30frames

Remember me?

Last week, Videostatic tweeted about this article in Newsweek – referencing how music videos are back. Back I say!!

I had missed the article for two reasons. One, I was unaware that Newsweek was still a going concern (I’m also weirded out by the new, TV Guide shape of Rolling Stone, so let’s say I have ‘issues’). Two, I can barely read.

The piece, by Ramin Setoodeh, makes some quality points. It even captured that brief sliver of time when Gaga was still ahead of Der Bieber.

The reason music videos have come back from the dead is simple. They are the perfect length—three to five minutes—for abbreviated online attention spans. They are easy to share, tweet, Facebook, and comment on. You can watch them from the comfort of your own home (or cubicle, when you’re procrastinating at work).

One thing I will add is that Setoodeh gives a decent amount of credit for the ‘revival’ of music videos to YouToogle. He also blames the standard villain for knocking MVs off of MTV – the reality show. Now I agree that once MTV realized the profits available with the Osbournes and the Sweet Sixteeners (let alone The Situation) videos were doomed on Viacom owned airwaves. But there was one villain (and I am using that word sarcastically, no one or no network ‘owes’ music videos airtime) left out of the piece – YouTube itself!

Once YouToogle unified all the disparate places people watched videos – the jig was up for MTV. Maybe the younger types don’t remember the earlier days of the web when finding videos online was almost impossible. During this era, the MTV.com site never really worked if you had a Mac. Hard to believe, but true. Assuming that this current ‘truth’ is not one of those interlocking dreams that I am waiting Juno to wake me up out of. Anyway, I digress …

Youtube came in and simplified the way we watch web videos. Search in one spot and pretty much every clip will available, and it will actually play. No more codecs or Windows Media blah-de-blahs to download. Youtube fixed all that and thus became THE place for videos on the web. Thus, YT (which always makes me think of Y&T – but that is another story for a more summah time) became the dominant place to watch videos and thus –

MTV stopped running them. Once any music video I want is available, ANY time I want it on the Internet – why do I watch a block of clips on MTV? The answer is: I don’t. If you’re a fan of My Chemical Romance, you don’t watch clips for Drake, drumming your fingers on your step-mom’s coffee table – you click on your computing device (hint: it’s disguised as a phone) and watch the desired MCR music video immediately.

When I was younger it made sense to sit through Pointer Sister videos to see the hoochie girls in short skirts get out of the car in that ZZTop video. There was no other way to see scantily clad women, or, for that matter ZZTop videos.

But in 2010, the internet does a great job of chopping our media consumption into smaller and smaller niches. If I want to read internet postings just from fans of MCR – I can do that. I can wall myself off in a narrow alley packed just with ideas I have heard a million times before (Hiya, Fox News). Or I can explore new artists and videos based on suggestions from my friends, or just based on what catches my Ritalin tempered attention span. That is how people see new videos now, and the benefit is that as soon as the song or the video starts to bore me - I can click away to something else. Under no circumstances am I going to sit in front of a television, watch through a whole video of an artist I don’t like, in the hopes that the next clip (that I also didn't choose myself) will just happen to be something I like. That channel has been changed long, long ago.

YouTube may now be ‘saving’ videos (If you consider $40k budgets for established pop acts to be ‘salvation’) – but first YouTube did a hell of a job kicking music videos in the nuts and ending video blocks on the biggest outlet, MTV. So for that, YouToogle, I say, umm, ‘thanks?’

Read the whole Newsweek article - here.

Labels: insider, MTV, music video, My Chemical Romance, philosophy, selling, TRL, video link, videostatic, YouTube

So today is Labor Day and on this second most American of holidays (after ‘Bring your Gun to Work Day’) what better band to focus on for a MAPS than the one that loves America the most - U2. Sorry, chest thumping country artists, your love for America pales in comparison to that of Bono, Adam, Larry and the guy that refuses to admit he is bald.

