Logan Russell's Whats Your Secret Sauce?

1.    My work ethic, while not totally unique to myself, is a truly important asset to me. Basically, whatever you ask me to do, consider it done, just like that. Either that or I give it everything I have to get it done and am not too prideful to ask for help when needed. 

2.    I have extensive knowledge of the film industry and have used that knowledge to build strong relationships through the topic as well as engage in certain projects and activities in which that knowledge would put me at a competitive advantage. 

3.    I am really good at reading people and understanding how people feel and why they feel that way. In almost any situation I can assess a situation based upon how someone is outwardly feeling; this gives me strong evidence about whether or not to engage the situation or not. 

4.    I have a great deal of delegation experience through my work as a Supervisor at the Stephen C O’Connell Center. I have lead shifts in which I am directly in charge of ensuring the safety of my employees.

5.    I am very passionate about communicating with other people and enlisting the help of others to get the job done. I am a huge team player who deeply understands the benefits of teamwork and how it can maximize efficiency and effectiveness.  

Interview #1 Chris Bass: Chris is my current roommate as well as a fellow supervisor at the Stephen C. O'Connell Center alongside myself. This was by and large the most comprehensive interview I had thanks to Chris's strong and eloquent answers. We touched primarily upon my emotional competencies. 

 Interview #2 Arham Khan: Arham is a good friend of mine as well as a fellow employee at the Stephen C, O'Connell Center. Arham primarily touched upon my workplace knowledge and skills, such as job delegation and tech knowledge and how it would benefit me in the business landscape.

Interview #3 Camilla Maffuz Camilla is a good friend of mine as well as a fellow employee at the Stephen C O'Connell Center. She was very keen on discussing my emotional strengths and how they would benefit me in future business endeavors. 

Interview #4 Hope Barlow Hope is yet another good friend of mine and will hopefully become a future employee of the Stephen C. O'Connell Center, as she recently applied. Hope, like Camilla, also had a lot to say about my emotional capacity, specifically discussing my ability to use my emotions intelligently and sparingly in situations that would require that level of decorum.

Interview #5 Khun Zaw My final interview was with Khun, who is a good friend and former employee at the Stephen C. O'Connell Center; he is soon to become an RA at Lakeside. Khun spoke mostly about my capacity to lead other and delegate through experiences at the workplace.

I would say my assessment of myself was fairly accurate of how my peers and co workers saw me. I believe myself to be a compassionate, dedicated, motivated, and knowledgeable individual and for the most part I felt my interviewees felt the same way, which was good to see. I feel that my list of five of my core assets, if anything, was reinforced after this exercise. My own personal opinion about myself was supported by those closest to me, and that was a cool thing to see. 

Logan Russell's Figuring Out Buyer Behavior #2

Interview #1: Ricardo Mendez Ricardo is one of many independent filmmakers I have had the privilege of meeting over the years. Due to his being in Los Angeles currently, I conducted my interview over the phone. I discussed my idea with Ricardo and he came to the conclusion that the only alternatives he knew of were crowdfunding cites like GoFundMe, Kickstarter, and Indiegogo. He had tried using Kickstarter to fund a project but his deadline wasn’t reached. People using these cites don’t rely on price, style, or quality: they just want the money. Its one of those all or nothing situations, Ricardo said, in which there is either success or failure. As long as the capital is funded, no one should care how its packaged, and I agreed with him. The question of where or how the alternative is bought really doesn’t apply to my product, it being a film-centered funding platform. Everything is conducted over the internet and the companies make profits by taking a percentage of the funds. When it comes to the post “purchase” (because nothing is really purchased), again Ricardo reiterated that the endeavor would only be worth it if the money was sufficiently funded to meet the request. Because of the nature of my opportunity/product, combined with the questions of the prompt, the interview was rather short, but I got my information nonetheless. 

