the hunting ground that Kirby Dick
directed that dealt with college campus assaults. It was released
by CNN Films. At the time, we were having weekly
calls with the Standard in Practice as group of CNN
because you have a lot of pressure from the universities
(23:32):
about this film that's talking about, you know, assault on
their campuses. So CNN was under a lot of pressure
about how those stories were told, and the filmmakers were
under a lot of pressure to tell their stories unfiltered,
and so that was a very interesting process. Currently, I
(23:55):
you know, I represent Sharmino be Chenoi, who the two
time winning filmmaker from Pakithan who asked her documentary s
directed very successfully Miss Marvel and then got a lot
of studio interest. And this has all been reported so
I can talk about it, including from Lucasfilms and the
(24:15):
film Brilliant for Paramount. So the other interesting part or
another interesting component of my professional life is that crossover.
You know, a filmmaker who crosses over from the documentary
medium to the you know, big budget feature medium, and
that's equally exciting.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Today, I could imagine there's not too many that I've
spoken to that I've done that. So for you to
work to someone like that must have been very, very
exciting for you. I can certainly understand that. And the
Eagle Huntress and the sentence above critically acclaimed what was
your role in those and how do you support filmmakers
beyond just contracts?
Speaker 1 (24:57):
So the Eagle Hunter is an interesting one because I
really packaged that project, which means that I literally saw
that the sivil reel for it. The filmmaker Otto Bell
came to me and he said, Hey, I think I
(25:17):
have a project that's really interesting, you know, will you
take a look, And he sent me the sizzle reel,
which was this young teenage girl from Mongolia going to
capture her eagle and then to train it, the eagle
to be a hunter, and she left the Eagle Hunter
and it was the most captivating fizzle reel I had
(25:39):
ever seen. And I told him and so I helped
bring in the producing team, the executive producing team, and
the financing. And I served in that project as an
executive producer in addition to being a lawyer. So that
you know that film was an extraordinary experience from at Sundance.
(26:00):
It was released by Sony Pictures Classics. You're hoping for
an Oscar nomination, but we didn't make it, and that's
how they pick. You crumbled sometimes, But that was another
another good one.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
And with the Ryanzol streamers and digital platforms, how entertainment
deals evolved over the last.
Speaker 1 (26:18):
Decade, Well they're still evolving, you know. On the positive side,
I repworsent a lot of content creators for a company.
This is a very American company, but it called Friday
Beers and it's like, instead of college humor, it posts
(26:40):
college humor. And the way that deal structure works is
it's almost like old Hollywood. So the company engages their
their talent, both writers and on air and on camera
talent in like employee and agreements like the way the
old studios just and would work. And because of the
(27:02):
rise of digital explication, it is short form content and
it's very successful and the company's growing and my clients
are getting a lot of acclaim and recognition, and then
we their agent and the attorneys are able to over
these individuals and the more traditional content and they're writing
(27:25):
for long form epathodic and for features, and they're getting
branding opportunities. So you know, something like that certainly did
not exist a decade ago, and it's exciting. And when
I talk about my broad practice, that's another example. So
you know, you go from a legendary Starlight Joe Keshi
to you know, young creator that are really inventing it,
(27:48):
doing it on their own on short form visual platforms,
and the crossing over to traditional that's very interested. On
the from my perspective, the negative side, six years ago,
like you know, right around right before the pandemic and
then certainly through the pandemic, people were talking about the
(28:10):
golden era of documentary and everything was great for independent
cinema and Netflix came along and was paying huge amounts
of money to the filmmakers and back ends were gone
and people were looking the other way. And for me,
it was like the pied piper and everyone just following
(28:30):
and going right off the pier. Because if we look
in the very short period, I guess that's six years
ago or seven years ago. Right right around then to now,
theatrical has sort of collapsed and digital streamers are now
paying traditional distributors a lot less money for that pay
(28:53):
one window. You know, distributors used to rely on home video,
and then it was the pay one video, the pay
one window, which is that cable or streaming platform that
can pay a big license fee. Now those license fees
are lower, and it's just one or two of the
films that have to be a unicorn to get a
big significant payment. And now Netflix, which was paying all
(29:15):
of that money to capture the digital footprint, failed back
and they're not paying these big amounts, and they're being
far more selective and the content is far more moder rated.