‘Where the Streets Have No Name’ was shot in 1987 at the corner of Seventh and Main in downtown Los Angeles by director Meiert Avis. Mr. Avis has been shooting videos since the very, very early days and on VideoStatic you can see he is still booking jobs today. I look at the depth on that credit list and I wonder why he doesn’t get as much credit as some other video pioneers. Maybe he should use more camera tricks.

The video for U2 takes place is the very commonly shot downtown section of LA. It is not far from the Tower Theater and at the edge of the seriously skeevy skid row area. Perhaps this location full of homeless folks was a purposeful tie in to the ‘no name’ aspect of the streets. More likely, it was one of the few places that would let a rock band play on the roof for a few hundred bucks.

Check out the map and click onto streetview - the place on the corner is still a liquor store, but the name has changed. Watch the video of 'Where the Streets Have No Name' here.

The beginning of the ‘Streets’ clip has lots of lead in before the song starts – something other videos would try to copy without much success. The live LA radio warning about traffic and the quality of the neighborhood (so maybe not that much has changed in LA) and the threats from the LAPD that the production was going to get shut down was all very effective.

It seems to me, re-watching the video, that the band got more than one run-through of the track, but the finished video makes it seem like po-po was closing the set down AS they were shooting. The video is a classic and it gets referenced all the time for new jobs – even twenty years later.

For more U2-ish fun, check out the feature documentary ‘It Might Get Loud’ starring the Edge, Jack White and Jimmy Page. The music is amazing and it is great to see Mr. Jimmy looking so lively and rocking at 65.

Labels: MAPS, music video, on the set, u2, videostatic

As part of the very popular ‘MAPS series’ here is part two, the Tower Theater in downtown Los Angeles. The Tower was built in the mid 1920s, a fertile period for the kind of construction that is a boon to music videos hungry for production value.

Downtown LA has a couple streets and corners that can convincingly play the role of a big city on the East Coast – one of the reasons that lots of videos get shot in a handful of blocks. The recent economic downturn might be bad for the recent condo-splosion and loftapalooza going on in the formerly deserted-after-dark downtown core of the city – but maybe empty buildings will make it easier to get a permit. Nearby the Tower are some other spots that get even more ‘work’ – but we’ll get to them later.

I picked out a couple videos that have been shot at the Tower, but I am sure that many, many others have used the moody, yet ornate interior to great effect. Feel free to post any other links you can think of in the comments below.

The recent My Chemical Romance clip off the Watchmen soundtrack was shot inside and outside the Tower. The decrepit but grand interior does a good job of complimenting the MCR performance, and the neighborhood definitely adds to the 'Desolation Row' vibe. My impression is that they are giving Mr. Zimmerman the flavor of the punk group Generation X – Billy Idol’s original band. Gerard even breaks out the Madonna-esque faux-Brit accent. Outside the theater the kids get all aggro.

You can see even more of the Tower’s look with some Watchmen EPK, behind the scenes footage.

Chris Brown’s “With You” uses the streets around the Tower (one would assume) as well as the vertical marquee as the backdrop for the main performance. As the camera circles over and around Breezy you can’t see the handcuffs, but you can see the Tower in the background and the director’s name added onto the outside of the theater.

Poke around on the Tower Google Street View and I bet you can see all kinds of music video hot spots near Broadway and 8th.

Labels: MAPS, music video, My Chemical Romance, on the set, video link, videostatic, YouTube

I know, two posts in a week. It's like the old days.

Idolator linked to this post on Tripwire about a super-indie band called Team Robespierre and their recent, failed, efforts to get one of their videos played. The video has a very, um, “home made” quality to it – but apparently MTV was allegedly going to air the clip on Subterranean. The post is a blow-by-blow of how the band got the run around and felt abused by ‘the system.’