Interview #2: Sarah TomlinSarah is a good friend of mine from school who has moved to LA to make her mark on the film industry; she has made appearances in a few commercials and minor film roles as well. I spent the first few minutes of the interview discussing the nature of my idea, which received a positive reaction. I then asked her about what alternatives existed and she answered with other crowdfunding sites, namely Kickstarter. I asked if price, style, or quality matter in choosing which service to use, and she said definitely no to style. She stated that the cut of the funding the cite will take afterwards might be an influence, and that like style quality isn’t a significant decider. She also echoed that if the people get the money they ask for, they will be more than satisfied. The process can only go one of two ways: they get the money or they don’t. Again, I did not ask the how and where is it “purchased” question because everything of each alternative is conducted entirely online and there isn’t a purchasing aspect in crowdfunding per se. And in regards to the post purchase evaluation, Sarah shared the same sentiments as Ricardo, saying that what makes crowdfunding worth it is getting the money you asked for. If that one desire is met, then the customer is totally satisfied. 

Interview #3: Kristen LoweKristen is another friend of mine from Los Angeles who has served as a script supervisor on quite a few independent projects. Like the other two interviews I conducted, it was over the phone and was quite beneficial. I spent portion of the interview discussing the nature and properties of my opportunity and consequent product, which, like the first two interviews, got a positive reaction. I asked Kristen about the alternatives that exist for what I was trying to introduce, and she, like the others, mentioned a slew of crowdfunding sites that could be utilized to fund a film. When I asked her if she thought style, quality, and price influenced a person’s decision to use one of the sites. She answered much like Sarah, saying style and quality play second fiddle to price; most clients will use the site that takes the least from the accumulated funds. Like the other two interviews, I did not ask the how and where is it “purchased” question because everything of each alternative is conducted entirely online and there isn’t a purchasing aspect in crowdfunding per se. When discussing the post purchase evaluation, she echoed exactly what both Ricardo and Sarah said, saying that what makes the experience worthwhile is receiving the funds you asked for. 

Conclusions:I can conclude that what will make my idea the most effective, based upon the information I gathered from my interviews, is that focusing on the best method to get the most people fully funded would separate me from the competition. I should put more attention upon this than the style, but should focus on creating a quality product too that doesn’t take too much from the funded amount of each client. 

Logan Russell's Halfway Reflection

1.    I certainly had to work on a number of my work tactics when it came to keeping up with the steady stream of assignments that this class built itself around. First and foremost, I would say is time management; I really had to plan how I spent my time more effectively in order to consistently submit the three assignments due at the end of the week. There may have been a few close calls, but because I was able to improve my time management skills, I have yet to miss a deadline in this class or turn in any work I considered subpar. I accomplished this through doing things like using a calendar to plan my weeks out, cut out excessively using social media or playing video games, and only doing fun stuff once all the work is finished. 

2.    A moment when I thought about giving up I remember quite vividly was in the 7^thgrade. I had absolutely horrible acne. It was cystic, meaning I had these giant lumps all over my face that were bright red and disgusting; I looked like I had been stung by a hive of wasps every day. I kept going to the dermatologist for months getting different treatments but nothing changed. I was so frustrated that I almost resigned to the notion that I would never look any different, but with the encouragement of my family, I kept going and trying treatments, and the acne eventually went away. Despite that being years and years ago, I would definitely say that I have developed a tenacious attitude over the past two months, primarily due to my recent decision to start getting fit. I have been a gaunt pile of bones my whole life, and one day I just had enough and decided to get fit and healthy. This decision has impacted nearly every facet of my day to day, specifically my confidence. 

3.    My three tips would be: 1) Understanding that with everything you do in life that you get what you give, 2) Work on time management, and 3) Realize that true happiness comes from within and not any external force. These three tips can change make anybody tenacious and a success at whatever they choose to do. 

Logan Russell's Reading Reflection #1

I read Grinding it Out by Ray Kroc, which is the story of the building of the McDonald’s empire. I watched the flim “The Founder” which is based upon this book and loved it so much that when I saw the book on the reading list I knew I had to read it. 

