Discrepancies and questions remain unanswered. If Polychrome grossed $2.8 million in 2007, what happened to the money? If Polychrome grossed over $1.7 million in 2008 but could only pay its four principles a combined total of $50,000, clearly the company was in financial trouble. Why did Taylor and Holland continue to license films they couldn't afford to distribute? This question is particularly disturbing when, allegedly, none of the filmmakers Polychrome signed has been paid. Is this the result of the infamous "creative accounting" that cause filmmakers to be wary?
Unfortunately, when this question is put to the general audience of filmmakers, the response is often tongue-in-cheek. "Par for the course" is what many filmmakers quip when made aware of the situation. To many filmmakers, back end is no end. Residuals don't exist to them. However, given the current state of independent filmmaking and the continued lack of record-breaking sales at Sundance, should independent filmmakers assume that a back-end deal is all they have to work with?
Continued instances of situations like what happened with Polychrome has fueled an industry hell-bent on alternative forms of distribution and transmedia. Microcinema, web series, and DVD-on-demand are just a sample of the alternative distribution processes independent filmmakers enlist. Emerging technologies, iTunes, robust wide-screen Smartphones capable of streaming video over 3G networks, Netflix and digital television offer seemingly comparable substitutes. However, films like Paranormal Activity have relit fires in filmmakers with their eyes on theatrical distribution. Many are willing to take chances with their films and with their money. In the end, it is the distributor who has never lost sight of this. They understand that all filmmakers want, have always wanted, and will always want a chance at theatrical distribution.
Whether Polychrome willfully mishandled its business in order to make a profit for its principles is not up for debate. The bankruptcy hearings will, hopefully, restore some balance. However, a deeper cause for concern is the fact that Polychrome's filing for bankruptcy has not put Eugene Taylor out of business. Taylor is a principle in another production and distribution endeavor, Main Stream Pictures. Should Taylor's new business partners, David Williams and Tony Chopelas, be wary of Taylor's business history? Is it a stretch to assume that Main Stream Pictures will be out of business in six years?
Caveat emptor. Let the buyer beware. When filmmakers buy in to the promise of distributors, it's wise to understand that, with respect to getting paid, the company's solvency is as major a factor as the integrity of the owners.
-Angelo Bell
Writer/Blogger/ Filmmaker