Here is a quote from the Tripwire article:

So a year after the record came out, over six months after the video debuted on Pitchfork, three months after it’s initially scheduled MTV2 air date and lots of wasted money we were given a “maybe” in early 2009. That was until we got the news that the person we had been dealing with was laid off in December. Now, not only was the status of the video up in the air, but we had no one to talk to about it.

Most of the commenters on Tripwire and Idolator have ripped the writer, who is not in the band but somehow helping them get their video not played. This does come across as some pretty spoiled baby stuff and it made me think of lots of articles I have been reading about employers, back when the economy had ‘employers,’ needing to adapt to deal with the self-absorbed attitude of recent college graduates.

This is from the Daily Mail:

Others expect to be pandered to and lack initiative, according to the report, based on responses from 217 graduate employers including investment banks, law and accountancy firms. In one case, a new recruit to a transport company was overheard on the phone to his mother saying: "I have got to go to London tomorrow and they haven't even told me how to get there."

Certainly the band misunderstood many, many things about the video airing process. All videos on television must be close captioned. Mean ole MTV didn’t make them do that – the FCC did.

The MTV programmer that liked the video enough to push it forward was replaced and the new person was not enthusiastic. Oh well, sometimes you drop your ice cream cone on the sidewalk and Allah/Jesus/Iovine doesn’t magically grant you new one.

Yes, there were silly standards and practices edits that seem hypocritical coming from he network that airs Tila Tequila. But you know what kids? Your Mommy and Daddy say you shouldn’t drink – but they (gasp) do it themselves. I could go on and on about how these kids don’t get it (too late, I know).

Obviously, Team Robespierre has already gotten more attention off this ‘scandal’ than they would have if their video had actually aired on MTV. So good for them, despite their ‘poor little hipster’ whines.

The larger issue, in my eyes, is this intersection of the amateur and the professional. Getting your band’s video up on Youtube is easy – you just post it and it is there. Granted, even YouToogle has Standards & Practices and rights issues. Once the video is there, who says it will rack up any more views than grandma’s birthday party.

As long as artists want the benefits of the professional end of the music industry – they are going to have to play by the pro’s rules. And with AMTV suddenly showing (shocker!) music videos on MTV – there might be more opportunity there.

The recent crumbling of the music label empire has made going amateur the rule – in recording music and in making music videos as well. We could argue about whether or not Team Robespierre would ever get signed to a ‘real’ label, and I am sure that the band might reply with, ‘We don’t want your smelly label, old man!’ But when the young punks want their precious video on the old man’s MTV, a label might come in handy.

Labels: insider, media, MTV, music video, trainwreck, video link, videostatic

Lots of videos get made with some kind of ulterior motive in mind.

• Maybe the director wants to shoot a car crash for his reel.
• Maybe the label is getting a big wad of cash to promote a movie.
• The label might be promoting a product for money. (Hello, PCD)
• The artist might be promoting their own line of clothing/vodka/acne cream. (Hola, Puff)
• Maybe the artists just wanna party with some bikini clad babes. (Hello, EVERYONE)
  

None of those are shocking or unexpected. I am sure there are other examples I am not thinking of right now. But this led me to think about another, more serious category of ulterior motives – affecting the legal system.

The one getting press right now is T.I. and his “I’m sorry I tried to buy machine guns world tour.” As part of Mr. Harris’ reduced sentencing he is required to speak with kids. The King of the South has an MTV show revealing how much he has changed. ‘Road to Redemption’ is kind of like ‘Scared Straight’ but less scary and more self-serving.

There was the 2001 Jigga/Kells duet on “Guilty Until Prove Innocent” where the chorus calls of ‘Not Guilty’ seem to be general references to R Kelly’s many legal troubles rather than a specific plea for leniency. Kells has a thing for the US legal system, but TI seems to be the first artist to use his music video, "Dead and Gone," as an actual part of his sentence/rehabilitation. Is Timberlake a character witness? “The old me is dead and gone – I SWEAR your honor!”