It's like, it's general, it's for the middle, it's not
(29:36):
taking big swings. So you know, it's concerning, and it
has been concerning, and the pendulum hasn't swung back totally
yet and right now everyone in our industry is trying
to find their footing and waiting for the pendulum to
switch and them are and you know, I'll stop there,
(29:58):
but so digital streaming has completely changed the ecosystem.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
Mark, how do you feel about Apple taking the transition
from a streaming platform to going more towards theatrical in
the future.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
So right now, you know, we've talked about from the
challenges in the marketplace and the collapse or the reduction
in the theatrical marketplace. So as someone who is a
professional in this business, and certainly please and happy to
(30:34):
see Apple leaning into its theatrical business, you know, and
it had at the myths and then it regrouped and
it came out with F one, which by all accounts
is a significant success or Apple and it and it
touches on Apple's vertical integration ambitions. It it reflects on
(30:57):
apple broad footprint in terms of its brand. Right the film,
this film shows Apple products in it's it The film
utilizes Apple products to be got in terms of their cameras,
and the film feels sleek, if field on brand. And
(31:23):
in so doing, they took a big swing because if
it didn't work, this would not be good for their
expansion plans. So I'm very happy to see it because
it's putting it's putting energy into theatrical. But on the
foot side, if you hear me being a little hesitant,
(31:44):
it's because at the end of the day, this is
pushing forward what we're seeing in theatrical, which is the
event sized theatrical, which is the imax theatrical. It's about
the spectacle. It's not about dare I say, cinema. Now,
there there can be some tailwinds that it has to be.
(32:09):
Let's say, like, let's be not let's be optimistic. There
has to be tailwinds for the larger cinematic community and
filmmakers if if a tech company like Apple really leans
into the theatrical experience. But Apple is going to be opportunistic, right,
They don't currently have their own distribution arm they're using
(32:34):
third parties to release their film. That's not going to
change over day, you know, overnight. But what I do
like seeing is it's a tech company that's leaning into
theatrical and making it important. And it's and you know,
Netflix to me respectfully feel you know, it's like Walmart.
You know, it's just like middle of the road. And
(32:56):
I think, you know, Apple is trying to need more
like aname and market for you know, some tell me
what that higher brand is and and we're seeing it
in the visual, we're seeing it in the cinema and
we're seeing it with their products. So it's the positive.
It's definitely a positive, and I want to see more
of it, But it doesn't change the landscape for independent
(33:17):
film and independent filmmakers.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
Can you tell us why do you think Apple have
done there and why do you think Netflix is so
lukem at the moment?
Speaker 1 (33:26):
Well, you know, Apple's in an interest in position. If
we kind of zoom out right, we have the legacy
studios whose entire economic structure is based on storytelling. Right here.
A legacy studio, all you do is make doled and content,
(33:48):
and you have an entire ecosystem to do that which
is built under studio and your sometimes your theme parks
and your theatrical and then you're putting it out into
the world. You know, Netflix is not that it's not
a legacy studio. It's its own sort of tech company.
(34:08):
But it's in a very narrow path. It is a platform,
and it's currently not trying to be anything more than
a platform, and it's trying to appeal to the math.
Is add this storytelling platform? Okay, Well, in the middle
of those two things is Apple. And Apple is a
(34:29):
robust tech company that does a lot more than storyteller. Right,
it's in the hardware business, it's in the service business.
It has a lot of ways to be very successful
and has done so. But at the end of the day,
it's technological basis is also in a way storytelling. Music
(34:52):
is storytelling, and then you know five or six years ago,
Apple TV Plus is storytelling. But it doesn't have the
life that the Legacy Studios has, It doesn't have the
library that Netflix has built in a short amount of time.
So I think it's trying to find its footing by
saying we are a tip, We're a very identity based brand.
