The film industry is in a state of flux, and yet, we often find ourselves surprised by each new development. Whether it’s studio layoffs, company closures, or box office fluctuations, these events seem to catch us off guard. However, these changes are not random; they are part of a scheduled evolution.
Producer Daren Smith of Craftsman Films has witnessed these shifts firsthand. In his latest column for IndieWire’s Future of Filmmaking, Smith shares his experiences and insights on how the industry is changing and what filmmakers can do to adapt.
The Math Behind the Change
The traditional model of film financing has been disrupted by the decline of DVD sales, which once provided a significant profit layer for both studio and indie films. The mid-budget film, ranging from $5 million to $20 million, has lost its justification to exist. This shift has pushed the industry towards a budget barbell model, where films are either low-budget indies or high-budget tentpoles.
Smith illustrates this point with his own experience. For his film “Brotherhood,” he realized that traditional distribution models would require a box office haul of $15 million to break even. By self-distributing and employing a hyper-targeted marketing strategy, he could achieve the same goal with just under $6 million. This realization marked a turning point for Craftsman Films, making it truly independent.
Missed Signs and Industry Blind Spots
Several factors contributed to the industry’s slow response to these changes. Hope for a return to the old model, cyclical trade reporting, and the belief that ‘the movies always come back’ delayed necessary adaptations. Additionally, the industry focused on the wrong metric: ticket prices. While revenue held up due to rising ticket prices, the audience shrank significantly, from 1.58 billion tickets sold in 2002 to 769 million in 2025.
Smith draws parallels with other mediums, such as music and television, which have already undergone similar transformations. The film industry’s physical moat—requiring audiences to leave their homes—delayed its collapse but did not prevent it. The industry mistook this delay for immunity, but the same schedule of change applies.
Adapting to the New Reality
Smith emphasizes the importance of being demand-first in developing, financing, producing, and distributing indie films. Hoping for distribution is no longer a viable strategy; it requires its own line item in the budget. He argues that preparing for change is not pessimism but realism. It is more loving to those around you to prepare than to stubbornly oppose change you have no control over.
There are two ways forward: continue working within a system that no longer serves you, or see where you fit in the current schedule and adapt. Smith’s journey with Craftsman Films exemplifies the latter approach. By anticipating and planning for change, filmmakers can navigate the industry’s transformation successfully.