1.    What surprised me the most about Ray Kroc was just how much he undertook personally to see the business succeed the way he did. Two of his marriages failed, he took out mortgages on his houses, and at one point even sold everything he had to keep McDonalds alive. What also startled me about this was that he was no young guy when this was all happening; he started building up McDonalds when he was 52 years old! Being that old and having the vigor and enthusiasm to build a fast food giant from the ground up gave me a great deal of confidence for when I pursue my future endeavors. What I admired the most about Ray Kroc was his dedication to his employees and to the people that helped him along the way. He makes a point of mentioning many, many people in his book that were instrumental in helping the company and how he treasured their efforts. What I admired the least about Ray Kroc was his explosive temper at times, but at the same time it showed his passion, so it could be argued as a positive quality. Kroc did encounter much failure; for many of the first years of the company’s existence, he never saw personal profit, and most of his business ventures before McDonalds ended up as failures. But Kroc just kept bouncing back, never being deterred to seek out the next opportunity. 

2.    I noticed that Ray Kroc was incredibly competent with people skills, such as negotiating and finding business tactics to get his way. Kroc’s real superpower was definitely his ability to get things done through other people. His charisma and vision was so clear and infectious that almost anybody involved with McDonalds shared it too.

3.    What confused me about the book at times were the comprehensive business tactics often explained when Kroc was discussing the ins and outs of his dealings. It was nothing too advanced, but there was just so much of it that it sometimes bogged me down. 

4.    If I were to ask Kroc two questions they would be: How were you able to maintain your standards for what a McDonalds store should be across hundreds of locations? and What would you have done differently looking back upon your journey? These are things touched upon in the book but I would truly love a comprehensive answer.

5.    Kroc was adamant throughout his book that nothing can be accomplished without hard work and dedication and “grinding it out.” The title of the book is quite literally a testament to how greatly Kroc believes in the necessity of hard work.

Logan Russell's Figuring Out Buyer Behavior #1

1.    Pick a segment: My specific segment I will be gearing this assignment toward are young filmmakers who specifically need help financing their film, rather than getting a distribution or advertising, which are other segments of the whole collective ideal customer. These people do not have the means to get their movie funded on their own, and most likely have turned to friends and family and crowdfunding sites for assistance. They have a script and a vision, just no money. 

2.    Interviews: Brian Vargas. Brian was one of the producers of a student film I worked on throughout the summer before my senior year of high school; we grew close discussing our frustrations of the wildly disorganized and dysfunctional set. I asked Brian a series of questions about the complexities of getting an independent film funded, I will be highlight the most important questions and answers of the interview. The first question worth noting was how much of a challenge it was to get an independent film financed in your position in the modern film industry. Brian answered that it was incredibly challenging, adding that even having significant connections doesn’t guarantee even a cent to your production effort. He cited that independent filmmakers are being drowned by studios producing mega blockbusters that steal practically every possible filmgoer. My second question/answer worth noting was about the possibility of my product achieving the success I think it could. He said that a product like the one I described to him would be undoubtedly popular and would facilitate the financing of many movies that previously wouldn’t have been able to. My second and third interviews were done together with two friends of mine who recently got engaged, Kyle Allen and Vanessa Rodriguez. They are a writing directing team I met in Los Angeles during one of my trips out there and are the proud producers of a few independent films. I asked them the same line of questioning and got similar answers. Again, the first question I posed that was worth noting here was how much of a challenge it was to get an independent film financed in your position in the modern film industry. They said that getting the necessary funding is practically an inevitability, that they know deep down they will have to sacrifice a great deal of their vision to make the near impossible budget they set for themselves. I then asked about what they thought about my product, to which they replied with resounding enthusiasm. They both agreed that it would solve many of the problem modern independent filmmakers have to deal with in the film industry. My product would provide these artists with the means to produce and the ability to showcase their work.

3.    Need and awareness: All three of the people I interviewed were all too aware of the problem and had a great need to find a solution. I was happy to find that my product seemed to solve these problems quite nicely.

4.    Move to information search: All three of the people I interviewed tried to remedy this problem just how I anticipated they would: they tried to utilize extensive connections they made, they reached out to friends and family members for support, and they used crowdfunding websites as well.