(35:16):
We are premium, we're slick, we are a higher class.
So if it can then create opportunistic content that serve
that brand, that serves that vertical integration that brings audiences
in to their streaming platform, then that's the success story.
(35:38):
And at the end of the day, Tim Cooks talked
about they're in the storytelling business, and right now we're
in a culture of storytelling, aren't we. So Apple is
leaning into that. I do think it's a positive. But
this is working at a very high level. This is
premium and I can I just hope that we will
get tailwinds across the industry. But you know, at the
(36:00):
end of the day, Apple not in the slate model.
You know, this is not going to be a volume
business anytime scene. It's opportunistic, but it is driving people
at the theaters. From an event heids perspective, Are.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
There any major legal trends or issues that filmmakers should
be paying attention to right now?
Speaker 1 (36:21):
I mean, certainly, the conversation about around back end for
the last few years has been significant, and we're seeing
different approaches and we're seeing different changes to it. It's
everything from a back end buyout, which can happen with
the streamers, like most recently, I did a feature deal
(36:44):
at Apple and they did, meaning there's a price, the
back end pool will participate in it, and regardless of
the success or lack of success, that's how it's going
to work for feature. There's a point system also even
at Apple, which was not unique to Apple, but there's
(37:07):
a point system where and it's more atcheing to episodic
right now, where the back end is based on how
long how many seasons the project stays on Apple, and
then if it stays on a very long time, there's
like another legacy pool and back ends at all of
the streamers are just everyone's trying to the reps, the
(37:31):
deal makers on the filmmakers side are trying to push
for something, and we're trying to find metric that makes
sense that are not arbitrary. You know, when we had
box office bonuses, that was very objectives. The film either
reached that box office number or it did not. Now
(37:51):
is it based on toscriber growth? Is it based on
hours viewed? How long does a viewer have to watch?
With all of these issues and playing out, and you know,
I'm always a believer in having mutual SIXCEPTH opportunities. You know,
if a project does well, the creators should be incentivized
(38:14):
to do their best work to make it a strong project,
et cetera. And that over the last you know, five
or six years, as eroded considerably and the theatrical markets
are rooted considerably, and you know that is not a
positive trend.
Speaker 2 (38:30):
Given so much brilliant and great advice on this podcast
so far, it's amazing learning from you and hearing about
your own stories as well. As a filmmaker. You've spoken
at major law schools and universities. So what do you
tell young lawyers or creatives trying to break into entertainment.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
You know, I get those calls a lot, and I
try to have them focused on, you know, a topic
that we've brought up a few times on where their
passion is. So sometimes get a call from someone in
law school and they say they want to be an
entertainment attorney, and I say on the music side or
on the film side, and they say, you know that,
(39:09):
Then the answer might be I'm not sure. I like
number one. It doesn't work that way. If I go
back to the orthopedics kind of college technology example, you
gotta pick one. You know, I'm going to be an
obscutrician kind then an orthopedis So you gotta you have
(39:31):
to be totally passionate about it. You have to understand
the industry, read the trades, and listen to podcasts. You
have to talk to people in the industry and really
mess yourself in that space to become sort of an
expert about it and really understand it. You know, that's
(39:52):
where it begins. On the on the filmmaker's side. You
have to be doing it for the right reasons. You
have to understand the challenges and it's about you know
what separates the really good creators from the others, you know,
from from the pack, so to speak. It's about that
(40:13):
unique voice, it's about that unique approach, and it's about
just like to be successful in any industry, it's about
putting in the reps. So you have to be doing
that work as a filmmaker, as a writer, as an actor.
You know, the great new thing is social media and
the short form that is available now through social media.
(40:37):
So if you're a creator, you can break in through these,
you know, previously unconventional channels. That that's the positive and
you can be your own entrepreneur. That's also a positive right.
You can build a following audience on social media. At
the very positive trendom, we're going to continue to see
(40:59):
how social media and workforum content and being your own
boss and getting your own brand endorsements and building your
own audience and building your own channel. How does that
transition into more traditional and mainstream compat That will be
super interesting.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
And one of the trends that has happened throughout the
history of film, I think, especially for some of the
people listening to this podcast, is trying to get funded,
trying to get a film funded as best as possible,
But how do you approach working with finances who are
new to the entertainment industry but bring capital from other industries.