The music career as mea culpa seems to have worked, TI is to be sentenced this month (March 2009) and he is supposed to get a year and a day of time. It is likely that TI (like all prisoners) serves much less time than that. It is still a long stretch inside for a guy used to fame and fortune, but better than the 5+ years he was facing. Do Chris Robinson and Timberlake get part of the defense team’s retainer?

I wonder if Chris Brown is watching? Now that CB is having his Kids Choice nomination pulled, and with the legal system leaving Kells alone to follow HIM, how long until Chris Brown releases a song/video about how sorry he is? Perhaps that is the duet they are allegedly recording.

Labels: Chris Brown, controversy, MTV, music video, Timberlake, video link, videostatic

So John Landis, the director of the most famoustest music video ever, is suing Michael Jackson for a portion of the profits from 'Thriller.' The shocker is that the contract actually says that Landis is entitled to 50% of the profits.

I saw this over on VideoStatic yesterday. The story is big news, especially since Jackson is selling the rights to 'Thriller' off to a company that will try and turn the video into a Broadway musical.

I think the point is that only now, with a big check (possibly) coming in from a theater producer – does it make sense for Landis to launch this suit. There have been a few times when directors saw hope that they might get a piece of the music video ‘profits,’ like when iTunes starting to sell videos. Remember way back when?

The problem is that there are never or almost never profits from music videos – since MVs are loss leaders for other revenue streams and MVs don’t make any money themselves.

'Thriller' is obviously the (possible) super mega-exception to this – and probably has generated some money. If 'Thriller' (the video) did make money, then it is probably the ONLY music video to ever do so. Sure videos help (helped?) CDs and cassettes (does anybody remember laughter) get sold – but that is, in and of itself, NOT making money with the video, that is promotion. Landis seems to be claiming that the video has made $2mil so he should get half of that. Who knows how much it has really made, since labels and entertainment contracts are notoriously good at hiding the back-end money from the creative types.

The other thing to remember is that Thriller was made in 1983, just two years into the existence of MTV. Back then there was no ‘standard’ contract for music videos – it was all new territory. I'm sure this contributed to the label/MJ letting Landis have a juicy 50 points of anything, even the imaginary "profits".

The contract (linked to on VS) didn’t seem set any precedents and it doesn't seem like any other directors have had the clout to get a contract like the one Landis did. In 1983 Landis was a huge, huge director. His 'American Werewolf in London' was a mega-hit and was the obvious inspiration for MJ to wanna do the 'Thriller' video (and maybe even the song) in the first place. Sadly, the Landis deal was not a precedent for future MV directors.

Other thoughts from reading the contract:

1. The budget for ‘Thriller’ seemed to be $513,769. Obviously they went way, way over that. So the ‘profits’ might have been gobbled up right there.
2. Going in, they planned on a 'making of documentary' about the video - something that was way ahead of its time.
3. It seems that Rick Baker, who did the make-up FX for 'Thriller' and 'American Werewolf', might be in line for a percentage of the back-end as well, maybe out of Landis’s half.
4. This is a good place to mention Indian Thriller.

Labels: Indian Thriller, label, media, MTV, music video, un-Indian Thriller, video link, videostatic, YouTube

Over on Videostatic there is post about the Pharcyde (sort of) reunion video, but the hidden gem in there is the original treatment for the Pharcyde video “Drop.” You know, the one in the alley where everything goes backwards. You can watch it here.

Now check out the treatment. One page from Spike, complete with teenage text0r spelling (see, he WAS ahead of his time). The concept and the execution were brilliant, but I especially love the low-fi presentation of the idea.

First of all, check out the date at the bottom of the treatment. 1995. How long ago was that? More than just 13 years. The Hollywood address was still in the 213 area code. There is absolutely no email or web address on the Satellite letterhead. 13 years is longer than I thought.