5.    Report the findings of your research: I found overall that the need for what I am proposing, the need for my opportunity, is just as great as I anticipated. The industry is backwards; not enough people are getting the resources to see their visions through, which is why my product is so necessary. 

6.    Conclusions: This segment of my customer base provided me with valuable insight into what I have to do and what must change from what has already been established. At the end of the day, there are artists out there who cannot succeed because they do not have the means to do so, but my opportunity can change that. These three interviews solidified the course my opportunity is taking, and I am looking forward to seeing where that course takes me next. 

Logan Russell's Idea Napkin #1

1.    You:  My talents lie in my extensive knowledge of film production, distribution, general business negotiations, as well the industry as a whole. I also have significant knowledge in the field of screenwriting. I have had numerous experiences which have honed the talents I discussed above; the experiences include being present as a production intern on film sets to learn the dynamic that goes into making a major motion picture, writing scripts critiqued by professional writers, and sitting in on meetings that discussed the likes of anything you could possibly imagine. I aspire to work in a studio in a business capacity helping directors see their visions through with studio help. My product aims to help people who are disillusioned with the studio environment; I hope to become one within the ranks of the film industry studio machine in an effort to make it more appealing to independent filmmakers. 

2.    What are you offering to customers? What I am offering is a platform for filmmakers with financial means to connect with people willing to invest in their vision; think of it like a gofundme specifically for films. The projects the service will facilitate will be showcased at a festival hosted by us, kind of like a poor man’s Cannes. This will give the films exposure they might not have had otherwise. 

3.    Who are you offering it to? This is a service geared specifically to two separate demographics. The first are independent filmmakers with the financial means to film and/or distribute the film they want to create. They are often young, fresh out of film school, and enthusiastic to put their work out into the world. The other demographic are people willing to invest in the filmmakers’ work. They will offer funds and/or insight to get the projects on their feet. 

4.    Why do they care? Well the filmmakers care for obvious reasons; they are getting their work financed. This is likely one of the only feasible ways for this to be accomplished, as other methods of funding are hard to come by in Hollywood. The people who are getting the opportunity to fund these projects care because they can become active in these projects and, depending upon the deal made with the filmmaker, may reap the profits if the project is successful.

5.    What are your core competencies? What sets me apart from everyone else is my years and years of hands on experience and knowledge of the industry as a whole. I quite literally grew up in boardroom meetings, watching my father pitch and negotiate with partners and executives, seeing the process that occurs in the room where it all happens. I was exposed to this at an incredibly young age, and have been marinating in it like a slab of chicken in teriyaki sauce ever since. I know my knowledge can be applied in numerous ventures, especially this one. 

Summary: I am confident that everything here expands upon the other and that all of these are effective pieces of my puzzle. There is nothing above that fits awkwardly into the overall equation, everything has a place. My talents, competencies, and resources will allow me to execute the product I have in mind, and the product will be so that it is effective in its goals and will make those who consume all the better off in the end and will become a fixture in film financing. 

Logan Russell's Elevator Pitch #1

Logan Russell's Testing the Hypothesis, Part 2

Interview #1 Chuck Russell My first interview was with Chuck Russell, a filmmaker, screenwriter, and my father. He has been working in the film industry for more than 30 years and has had every experience a filmmaker in Hollywood. I valued his opinion in a particularly high regard, as he has the most insight into what I am trying to solve due to his work and wisdom as somebody who has worked both independently and with studios. My first question which was how often do films not associated with studios get wide releases and distributions, was met with the expected answer. He said that films not associated with studios rarely ever get wide releases or distributions, because every year it becomes more expensive to distribute a film, meaning those without the financial means to do so can’t afford it. My second question was how hard is it for a film not associated with a studio to get a wide release and distribution, and he answered similarly, saying it is becoming impossibly hard due to studio competition and the price tag. Lastly, I asked him what was the most common way for an independent film to get a wide release/distribution he said it was through either having a big-name star attached to the picture, or being picked up at a festival. When I discussed my idea with him, he said that while it was good intentioned, it would change the dynamic of the industry of a whole, and he said that I could make it happen with enough effort, but is a shot in the dark overall. 

