Distribution is still the essential problem, though. There is lots of great content out there, regardless of the medium. Discovery remains the problem. And I feel like Deadpool has just peed in the proverbial pool. (He'd like that analogy!)
Question: Do these things need widespread distribution? Is there a reason to create more focused (or maybe unfocused) pieces of film that don't appeal to the audience of say, Deadpool, or other big name films and then try to market them to as many people as possible? Does the onus of discovery fall on the creator or the consumer.Distribution is still the essential problem, though.
I don't have an exact answer to that, but I have found that some of the movies that I've enjoyed the most or have resonated with me the most I've discovered either by chance or word of mouth.Does the onus of discovery fall on the creator or the consumer.
I guess it is an issue of Discovery and Accessibility. Sure, a film may play at one time on one day in one theater in one part of town. The likelihood of me getting there to see it, casually, as an exploration, is so vanishingly small as to effectively be zero. I have dear friends who make movies professionally. And I have been unable to see some of their work. In this era of media ubiquity, distribution is still a problem.