Speaker 1 (41:37):
Super interesting in that regard, and I believe this anecdote
is emblematic of what's happening in the industry ten years ago,
twelve years ago, eight years ago, I was focusing on
representing a lot of independent financiers. But we just talked
about how like netflicking in and everything was being shut
(41:59):
up in the streamer took over to the independent film
financing model really dissipated, and then all of.
Speaker 3 (42:06):
A sudden in the last six to nine months, not
even through intention, but through like incoming referrals and intri
all of a sudden, I'm representing more independent financiers.
Speaker 1 (42:19):
And why is that? I think that's because when one
door shuts, meaning the streamers aren't just throwing money at
content and acquiring, another door opens, and that that is
a bit of a pendulum. And I think we're going
back to an independent financing model and financiers are back,
and when or growing back. It's not black and white,
(42:44):
But when I speak to independent financiers first and foremost,
again a similar theme that's come up in this podcast.
I talk about doing it for the right reasons, being
passionate about it, wanting to support, wanting to support creators,
if you're not there to support careers. And it depends
like what is your financial capacity. You know, it's very
(43:07):
hard to be a financier in this industry if you
do not have significant capital. I mean, that's just the reality.
If you have significant capital, we can be really strategic
about what kind of projects you're going to make, how
you're going to make them. One of the have a
client right now that's doing something really interesting, which is
(43:28):
and this has been talked about over the last fall
fifteen years and hasn't sixteen and the independent financing model
for episodic television hind or screening, and we see in
it coming ways where it hasn't ever really attached well.
Now with Volume Capture VR, I have one client that
is fully leaning into independently financing and producing an episodic
(43:53):
serials and the licensing it to the different buyers all
over the world. So what's your level sophistication, what's your
level of capacity, and how do you want to approach it?
And depending on that, I talk about the ability to lose,
right you have to have the wherewithal to lose the money.
You can't go into this thinking that it's going to
(44:14):
be a win win and that's going to all these
sunshine and rainbows. But you can have a major impact
right now, especially independent financiers can have a major, major
impact because money fuel, you know, economic fuel is needed
to support creators. Right now. It is a tough time.
Speaker 2 (44:34):
Incredibly tough, that's for sure. I can feel it. I
am feeling that I should say sorry, but you're clearly
a go to entertainment attorney for complex financing and distribution deals.
When did you first start working on cross border transactions?
Speaker 1 (44:49):
A long time ago? Because it's just the nature, you know,
I mentioned Ermine, who's from Pakistan. We have several international clients, Scandinavia, Brazil,
so it's just sort of a natural outgrowth as you
grow your practice. And again it's a necessity you have
to be able to as both as a funding theories
(45:12):
a gillmaker. You need to be able to be expanse
those and so you know, that's just a component of
the business. And I go to can every year. I
go to Toronto, you know, to understand the international marketplace.
Speaker 2 (45:24):
Was there a project early on that really tested your
understanding of international finance and tax law.
Speaker 1 (45:31):
Well, when it comes to tax law, I don't come
to me. I have tax partners that I consult with
on the international tact implications. In terms of the deals,
you know, they're just they can be complex that they
can also be straightforward. So I don't have a deal
to you know, to reference and say, like, you know,
here's a story that made it quite compelling. I would
(45:53):
just point to several deals in Canada that take advantage
of the Canadian tax credit. There's a client of mine,
Sonya O'Hara right now, who's in genre director, and you know,
we're able to tap into territories in Canada where there's literally,
in this case, a one million dollar grant that's non
(46:14):
recoupable that bring production to Canada. You know, those opportunities
aren't present in the United States. And again, it's just
about being able to fitt and handle those deals and
understand how they work, and having filmmakers be able to
lean into that.
Speaker 2 (46:34):
And we've previously spoken about how things have changed in
terms of distribution and the filmmaking industry as a whole.