Interview #2 Danny Kaufman My second interview was with Danny Kaufman, a friend of mine who also knows a thing or two about the dynamic of the film industry, studio-independent filmmaker relations in particular. My first question for him was how often do films not associated with studios get wide releases and distributions. He responded saying that it was a rare occurrence, due to all of the distribution attention going to studio films such as the Marvel movies, which he added has changed the industry dynamic as a whole. My second question for him was how hard is it for a film not associated with a studio to get a wide release and distribution. He said it was incredibly hard because people don’t catch word of the works of independent filmmakers because they cannot afford typical advertising. My final question was what was the most common way for an independent film to get a wide release/distribution. He said the most common way was that films that go to festivals like Cannes and Sundance, and that it was also pretty much the only feasible way. When I discussed my opportunity, he thought that it was a great idea, but that it would need a lot of time to gain traction, time which filmmakers and filmgoers may not have

Interview #3 Will Sykes My third interview was with Will Sykes, a friend I grew up with in Los Angeles who also has a family member who is a producer, who plays a great deal in securing distributions and global releases. While that family member was not able to be reached for this assignment, Will is the next best thing. My first question for him was how often do films not associated with studios get wide releases and distributions. He responded saying that it all comes down to how renowned it can become before any possible investors come into the mix; he said some films get picked up pretty fast from word of mouth alone, while others wallow for years. He said overall it was a matter of luck and connections. My second question for him was how hard is it for a film not associated with a studio to get a wide release and distribution. He said it was incredibly challenging, as the dynamic in the film industry means that studios are the big fish with all of the deals, and the independent filmmakers are the guppies getting the scraps. Basically, he’s saying that it is incredibly hard for in independent filmmaker to secure a distribution deal. My final question was what was the most common way for an independent film to get a wide release/distribution. He said the same thing that my other two interviewees said: festivals the independent filmmakers attend with their projects have the best chances of getting picked up there. But he also added that a strong overseas release could also justify a distribution agreement. When I discussed my idea with him, he said it was strong and could benefit many filmmakers and investors alike. 

Interview #4 Madison Cole My fourth interview was with Madison Cole, a production intern on one of my dad’s recent projects. She was responsible for a lot so her input was also quite valuable to the progression of this project. My first question for Madison was how often do films not associated with studios get wide releases and distributions. She said, as someone who had worked on sets of both independent and studio films in the past, that it is a rare occurrence that an independent film gets a sizeable distribution, mainly because investors are primarily looking to put money into projects with guaranteed success, like superhero films. My second question for her was how hard is it for a film not associated with a studio to get a wide release and distribution. She said that it is incredibly challenging, simply because, like she said before, no one wants to look at these smaller films when films as big as studio ones are around. My final question was what was the most common way for an independent film to get a wide release/distribution. She said that, like everyone else, film festivals provide indie filmmakers the best shot at getting picked up for distribution. She positively received my idea, thinking that it had enough people who could benefit from it. 

Interview #5 Ricky Acosta My final interview was with Ricky Acosta, a sound engineer/boom mic operator I met while shooting a student film many years ago. He has since moved to LA and is doing well for himself there. My first question for Ricky was how often do films not associated with studios get wide releases and distributions. He said it didn’t happen very often, as indie filmmakers don’t have the means of putting their work out there the way studios can with their projects. My second question for him was how hard is it for a film not associated with a studio to get a wide release and distribution. He said it was incredibly challenging, as the average film needs $20 million to get a strong distribution, and most indie guys could only dream of seeing that much money. My final question was what was the most common way for an independent film to get a wide release/distribution. He agreed with everyone else in saying film festivals are the best option for independent films to get the necessary exposure needed to get a distribution deal. 

