THE FRONT RUNNER

[harlequinade]

Lighten up!

[luzie]

Oh, don't worry, I am relaxed! By the way, Di Caprio plays another politician ...

[jo]

http://instagram.com/p/BacOreilvxy

[jo]

Oct 19, 2017 7:00:29 GMT -5 jo said:

People are noting the similarity --

The similarity is closer in this photo of the older Gary Hart --

[jo]

Follow the sign

Btw, for blockbuster types, they usually use a code name ( like JUAREZ for LOGAN).


Jo

[jo]

http://instagram.com/p/Bak6JQHD1ym

So the reading was with a number from the cast of THE FRONT RUNNER? Save for Ian Reitman (Jason's film director's father as grandfather), Mae Whitman ( worked with Jason on another Live-Read project/played Inigo M), and the boy who played the grandson, all other roles were from the FRONT RUNNER cast.

It was not just a generous gesture on their part but it is also a sign that this movie has an exceptional cast with excellent acting chops ( through the dramatic/comedic reading of the screenplay)!


Here's the full cast of the film --

www.imdb.com/title/tt7074886/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast


PS: If I may say so the casting of Hugh Jackman as the swashbuckling Westley/Man in Black was perfect


Jo

[jo]

http://instagram.com/p/BanIXJEnm_6

Kaitlin Dever --

Having been named one of Variety's 10 Actors to Watch, Kaitlyn Dever has become one of Hollywood's top emerging young actresses.

Kait plays the daughter of Gary and Lee Hart. This is going to be another role with a father-daughter situation for Hugh. But this time, there will likely be some conflict once the Gary Hart scandal breaks loose!

Some drama because of a strain in the filial relationship ??

Jo

[jo]

http://instagram.com/p/BapBAuRlnQh

[jo]

This was written when the Matt Bai book which will be the basis of the movie THE FRONT RUNNER was published --

www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/media-doesnt-want-remember-gary-hart

News Desk
Why the Media Doesn’t Want to Remember Gary Hart

By Ken Auletta
January 27, 2015


Expectations were high this past fall for Matt Bai’s book “All the Truth Is Out: The Week Politics Went Tabloid.” Bai is a former Times political reporter and a current national political columnist for Yahoo, and his book zeroed in on a turning point in American political journalism, now largely forgotten: the way the press pursued Gary Hart, the leading Democratic candidate for President in the 1988 campaign, about his sex life. Reporters staked out his home to learn if he was sleeping with Donna Rice, a model; they asked whether he had ever committed adultery; and they investigated that very question. This process, Bai claimed, turned reporters into character cops, fundamentally changing the way the press covered campaigns. Instead of probing the substance of Hart’s positions, he said, reporters chased him from the race. Much of the political press turned into a supermarket tabloid.

“It’s a story,” Bai writes near the start of his book, “of the moment when the worlds of public service and tabloid entertainment, which had been gradually orbiting closer to one another, finally collided, and of the man who found himself improbably trapped in that collision, and of the way that moment reverberated through the years.”

Bai’s book is brisk and compelling. It was featured on the cover of the Times magazine last fall. Reviews, especially those composed by academics, were positive. He appeared on “The Daily Show” and “Charlie Rose.” Amazon editors chose it as one of the best books of the year. His publisher, Knopf, ordered a first printing of twenty-five thousand copies. Yet sales fizzled, totalling just ten thousand, according to a knowledgeable publishing source. Journalists, it seems, did not want to reflect on the way their profession had changed, and the public didn’t seem so interested either in the moral questions Bai raised. A publishing executive who is a fan of Bai’s book asked me, “Do you really think the press will warm to a book that criticizes the press?”


Members of the media have often justified their investigations into Hart by noting that the candidate invited them to snoop. “Follow me around,” Hart once said. “I don’t care. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead. They’d be very bored.” But, as Bai shows, that well-known quote was taken out of context. Furthermore, it did not appear until after the Miami Herald, which published the first stories about Donna Rice, had staked out his D.C. home and cornered him in an alley.
The book paints a vivid picture of a feral pack of reporters out to beat the Herald’s scoop. It particularly notes the moment, a short while after the Miami Herald story appeared, that Paul Taylor, a respected reporter from the Washington Post, asked Hart at a crowded New Hampshire press conference, “Have you ever committed adultery?”