But in your experience, how important is pre sales in
secure in finance today compared to ten or fifteen years ago.
Speaker 1 (46:48):
We've ran on how the package is being put together.
I would say now in the last year it's sort
of reverted back to what it was fifteen years ago,
where the models are prevalent again and they're necessary or
put together film projects, Whereas in that period three years
ago to eight years ago and everything is just being
(47:09):
set up, and you know, Netflix and buyers are just
throwing money at it to get films made. It became
I really wouldn't have been I would not have wanted
to be a foreign sales agent at that time. But
I feel like now that pendulum is swinging back to
that model, you know, where you have a foreign sales agent,
you get Askimich, you get a lender, then you get
a little bit of equity, and then you have financed
(47:31):
the gap and the pre sales.
Speaker 2 (47:33):
Okay. And a lot of people listening to the podcast
our producers early in their career. If you were advising
a first time producer, for example, today, what's the one
thing they must understand about cross border financing before they
take a dollar or foreign investment.
Speaker 1 (47:49):
They should be working with producers from the local region
who understand what those regents have to offer and understand
whether the region those foreign regions that they're looking at
the crew that lends itself to the tax credit. In
other words, if there's some very beneficial tax credit but
(48:13):
that local area doesn't have the crew to support it,
then all that tax credit savings is going to flying
people and crew to that area, and that's not worth it.
Speaker 2 (48:22):
Yes, that makes sense, because you're just bringing in people
from abroad when you could what were the people there,
and all the money going in a place where it
might not be necessarily best spent in that In that way,
and your job is very full, very very good. What's
someone rewarding part of your job and what's the most misunderstood.
Speaker 1 (48:43):
Currently, The most rewarding part is find you know, helping
my clients find success on a deal and seeing a
phenomenal project come to fruition. You know, there's no doubt
about that, and it happens, and it's worrying, you know.
The challenge is dealing with volume, number of emails and
(49:07):
the time pressure on your multiple deals happening, and being
response to being a lawyer is a sort of a
twenty four to seven job in terms of responsiveness and fielding.
Speaker 2 (49:20):
Yeah, deal well, And one of the things that a
lot of the filmmakers on this podcast also struggle with,
and I'm imagining you may have heard this before, some
of the technical and legal hurdles that happen when filmmakers
are trying to make the documentaries or narrative films. So
beyond the legal documents, there are often technical requirements for delivery,
(49:44):
things like master files, QC reports and captioning. Do you
find these technical details often cause delays? And if they do,
how much of a problem is it for you?
Speaker 1 (49:55):
The day that, even though I've mentioned your films, which
sets me apart for most attorney, I deal so little
with technical delivery and try so hard not to keep
up with technical advances and or delivery itself. Just I
find that, you know, I just talked about the volumes,
like I don't want to get into that and let
(50:17):
the producer do it. And he said that, of course,
if you're unable to deliver a film correctly, it's gonna
set you back. So the young filmmakers out there, you
definitely have to your data and your content properly managed
and stored it and organized, or you're gonna have a
nightmare on the other end.
Speaker 2 (50:38):
Too true, Too true, I can't disagree with that one
nightmare at the other end. And lastly, if you had
to sum up your philosophy on law and storytelling in
one sentence, what would it be.
Speaker 1 (50:47):
Oh, I had a law school professor who had this
great little line factor. It was three p's, and I'm
forgetting one of the piece, maybe your audience consoling. But
it was practiced with passion, provision, and another P I'll
say persistence. Practice with precision, passion, and persistence. I think
(51:10):
got both law and creation right.
Speaker 2 (51:14):
I like it, I really do. Mark, thanks so much
for coming on the podcast. I really appreciate you taking
the time to talk to me. I've learned a lot.
I know the listeners have learned a lot too. And
it's always amazing to talk to someone who's a filmmaker
and an attorney, because genuinely, a lot of the times
people don't think attorneys would make films or do make films.
(51:36):
So it's a special kind of person that can do both.
And I hope you would make a film again one
day that we can all go and watch and see
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.