	Inside the Boundary	Outside the Boundary
Who is…	Anybody who wants to make a film of any scale or capacity can use this service. Anyone who is looking to give money to those wanting to make films are also inside the boundary, along with people. who would like to view the finished product.	Anyone who is not doing what is listed inside of the boundary should be considered outside of the boundary.
What the Need is/isn’t	The need is independent filmmakers needing funding for films and distribution deals that couldn’t afford them without the help of outside investors.	This is not a way to combat the big studios, but is simply a way to give independent filmmakers the tools and resources they need to see their cinematic visions through.
Why the need exists	The need exists because there are hundreds if not thousands of filmmakers who cannot support the creation of their films, or secure proper distribution, because there isn’t a platform for these people to communicate with possible investors	Alternatives: Another reason why this exists could be because of the investors themselves ignoring independent filmmakers altogether.

Summarization: Overall, the interviews made me want to pursue this idea further than I ever thought; I knew when I came up with this with Dr. Pryor that it had crazy potential, but now I fully understand what I have on my hands. There is an unmet need out there so powerful that it has become a part of an industry standard. It will not be easy, but with the right ideas, motivation and hard work, this idea could succeed and redefine the film industry dynamic as we know it. 

Logan Russell's Solving the Problem

After I turned in the last batch of assignments, I found myself disillusioned with my idea; it was too broad and I couldn’t seem to pick out a specific problem to write an opportunity about. I knew that I wanted to stick with the film industry, the relationship between studios and independent filmmakers in particular, but I couldn’t narrow it down enough to isolate a functional idea. But that all changed when I asked Dr. Pryor himself for assistance in taking my topic of film industry dynamic and uncovering a strong opportunity from that, and what we came up was truly amazing. Together we discussed the opportunity of how independent filmmakers not backed by studios do not have the financial means to distribute their film, meaning they can’t afford to advertise the project or put it in theatres. This is a real problem because this means that being aligned with a studio is the only effective way to give a film a wide release, which isn’t fair at all for anyone not a part of that group. While certain film festivals, such as Cannes, host executives who can choose to distribute films they screen, a lot of movies don’t get the traction necessary to even make it to the festivals themselves. 

My solution is to create a service that allows independent filmmakers of all calibers to find possible investors for their work; think of it like a gofundme just for films. Films have been made in the past through funding sites, a prominent example being Super Troopers 2. Having this service will allow those who previously didn’t have the financial means to make and distribute a film the opportunity to do just that. On top of that, the service would provide, grassroots screenings for these movies for all to see, sort of like a “Woodstock for movies” as Dr. Pryor so aptly put it. This solution has the potential to really change the dynamic of the film industry as a whole should it find success. 

Logan Russell's Testing the Hypothesis, Part 1

Opportunity: Some filmmakers are afraid to work with production houses, such as Disney, Sony, Lionsgate, New Line Cinema, and 21st Century Fox, because they are afraid that their vision will be stifled by executives whose main goal is to make a profit. While this isn't as pervasive as it was in decades past, the surge in popularity in independent filmmaking directly correlates with this trend. I know this especially well: my dad often tells me stories from when he was shooting The Mask in 1994, he had to constantly fight the studio making the movie to keep as much of his vision in tact as possible. My opportunity is that we can train future executives how to find a balance between making their studio profit and allowing creative freedoms to the filmmakers. The who: filmmakers of all kinds. The what: often have the vision of their film altered greatly by studio executives. The why: The studios are hungry for money, and thusly manipulate the movie to where they think it will maximize its profit, often at the expense of the filmmaker's vision.

Hypothesis:
Testing the Who: While this is indeed a very niche opportunity, there are others within the film industry besides filmmakers that suffer from this situation. Screenwriters often have their drafts completely retooled before studios will event consider picking up the script. Actors will often find their choices for the way a role should be performed altered by studios as well in order to create a character that will be more popularly received, more often than not so that they can make a lucrative toy line based on that character.
Testing the What: The major studios have a variety of ways to go about asserting their dominance over the entirety of a project, overshadowing the wills of practically all else involved. They will make threats to blacklist the artist from the industry as a whole, which could make or break the carrier of an up and comer. While the heavy hitters of the industry are untouchable by the major studios, those trying to make a name for themselves have to work with them, and often sacrifice the quality of their work to appeal to the wills of the studio in order to galvanize their Hollywood reputation.
Testing the Why: All the studios want is money and power, and they go about doing this by releasing universally applauded moneymakers. More often than not they will hire directors and writers they know will be malleable to their demands and will produce something that aligns with what the studio thinks will rake in the most cash. Money is what drives the studios to break the will of those who stand in the way of what they think their movie should be like. A great example of this was the Michael Keaton Batman franchise; a third movie was slated to be released, but Warner Bros. thought the last one was too dark, and decided to make the third one more family friendly to sell toys and get family into the seats of movie theaters. The two movies that followed killed the batman franchise for 10 years and are considered some of the worst movies of all time.