Bai described the reaction to this query. “To Hart and his aides and to the older reporters in the room who would always remember it as a watershed moment, Taylor might as well have asked him to disrobe right there and submit to a cavity search,” he wrote. “No reporter had ever asked a presidential candidate that kind of personal, sexual, broad question.”
While Bai is tough on Taylor and the principal political reporter for the Miami Herald, Tom Fiedler, he also scrupulously offers their defense, and he provides some context for why the press had legitimate concerns about Hart’s character: Nixon had lied about Watergate, and Lyndon Johnson had lied about Vietnam. But Bai also shows how, after Watergate, reportorial skepticism curdled into cynicism, and how some journalists became as ambitious as the candidates, hoping to become the next Bob Woodward or Carl Bernstein. Bai expresses admiration for Hart’s efforts to publicly question the press’s behavior, and he defends a candidate’s right to demand a zone of privacy.


Serious questions have been raised about Bai’s book. Thomas E. Patterson, the Bradlee Professor of Government and the Press at Harvard’s Kennedy School, wrote in an e-mail, “As far as its thesis, I both agree and disagree.” The Hart campaign was, Patterson said, a watershed, and it did set up the press’s coverage of Bill Clinton. But he also notes that tough personal questions, such as those about Geraldine Ferraro’s tax returns, had been asked before the Hart campaign. He added, “I think Matt is right in looking at the Hart case as definitive in terms of signalling that candidates’ private lives are fair game.”

Tom Rosenstiel, who inspected the media’s coverage of the Hart campaign for the Los Angeles Times, and who today serves as the executive director of the nonprofit American Press Institute, told me that he believes Bai minimizes the legitimate questions reporters had about Hart. As a candidate, Rosenstiel said, Hart was “pious,” presenting himself as someone “who wanted to bring virtue to public life”; yet journalists worried about his “reckless” behavior and the “blind spots” in his character. What animated reporters who covered Hart, Rosenstiel said, “had less to do with Hart’s fidelity to his wife than with, ‘You say you’re this kind of person, yet you conduct yourself differently.’ ”


Sometimes there are good reasons to report on the sex lives of politicians. The tabloid National Enquirer revealed much about John Edwards’s character, in 2008, when it exposed his adulterous affair, as well as his blatant lies about paternity, as his wife died of cancer. While there were egregious excesses in the press coverage of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, there’s no way reporters could ignore that the President of the United States had had an affair with a White House intern and publicly lied about it. Or that the former Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller had suffered a fatal heart attack, in 1979, while having sex with a woman who was not his wife, or that his staff had at first induced reporters to file false stories about the incident.

Perhaps Hart would have imploded anyway. “There were lots of things about Hart that may have made him a problematic candidate,” Rosenstiel said. The candidate was as intellectually sharp as Bill Clinton, and his innovative ideas have had lasting impact. But a President is in our living rooms daily, and “likeability” matters. Hart’s intensity, aloofness, and admirable sense of privacy won respect, not warmth, Rosenstiel said. Reporters were right to note that Hart was a loner, and that few of his colleagues in the Senate supported him for President. This posed the same question for Hart as it does today for Obama or for Elizabeth Warren: choosing a President involves more than just going through an ideological checklist. Whether candidates also have the political and executive skills—and the patience—to manage a giant enterprise and build a consensus to advance their agendas is equally important.

Bai’s superb book provokes many questions, and I gulped it down in a single sitting. Perhaps the reason that the book didn’t sell, a well-placed publishing executive told me, is because Hart is ancient history, and books on the press are perceived by readers as inside baseball. But the other reason, it seems to me, is that thin-skinned journalists have less interest in reading, and writing, about their own mistakes.

Bai had extensive access to Hart, and as I neared the end of the book I wondered, will he ask Hart the question of whether he committed adultery? I’ve heard more than a few reporters lambast Bai for writing an entire book without asking Hart whether he had sex with Rice. But those who ask that question miss the lesson that Bai meant to impart. The most poignant and powerful moment in the book comes near the end, when Bai explains why he chose not to ask. To ask would have contradicted everything he wrote in two hundred and forty-six pages. After two years of reporting, he had decided that, while Hart was flawed, the candidate’s refusal to answer prurient questions showed true strength of character.



Ken Auletta began contributing to The New Yorker in 1977 and has written the Annals of Communications column since 1993.

