Sharper (metaphorically) than a tack. Funnier than the Unknown Comic. And yes, smarter than your average bear. The mind behind 30frames.blogspot.com has been eviscerating the music video industry as only an insider could. Whether it's spilling the beans on the "godfather filter" or telling a tale or two about some mystery artists, Mr. 30frames is a consistently
interesting and surely controversial voice in the video wilderness. Videostatic is pleased to welcome 30frames to our stable of contributers. This is the first (hopefully) in a series of essays, opinion pieces and things yet to be determined from our friend.
ps: Like they warn before those DVD commentaries, all views expressed are solely those of 30frames. So, don't complain to me.
Amateur Hour: The Music Video Contest
Music video contests for the likes of the Decemberists and even Four Tet — in Italiano no less – are getting lots of attention these days. For an actual working director, these competitions are kind of like showing up for a job interview in your nice suit and having the Human Resources guy tell you to scrub all the toilets, take out the trash and THEN they will read over that resume in your sweaty little hand.
Companies are using "make 'em your ownself" competitions to get some eye-balls for their baby artists (and to get some free videos made at the same time). I have written briefly about this before on 30frames.com, but the contest thing has started me thinking about a return to amateurism.
Back in the very early days of music video, clips were made on the cheap with little planning and even littler budgets. Perhaps a friend of the drummer, or maybe the road manager, would direct the videos. The performance was lit (aka DP'ed) by roadies. Videos were just being created on spec as there was not even a set place for the clips to air. The labels were experimenting and (wisely) doing it on the cheap. Videos got made the way the plays were made on Lil' Rascals – with a sheet, some smoke and more energy than experience. For example, they would put the band's touring stage set in a warehouse near the Van Nuys airport and shoot the band running through SEVERAL of their new songs in a single day (see Van Halen's "Running with the Devil" and "You Really Got Me" from 1978.) This was actually an appropriate level of production since MTV did not begin broadcasting until 1981 and the earliest videos were made without a sure outlet to reach the masses.
These clips were the ultimate in simplicity – more like home movies of the band performing to an empty concrete floor than the kind of visual extravaganzas that were to come. Nothing fancy, but that’s what the competition was doing (if they were even making "videos") so it didn’t matter.
Things changed as videos became more effective sales tools. Budgets went up as bands and labels competed for attention. MTV airplay turned into cash registers ringing, so the process became more involved. The first real “concept” clip I remember was The Cars at a carnival/carousel for "Touch and Go." This was the band doing more than replicating a live show.
As the strategy worked and records sold, videos turned into A-ha and "Thriller" and so on. This brought on professionalism. Getting things done right meant getting someone with training, the creativity and the support to do it. This brought about the MV industry.
Now, music videos are often seen only after they are sought out by fans on YouToogle, so the need to visually compete with other bands is lower. We are back in the place where just having a video is the goal. The amount of money a label can make selling a CD has shrunk up, so the promotional and production budgets have done the same.
New production technology allows amateurs to be on a semi-level playing field with professionals. Young directors can do amazing things with a $500 video camera and some editing/post software. Those amateur techniques simply cannot visually compete with 35mm film and a talented telecine artist, but if the label doesn’t really care about details other than the budget and just having a visual placeholder, then why not go with the cheapest solution?
This brings us back to amateurism. That’s where the music video industry has returned. Just like no one could really make a living shooting Bachman Turner Overdrive playing in a bar during the late 70s, no one can make an actual living today shooting clips for The Willowz. And by "a living," I mean not being on the parents’ health insurance and covering the whole rent, every month – on your own.
Professionals are getting priced out of the market. Anyone with training and experience probably costs too much to hire on most music videos. Those pesky professionals see production as a career, not a side-line to justify that film school tuition and meet cute chicks.
Amateur doesn’t mean bad, but it’s often in the neighborhood. How eager would you be to get a filling if being a dentist was this same kind of "amateur" gig? What if dentists were guys who yanked teeth when they weren’t busy repairing Xerox machines or re-folding t-shirts at The Gap? Perhaps the t-shirt folder got his "big break" by winning a dentistry contest of some kind.
I don’t think contests are "bad." Labels are not evil for having these kind of competitions. If a direct-off contest raises awareness of all involved, then great. Assuming they know the ground rules going in, the directors are not being taken advantage of – they signed up for it. Of course, who else but the lowest guy on the totem pole would consider winning one of these things an accomplishment?
Contests and fetus-level directors getting work is not the CAUSE of any problem. But it does reveal exactly where the industry is today. There are so many directors fighting for every minuscule scrap that people are willing to make videos for free and compete for the prize of a laptop and a Starbucks gift certificate. Perhaps we can start a music video barter economy based on Rotoscoping, pulling cable and no-cost dental work.
Viva la amateur!
Comments