It seems clear to me that Spike was presenting this technologically tricky idea in a simple conversational way. Helped to make it seem like no big deal that the band would have to learn the lyrics in reverse. The way the treatment is written also captures the swirly, improvisational and hallucinatory feel of the finished video (and most Pharcyde music). Were all these things purposeful? I’d have to see more Spike treatments of the era to judge, but who am I to doubt the master?

When I see all the effort that must go into winning a job now, this Pharcyde treatment seems quaint. I bet Spike, caught in his current Sendakian nightmare, sighs and thinks back on when everything was simpler.

On even moderate budgets today, many labels want reams of reference photos and video clips included with the director’s pitch. They want adjustments and tweaks and input from the manager and commissioner – all before the job is ever awarded. And modern directors are competing against a much, much larger field of directors that anyone had to back in the mid-90s. The amount of energy modern MV directors put in to even getting themselves in the running continues to grow, even as the financial and creative pay-offs shrink up.

One Page Treatment Writing Directors UNITE!!!



On a side note, someone took that classic video for ‘Drop’ and re-reversed it so we can see the way the action really played out on set. Watching the clip again, my thoughts are that this was a lot of well thought out gags (disguised as an effortless goof) and that the alley they were shooting in must have really smelled like urine.

Labels: insider, music video, on the set, Spike Jonze, videostatic

A high-school reunion usually prompts people to try and get themselves together – or at least act like it. Gym memberships, Rogaine and spray-on tans often mark the lead up to the big event – but they can’t quite make us look as good as we did back then.

“Thriller” is like the one person coming back for the get-together at the Double Tree that everyone remembers clearly. In fact he has been the talk of the town the whole time – both for the wild successes and the, umm, rumors of other stuff. Unfortunately, Thriller looks so different that some people might not even recognize all the new facial features.

The LA Times goes over the top-selling record of all-time, track by track and lets us know that “Thriller” was pretty darn good. I am particularly partial to “Billie Jean” – the beat is a towering monument to the genius of Quincy. When it comes to the title track, the video comes up:

"Thriller": If ever a video killed the radio star, "Thriller" was it. The song was adequately groovy -- funked-out beat, lyrics seemingly lifted from some little kid's "scary storybook" -- but the video was legendary: bearing a price tag of $800,000, the 14-minute mini-film was the most expensive video of its time. Back then it was over the top; to today's viewer, jaded by bloated-budget videos, it still looks epic -- and deliciously campier than ever. - LAT

Is anyone feeling “jaded by bloated-budget videos”? Maybe if newspaper types weren’t so busy getting laid-off (and writing about same), they might have noticed that 25 years is a long ass time.

Also, posting about real Thriller, obligates me to also mention, umm, you know.

Labels: Indian Thriller, media, music video, un-Indian Thriller, videostatic

MVPA Awards 2007

Wayne Isham received the lifetime achievement award at the MVPA Awards Wednesday night. There have been twelve other winners, and all of them deserving (Fincher, Julien Temple, Jeff Ayeroff, etc). But look at Wayne’s credit list and marvel that it took as long as it did. My guess is that this is the first night in 12 years worth of award shows that MV’s Falstaffian clip machine has not been working and thus able to attend.

Seriously, look at the list of Wayne’s credits – the only thing longer was the pre-taped intro given by Metallica’s Lars Ulrich. Side note – Lars finally finishing his lengthy spiel may have drawn the biggest cheer of the night. Wayne developed so many trademark music video moments it was shocking to see them all chopped together into the tribute reel. Then Wayne gets up and makes a classically rousing Wayne-style speech – pumping up the crowd on how great and important music videos are, an antidote to the eyes downcast “big changes for the industry” talk from many others on the podium.

The other big winner was Chris Milk. No real surprise there. Milk won several awards (try videostatic for the full list) including director of the year. He spoke about the Kanye “Touch the Sky” clip and reminded the real Evel Knievel (who is suing the production for something) that the clip was an homage. I am not sure how many videos Milk made last year, but there were few (okay zero) weak links.