I have wondered why Hugh would be interested in a biopic involving the failed candidacy of someone who is now more of a footnote in American political history --


Maybe he has been impressed with the work of twice-Oscar nominated Jason Reitman and his strength in characterizations of key characters in his movies and the pitched film project was absorbing to Hugh?

Maybe because he has lived in America for sometime now ( for earlier movies and since the Jackman family relocated to NYC since 2008), his interest in recent political history and national issues is understandable?

Maybe he felt this is a serious turn away from the type of movies he used to make in the past?


And maybe, most importantly, having been formally educated in the study of journalism in his first undergrad degree, Hugh was fascinated by a story that pits national political figures with the trained professionals who cover their political and personal lives, underscoring the role of journalists in influencing national issues?


Jo

[jo]

This is interesting why Hugh would wear a special ring in the biopic of GARY HART --

www.thenortheastgeorgian.com/news-subscribers/jeweler-creates-second-%E2%80%98black-panther%E2%80%99-ring

Allwicher said, since he made the rings for “Captain America” and “Black Panther,” he has also made a ring for another movie, but he can’t disclose that film’s name. The ring will be worn by Hugh Jackman, and the movie has just begun filming, Allwicher said...

[jo]

Vanity Fair published a very long feature on the personal journey of GARY HART ( formerly Gary Hartpence) -- it is interesting from the perspective of trying to understand what made this almost-golden boy of American politics follow the destructive path that he did.

Not sure if all that is mooted about here is all truth or part gossip or an attempt towards character psychology analysis -- but it helps to understand the background in which we find the final leg of that journey ( in the book of Matt Bai..and the likely biopic portrait being put together by Jason Reitman, the screenwriters, and Hugh Jackman).

www.vanityfair.com/news/1987/09/gary-hart-failed-presidential-campaign


It is a VERY LONG piece!


Jo

[jo]

[jo]

[mamaleh]

Wonder if they'll chow down at Paula Deen's The Lady & Sons restaurant. The biscuits and cornbread were out of this world when I toured Savannah this summer.

Ellen

[njr]

Oct 25, 2017 7:28:57 GMT -5 jo said:

I am quoting this to see if it will show up. Your OP is blank for me.

Yeah, still blank as are other posts of yours.

[jo]

Another actor ( playing Bob Woodward, of WATERGATE fame) has wrapped filming. The first significant one was the actress playing Gary Hart's daughter.

http://instagram.com/p/BaxkB7TjBvP

And another one --

http://instagram.com/p/BauNspzFT7O

[jo]

I wonder how much more principal photography is due... and then Hugh can also wrap his filming for the movie?

Maybe mid-November ??


Jo

[annetter]

Oct 23, 2017 22:41:12 GMT -5 jo said:

http://instagr.am/p/Bak6JQHD1ym

So the reading was with a number from the cast of THE FRONT RUNNER? Save for Ian Reitman (Jason's film director's father as grandfather), Mae Whitman ( worked with Jason on another Live-Read project/played Inigo M), and the boy who played the grandson, all other roles were from the FRONT RUNNER cast.

It was not just a generous gesture on their part but it is also a sign that this movie has an exceptional cast with excellent acting chops ( through the dramatic/comedic reading of the screenplay)!


Here's the full cast of the film --

www.imdb.com/title/tt7074886/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast


PS: If I may say so the casting of Hugh Jackman as the swashbuckling Westley/Man in Black was perfect


Jo

Well, I missed out on Atlanta but . . . . Savannah here I come.

[jo]

A finance publication asks : Will movies from the political genre make money ?


www.marketwatch.com/story/how-trump-has-influenced-the-new-boom-in-political-genre-movies-in-hollywood-2017-10-31

How Trump has influenced the new boom in political-genre movies in Hollywood

By Tom Teodorczuk
Published: Oct 31, 2017 10:26 a.m. ET


Will all these political movies make any money at the box office?


At such a politically charged time, Hollywood is experiencing a boom in politically-themed movies.

“Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down the White House,” in which Liam Neeson played secret Watergate source Deep Throat, recently opened in theaters. Rob Reiner’s “LBJ,” a biopic featuring Woody Harrelson as the 36th president, will be released later this week.