Interview #1 Paul Kleist Basically, I interviewed five people I knew were very knowledgeable about the film industry and asked them questions about the relationships between directors and studios. My first interview was with Paul Kleist, a friend of mine and a fellow film aficionado. When I asked him if the major studios have too much power in Hollywood, he answered with a resounding yes, stating that unless it has a studio logo in the opening credits, a movie nowadays will have to fight to earn its budget back. I asked him if he thought that film studios are threatened by independent filmmakers and he said that they should be, as more and more people are becoming aware of the studio's dangerous grip. I lastly offered up my solution and he thought that while it was idealistic, the studios will always go after money and nothing will change that.

Interview #2 Sarah Simmons My second interview was with Sarah Simmons, a childhood friend  who also has a father in the film industry, a cinematographer who found mild success on a steady career. When I asked her if the major studios have too much power in Hollywood, she stated that they did. She recounted a story in which a friend of her fathers had a script he wrote stollen and re-skinned by a major studio and couldn't do anything about it because the legal fees would bankrupt him and negatively impact his reputation. I asked her if she thought that film studios are threatened by independent filmmakers, and she said no. Basically, Sarah found that studios are like steamrollers, flattening any that oppose them. I lastly discussed my opportunity and she found it to be useless, as nothing will topple the film industry studio structure.

Interview #3 George Hollander My third interview was with George Hollander, a member of the film club I was a part of in my high school. His knowledge of cinema history is near encyclopedic so I found his input particularly valuable. When I asked him if the major studios have too much power in Hollywood, he agreed, but not to the extent as anyone else. He argued that the film studios need to be powerful so that the films they produce can reach a national, or even international, audience. If every film was indie, he said, than they would be no different than studio films after a while, as people would rush in to invest and eventually the studio hierarchy would rise again. When I asked if he thought that film studios are threatened by independent filmmakers, he said yes. With the dynamic of the film industry changing as of late, he argued that eventually the scales could tip and indie filmmakers could be the go to source for lucrative work in Hollywood. When I discussed my opportunity with him, he believed that if enough force was behind the idea, it could be totally possible. If enough people demand the studios relinquish creative control back to the filmmakers, it could very well happen.

Interview #4 Lenny Santaniello My fourth interview was with my pal Lenny Santaniello, another childhood friend from Los Angeles, who is currently trying to make it as an actor. I sought him out because his insights would be particularly interesting considering he has greater interaction with the studios that most people I know. When I asked him if the major studios have too much power in Hollywood, he agreed. He said that only the major studios could afford to have auditions as extensive and thorough as they do, which puts independent filmmakers at a disadvantage already. When I asked if he thought that film studios are threatened by independent filmmakers, he thought that they are because now indie filmmakers are becoming known for producing quality work that major studios will have to compete with. When I discussed my opportunity with him, he thought that if done right and with enough manpower behind it that it could be a success and redefine the film industry.

Interview #5 Cassie Powell My final interview was with Cassie Powell, a friend and fellow classmate in my film studies class in high school. When I asked her if the major studios have too much power in Hollywood, she said for a while yes, but that it may be slipping away. Film studios lately have been under much scrutiny lately, she argued, due to recent events such as the MeToo movement and the Weinstein scandal. She thought that at this point no figure in Hollywood, studios included, is immune from being taken down. When I asked if she thought that film studios are threatened by independent filmmakers, she thought so, as again, the changes surrounding Hollywood as of late could create a shift in power that favors independent filmmakers. When I discussed my opportunity with her, she thought that now is the best time to put them into action, as Hollywood is in the process of reinventing itself and this could be the icing on the cake.