Another interesting bit was Jonas Akerlund accepting the award for “Smack My Bitch Up” going into the MVPA Hall of Fame. Akerlund said that during the edit Prodigy sent him a fax saying they hated the direction of the clip and they would never use any of the footage under any circumstances. Akerlund finished the edit on his own and an ultra-influential clip was born. Classic story of the long path creativity must always walk. And usually alone.

Labels: Chris Milk, insider, Isham, music video, Prodigy, videostatic

The changes in the music video world are driven, largely, by record labels. Labels are consolidating and closing up at an alarming pace. When Tower Records goes under – you know things aren’t going well. But I would say that the softening/collapse/death of retail is still not the main reason for the shifting world of music video.

The changes in music television are, in my opinion, responsible for labels deciding to spend less on music video even faster than MC Hammer cut back on his race-horse purchases once the bubble burst.

But these changes are not new. I wrote about MTV not airing videos way back when and Video Static did it even earlier. I found an intriguing bit on altmusictv about the same issue. The post lists the weekday MTV schedule from February 1998 and compares it to 2007’s reality TV fest:

“Now, I remember back in the late '90s, people were already saying that MTV had lost its way, but in retrospect, it seems almost like bliss.”

Read the full list on altmusictv and realize how much music actually aired then.

Who could resist Ananda? Well, most people. MTV stopped showing videos because you stopped watching them. MTV needed to draw more eyeballs and every game show and sports special MTV ran got much better ratings than the endless wave of videos that MTV normally ran. So they changed what they normally ran. And this happened longer ago than you think, MTV first ran the game show, Remote Control, in 1987.

The people at MTV would have been fools to ignore the data, so music videos got less airtime (while still remaining the "face" of the franchise) and reality TV got more. Even in MTV's earliest stages – where the viewer ship was low, but the channel was at it’s most influential – straight-up, un-cut videos have never drawn lots of viewers. One music video insider is quoted as saying, “video hours are always pathetically rated.” Even with Ananda.

There are plenty of new outlets for music videos, but the raw power of videos came largely from the unified group of eyeballs that saw them. That pool of viewers grows larger, but ever more diluted over the intrawebs and all the other new technology.

I have the sneaking suspicion that, someday music video types will look back on the “glory days” of Cribs and Punk’d with the warm, yet bittersweet joy of a 35 year-old recalling when grunge was cool and they had all their hair.

Labels: death, media, music video, videostatic

Have you seen Video Static recently? No? Well, go there now.

Labels: music video, videostatic

The list of Grammy nominated videos came out this week. I believe the selections are solid and remind me of the choices the Grammy voters seem to make every year. In the same way a famous actor playing a character that is fat/ugly/retarded almost assures an Oscar nod, the Grammys seem to look for certain things.

The main thing they look for is a “hook.” Hooks are good, they sell treatments to labels and make for some memorable videos. The Grammy voters like ultra-high concept stuff like “Hey Ya!” and the dancing Walken video – which is certainly not a bad thing.

This year the nominees are Big & Rich with a tear-jerker about war veterans, The Killers with a telenovella, Chili Peppers with themselves playing dress-up, Underoath wedged into a nightmare dollhouse and OK GO bouncing around on choreographed treadmills. I believe OK GO is/will be one of the most significant and memorable clips for this era of music video, despite what some people might think. The full list of Grammy nominations is here.

On a side note, the long-form nominations are usually a collection of uninteresting concert footage, backstage interviews and old videos. This year is the same except for the Death Cab collection which is fresh new stuff. Congrats for those involved.

Back to the short-form nominees. All these are good videos and the makers should be proud. High concept videos are neither good nor bad in my book – some are excellent others are Trapped in the Closet. Those big hooks and high concepts certainly jump off the page in treatment form, which is definitely a good thing.