The notorious 1969 incident, when Senator Ted Kennedy drove a car off a bridge which resulted in the death of political staffer Mary Jo Kopechne, is dramatized in a new movie. “Chappaquiddick” recently premiered at the Toronto Film Festival and opens next April.


Half a decade after Steven Spielberg made “Lincoln,” his new movie “The Post” chronicling the Washington Post’s fight to publish the Pentagon Papers in 1971, starring Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks, is scheduled to come out just before Christmas.
2018 will mark the release of an irreverent biopic of Dick Cheney directed by Adam McKay (“The Big Short”), starring Christian Bale as the former vice president. There’s also “The Front Runner,” currently filming in Atlanta in which Hugh Jackman plays Gary Hart, the 1988 Democrat presidential favorite whose political dreams were extinguished by an alleged extramarital affair with model Donna Rice.

And let’s not forget Martin Scorsese has a biopic of Theodore Roosevelt in development with Leonardo DiCaprio slated to play the 26th U.S. president.

“Cinema has always dramatized politics dating back to the silent movie era in France when a big hit was the dramatization of the Dreyfus Affair,” says Daniel Loria, editorial director at movie-tracking service Box Office Media. “But the number of political films now being made based on recent events seems more than usual.”


The Era of Trump

Whereas during the era of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, politically-themed movies such as Warren Beatty’s “Bulworth,” Rob Reiner’s “The American President,” Rod Lurie’s “The Contender” and Steven Zallian’s “All the Kings Men” served up tales of fictional intrigue in the corridors of power, the slate of recent and upcoming biopics testifies real life has now gate-crashed the political movie genre.

Rod Lurie, who as well as directing “The Contender” also made 2008’s “Nothing But The Truth,” loosely based on the Valerie Plame-Scooter Libby case, is currently adapting for the screen “The Last of the President’s Men,” a Watergate history based on a 2015 book comprised of interviews with Nixon aide Alexander Butterfield written by Bob Woodward, who co-authored “All the President’s Men,” which went on to become the most celebrated political movie of all time upon its 1976 release.

Lurie said the political movie is ripping from the front page more than ever partially as a way of interpreting the turbulent era we’re living in. “The political films out there have everything to do with what is happening right now,” Lurie said. “There seems to be an interest in connecting the history of the past to the present and asking whether things have really changed. Films like “The Contender” and “Bulworth” seem quaint compared with Trump!”
While the riveting news agenda serves as the pathway for more political movies, the overlapping of news and entertainment presents a growing challenge for how films can cut through the noise. “You can’t compete with the insanity going on in government right now,” said Oscar-winning director and screenwriter Paul Haggis. “If you try to compete with the news, Trump is going to beat you every week!”



But Australian actor Jason Clarke, who plays Senator Edward Kennedy in “Chappaquiddick” and previously acted in Kathryn Bigelow’s Iraq movie “Zero Dark Thirty” and Showtime political drama “Brotherhood,” insists motion pictures about politics are more enduring than the latest headline or social media sensation.

“You obviously hope the film will be politically relevant — the whole point of “Chappaquiddick” lies in its similarities to the modern arena,” he said. “But art is lasting. A movie touches you on an emotional and human level whereas a tweet you fire off to make money for your brand can’t.”

Some actors seem drawn to political movies as a way of embracing issues they care about without getting drawn into political controversies that might arise if they openly express liberal viewpoints that risk inflaming conservative cinemagoers.

“I’m not interested in being political,” said Richard Jenkins, who has appeared in “LBJ” and the 2015 Sandra Bullock political-consulting drama “Our Brand is Crisis” as well as Guillermo del Toro’s upcoming politically-tinged fantasy movie, “The Shape of Water.” “I have political views but I don’t like to talk about them. I love people who do but maybe I’m not smart enough to wax eloquent about what I believe. The way I express it is through performing,” Jenkins said.
The polarized political environment has already derailed some movie projects. 18 months ago, Will Ferrell dropped out of playing Ronald Reagan in a new comedy after it emerged that “Reagan” would focus on his Alzheimer’s-induced dementia in the second term of his presidency, resulting in a right-wing backlash.


Other movies have had to compromise. An earlier script draft of “Chappaquiddick”, written by Taylor Allen and Andrew Logan, seen by MarketWatch, contained a love scene between Ted Kennedy (Clarke) and Mary Jo Kopechne (played by Kate Mara).