Conclusion/Thoughts From my findings in the interviews, I believe that due to Hollywood's current climate, change is especially welcome. The film industry is quickly becoming one of the most inclusive industries in the world, and capitalizing on that by including ways to allow filmmakers to retain their creative visions while working with major film studios seems like a no-brainer. It is a change people want to see, and although it its grand in scope, if Hollywood has taught us anything over the last few months, is that even the tallest giants can fall, and that change is full possible.

Logan Russell's Identifying Opportunities in Economic and Regulatory Trends

Economic Trend #1: Baby Boomers Aren't Retiring
- This economic trend was found on the website "the balance" in an article discussing recent prominent economic trends. The lack of baby boomers retiring means that they are still working at a similar pace compared to most younger Americans. In order to keep up the pace, these baby boomers will rely on medication, vitamins, fitness, and other remedies to counter the inevitable sluggishness age provides. If there was a product that was capable of providing the same energy of caffeine or B12, but safe for the hearts of those who would consider themselves baby boomers, a huge breakthrough is bound to occur. The prototypical customer, easily enough, would be baby boomers, or those born between 1946 and 1964. This opportunity is indeed relatively easy to exploit, because baby boomers would rely on this product to stay as mentally and physically keen as younger generations; their livelihoods are on the line if they lose that competition and the product doesn't do its job. I saw this opportunity because my father is a baby boomer and still very active in his field of work. He often discusses with me how he's being phased out by younger competitors who come to the same conclusions he does, only faster. If such a miracle product existed, he would stand a chance against the tide of youth.

Economic Trend #2: The Rise of Interest Rate Prices
- This economic trend was found on the same website as the one above, "the balance," also in the same article discussing recent prominent economic trends. I found that this is a problem that effects a great many people; as interest rates increase, more people won't be able to afford to take out loans. My opportunity is inspired by the GI Bill, but with a modern twist. The GI Bill was passed in the 1940s and provided money for homes and education for soldiers returning from war. Without this money, these soldiers would have never been able to afford their houses, similarly to how people won't be able to own their homes if interest rates continue to rise. If there was a handout program for people who met certain predetermined qualifications that would give them the resources to disarm these interest rates, there would be a huge surge in the housing market. The prototypical customer would most likely be young families looking to own their first home. This system could be considered easy to exploit, it it is barely a fraction of a functional idea so I couldn't even begin to tell how; an idea of this scale could be vulnerable to many things.

Regulatory Change #1: The Tariff Situation
- The news has been abuzz with word that the Trump presidency will be imposing heavy tariffs on certain countries, the ones we do the most trading with in particular, These tariffs were designed to get jobs back into the country that we were previously outsourced to the aforementioned countries. The tariffs are only upsetting other countries which will eventually retaliate and create counter tariffs which will only serve to damage our economy. My opportunity comes into play for local farmers and agriculturalists, who should benefit from this. Because international trade will be inevitably damaged by this, local produce producers will see a massive rise in profit. Those who would benefit from the tariff debacle, as they would become the prime source for the in demand resources. This situation could see the agriculturalist taken advantage of, as those who control the market could make demands of the farmers and problems could ensue. I came across this problem because, as a California native, I actually have a few friends whose parents work in the farming business, and they spoke at great lengths of the effects of NAFTA on their businesses.

Regulatory Change #2: Repeal of Anti-Discriminatory Regulation
- I was looking into regulation that involved racism and this was a very interesting example that came up. There was in place an Obama-era piece of legislation that prevented any type of discrimination on the showroom floor. Statistics prove that loan rates for cars of all kind were significantly higher to those of minorities, so the rule was put in place to counter that. A few months back this piece of regulation was repealed. This presents an opportunity for auto chains to meet with minority leaders to plot out exactly what has to be done to eliminate this hostile environment. Those who would most directly benefit from these opportunities would be minorities who were previously mistreated by the automotive industry. I decided to discuss this particular topic because I actually know of people who have experienced this type of discrimination in car dealerships in the past.