Hook videos are sort of the opposite of the “execution” videos I have written about before. Execution videos, like Beyonce’s “Crazy in Love” or No Doubt’s “Hella Good” are not ‘about’ any one thing but rather more focused on performance, the photography and style. Execution videos are also often harder to describe in one sentence, at least in a way that makes them sound like a good idea for a label to shell out $$$ for. Seriously, Hella Good is the band in vaguely futuristic/apocalyptic looks, completely alone in and around a decrepit cargo ship all shot in black and white. That doesn’t sound great in one sentence, but the final video was excellent (IMO). Hook videos are the opposite, with quick, easily digestable pitches (RHCP perform on stage in dressed and shot like a living history book of rock and roll, from British Invasion to Glam Metal and everything in between). Both “types” of videos (and there are obviously way more variations and shades of grey than just these two) can produce great results but the hookier ideas are easier to sell to the client and they are usually the kind that award shows (like the Grammys) notice.

I, personally, don’t think that hook videos are usually the best for a new artist. The performers can get lost in the hub-bub of the idea, which is fine if you are as famous as the Killers or Flea, but not so good if you are the guys in Underoath.

I don’t think that the Underoath video really serves the band because most viewers have never seen them before and after watching the video, still haven't seen them. I feel like I wouldn’t recognize them if I saw them again. To me, they get lost in the cool visuals of the clip. Same thing for that Jamiroquai “Virtual Insanity” video, their only clip that ever aired much in the US. I am still not sure I know anything about the group. Band? Solo guy? I don’t know. I do know the Jamiroquai dude is famous in the UK but Americans don’t dance we just pull up our pants and do the roc-a-way.

Execution videos usually make better introductions to new performers or artists switching to a new image – “Crazy in Love” or Christina’s first “Genie in a Bottle.” Execution videos usually have longer close-ups and they focus more on performance without too much story, effects or concept getting in the way. I have encountered labels booking a job based on a hooky concept that is fun to read and then the same execs try to turn the finished clip into an execution video during the shoot and/or edit, usually with poor results.

On a side note, I have recently figured out how to see who logged onto this blog and what link referred them and so on. Basic stuff, but that’s how I roll. Anyway – I have been getting a trickle of traffic from people who have Googled “execution videos” and are really looking for something far, far darker that I have to offer.

I know some commenters don’t like the tone of the blog, because it is too grim and they don’t like the view I have of the music video industry. To those people I say, Sony and Warner Bros laid off MORE employees in the video departments on Friday. I ain’t making this stuff up and at least no one gets “executed” here.

Labels: contest, media, music video, review, videostatic

In the glory days (yes, I am writing about THAT again) there was a trade publication called CVC that covered the ins and outs of the music video industry. CVC was something that insiders subscribed to so they could see who booked which video and which rep signed what hot new director.

In 2004 CVC folded and the editor started a website, Video Static, that does much of the same stuff. It is a very valuable tool for anyone who is in the music video business. The wealth of information on VS is great. It is updated every weekday and I check it on the regulars. The subscription fee for CVC was hefty so looking at some Dip Set banner ads is a small price to pay for all that knowledge.

Anyone interested in music videos, in my opinion, needs to follow the business side of the industry as well. It could be claimed that a director is an artist and he should only think of the videos, but to me, that seems like a chef opening a restaurant and only paying attention to the food while refusing to notice if his new locale is on a busy street or if there are competing restaurants near by. It’s show-business.

The list of what videos get added every week is, by itself, a great learning tool to see which way the wind blows.

This is the path of modern media. Publishing information on paper and sending it through the mail (the old, CVC model) just doesn’t make much sense in 2006. For something as finely niche tuned as Video Static (or this, depressing blog) – the audience is never huge. Music video as a whole seems to journeying on this same path with smaller (but hopefully more fervent) audiences for every niche. Is MTV-Screamo or BET-Hyphy on the horizon? If so, you bet Video Static will have the science.

Labels: music video, videostatic