“They kiss gently at first,” the scene direction stated. “Then hungrily.” The scene subsequently cut to “Ted Kennedy stand[ing] unsteadily, weaving from drink. He slips himself into his back brace. Mary Jo pulls on her pants, without bothering with her panties.” Yet that love scene between the pair, whose romantic history has always remained ambiguous, was missing in the final cut of the movie that screened at the Toronto International Film Festival.
Will they make money?

Political films have historically endured a hard time getting high audience turnout. While “Lincoln” grossed $182 million domestically and “All the President’s Men” made $70 million, most others struggle at the box office. “Our Brand is Crisis” made just $7 million, “W” $25 million and “Frost/Nixon” $18 million.






“Are they guaranteed home runs? Not exactly,” said Loria of Box Office Media. “But the expectation for them to be huge hits isn’t there — you don’t have Batman helping LBJ through its crises. They’re made for more adult audiences.”
Some political movies go to increasing lengths to stand out as a result. MarketWatch understands Adam McKay’s Dick Cheney movie will feature an extravagant song and dance number choreographed by “Hamilton” choreographer Andy Blankenbuehler.


For a political movie, timing is often key. Loria notes that Joe Wright’s upcoming Winston Churchill WWII biopic “Darkest Hour” might get a box office boost from supplying the flip side of the same historical period as Christopher Nolan’s summer hit “Dunkirk.”

Paul Haggis’s “In the Valley of Elah,” starring Charlize Theron and Tommy Lee Jones, was one of a number of Iraq War movies that happened to be released in 2007. A decade ago they all flopped. “The Iraq War was still popular when I made the film,” he said. “Even liberals against the war just didn’t want to hear about it. Then two years later “The Hurt Locker” won at the Oscars. My agent’s advice, who I probably should have listened to, was to wait a year or two.”

For now, the shadow of President Trump looms large on the political movie. “We’ve moved from films about nobility in politics like “The American President” to examining films that deal with abuse of power,” says Lurie. “We’re connecting everything to Trump right now.”


Director-writer Paul Schrader, whose political movies include “The Walker” and “Patty Hearst,” emphasizes the dramatic shift the genre has undergone in the last decade. “There’s one kind of political film not being made right now,” he noted. “That’s the film about the decent, well-meaning president. You can’t get that one financed. Morgan Freeman for president no longer works.”

Controversy is the heart of the THE FRONT RUNNER! From what we have learned so far, the movie deals with uncovering the qualities of a man which may not assure a good presidency...and with uncovering the aggression from a once-passive media in the political landscape!

Will they be interesting enough... at the box office ... and with critics?


Jo

[carouselkathy]

I think THE FRONT RUNNER may have more of a chance, especially with critics, because it represents a turning point in how the press covers politicians. Woodward & Bernstein focused on political shenanigans. Previous presidents were revered for their leadership while unfaithful to their wives. The press ignored it. The Washington Post reporter who asked the Donna Rice question at a Gary Hart press conference crossed a line into tabloid material. It arguably changed the direction of an election and the focus of political journalism.

This movie has Reitman and Jackman. It's relevant in today's political climate. I predict critical success. Will the public go for it? I'm a little more cynical about that. The only thing that blows up is a political career.

[jo]

Reitman turned his movie JUNO into a critical and I think a box office hit, too. It dealt with another social issue ( teenage pregnancy) and maybe -- I never saw it -- it found a little more mass appeal. Reitman is a two-time Oscar nominee for film direction. He also hinted that he would like to explore the comedic aspects of the change in behavior of mainstream media into NationalInquirer-type of hounds ...

Hugh will likely relish this performance. Hope he turns out one which is a critical success for him!

So the combination might really hit if off.

Two other popular actors - Vera Farmiga (of The Conjuring & Psycho TV) and J.K.Simmons could also provide additional interest in the movie.

Jo

[jo]

I am not familiar with Gary Hart's journey -- I understand that after the debacle of his attempt to win the presidency, he still continued to be in public service but not as a politician. He is supposed to have a brilliant mind and had a keen mind for political analysis. I understand that he also foretold the heightened Middle East conflict and even the possibility of a "9-11", only 1-2 weeks before it happened in 2001!

I wonder how he feels about this movie project?


Jo

[carouselkathy]

I assumed that Hart pretty much stayed out of politics after the scandal...It would make sense that he kept up with foreign affairs in some way.

[jo]

Based on Wikipedia notes --

Hart returned to private practice after the 1988 election and served in a variety of public roles. He co-chaired the Hart-Rudman Task Force on Homeland Security, served on the Homeland Security Advisory Council, and was the United States Special Envoy for Northern Ireland. He earned a doctorate in politics from the University of Oxford and has written for outlets such as the Huffington Post. He has also written several books, including a biography of President James Monroe. Hart has been married to Lee (Ludwig) since 1958 and has two grown children.

More interesting info from Wikipedia --

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Hart

[jo]

No distribution takers so far ?

www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/afm-preview-how-new-players-are-rewriting-rules-indie-dealmaking-1053642

AFM Preview: How New Players Are Rewriting the Rules of Indie Dealmaking
7:00 AM PDT 11/1/2017 by Scott Roxborough



Silicon Valley and the emergence of fresh disruptors have ushered in an era that looks very different than it did just a year ago: "Indie companies aren't dictating the future of the film business."
Forget Harvey Weinstein.

The fate of the disgraced movie mogul, and that of The Weinstein Company, will be a subject of cocktail chatter at this year's American Film Market, which kicks off today, but Harvey is a sideshow compared to true forces of disruption rocking AFM: The independent film business is rapidly evolving and business models that had worked for decades are being torn apart and tossed aside.

The rise of online platforms Netflix and Amazon has brought a flood a cash into the indie biz — Netflix alone says they will produce or acquire 80 original films next year, double their 2016 output — while short-circuiting traditional distribution models. Buyers used to trolling the Loews for the next big indie tentpole are finding themselves outgunned by these deep-pocketed Silicon Valley giants who sweep down and buy up world rights for any project with mainstream potential.

"If a project gets big enough or gets any buzz behind it, it gets snatched up by the platforms or by the studios," complains one veteran international buyer, noting the dearth of big projects at AFM this year. It’s notable that the one big package on offer this year — Bloom’s The Frontrunner, a Jason Reitman film starring Hugh Jackman, Vera Farmiga and J.K. Simmons — has limited international appeal, given that the story has Jackman playing disgraced ‘80s American politician Gary Hart.


"Talking to sales agents, the projects on offer are all in the $5 million-$7 million range — there’s nothing in the $20 million plus range, nothing mainstream," says Alexander van Duelmen of Germany’s A Company.



Thorsten Schumacher of Rocket Science — which closed one of this year’s biggest indie deals, selling animated feature Bubbles, about Michael Jackson’s beloved chimp, to Netflix for a reported $20 million in Cannes — says the online giants have brought “a welcome injection of capital, but also a welcome injection of innovation” into the indie business, while admitting that the shift has been “disruptive and painful” for many old school distributors. “They are going to have to change their models,” he says.

The few big players left in the indie world — Lionsgate, Annapurna, STX Entertainment — are moving quickly to set up new models, combining production and financing muscle with international distribution to create 21st-century versions of the mini-majors. Annapurna, whose upcoming slate includes Richard Linklater’s dramedy Where’d You Go, Bernadette and Barry Jenkins’ Moonlight follow-up If Beale Street Could Talk, this week announced a U.S. joint distribution venture with MGM, adding another component to Annapurna’s global battle plan. Megan Ellison’s outfit already has international distribution deals in place for much of the world, following a pattern set by similar production/sales outfits STX and Lionsgate. Lionsgate itself is in the midst of a transition, after swallowing Joe Drake’s Good Universe in a deal that will see Drake return to the company as, for the moment, co-chair of its Motion Picture Group alongside current boss Patrick Wachsberger.
And all AFM eyes are on former Lionsgater Rob Friedman and his newly formed “content studio” Global Road Entertainment, which brings together U.S. distributor Open Road Films with production and sales outfit IM Global.

“There are a lot of new companies and new models emerging,” says Hal Vogel, author of Entertainment Industry Economics and a veteran observer of the indie film business. "But this isn’t 10 years ago, when losing The Weinstein Company would have been a big blow to the industry. Today, the indie compa- nies aren’t the ones dictating the future of the  lm business. Silicon Valley is. Where they go, the business will follow."

Maybe they should focus on more details on the FRONT RUNNER project to persuade prospective international buyers that there is more to the film, beyond the story of a disgraced American politician/