Every Film is a Startup. That's the Problem.

Here’s the life cycle of most independent films.

A filmmaker falls in love with a story. They spend months, sometimes years, developing it. They raise money one conversation at a time. A team comes together. They shoot, edit, and finish the film. Maybe it premieres at a festival.

And then everything dissolves.

The crew moves on. The investors wait to see if they’ll get their money back. The audience that showed up for the premiere scatters. The hard-won lessons live in one person’s head, if they live anywhere.

Then the filmmaker starts the next project from zero, building it all over again. By hand. Reinventing the wheel in the most exhausting way possible. 

A Startup Every Time

In independent media, every film is treated as a standalone startup. That really translates to start over. 

Think about what that would mean in any other business. Imagine a restaurant that hired a new kitchen staff for every dinner service, bought new equipment each night, found new customers each time, and then closed its doors after dessert.

No one would call that a business model. But that’s how much of independent filmmaking works.

It’s inefficient, and it’s expensive. Every project pays the startup costs again: finding the team, building the relationships, learning the legal and financial lessons, and finding the audience.

The Documentary Squeeze

These challenges are most visible in documentary filmmaking. Even before recent shifts weakened the public infrastructure that once supported documentaries, the economics were fragile. Congress eliminated federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which dissolved in January 2026. The National Endowment for the Humanities canceled more than 1,400 grants in 2025, a move a federal judge later ruled unlawful.

Funding is scarce, highly competitive, and disconnected from long-term career development. Business literacy, rights protection, and audience strategy are rarely priorities.

Filmmakers are expected to be artists, fundraisers, lawyers, and entrepreneurs all at once, without the systems that make any of those roles sustainable.

True stories make it harder. Developing them responsibly takes time, trust, and legal discipline. Rights must be secured carefully. Subjects, families, and estates deserve respect, and so do the creatives who bring those stories to life.

Most of the documentary filmmakers I’ve met have a charity mindset, rather than a business mindset. I think that’s because of the way the system has worked for years. It was structured to push you into grant cycles, crowdfunding, and leaning on the generosity of family and friends to pursue passion projects. 

Nearly all of them make a living doing something other than documentary filmmaking. For many, it doesn’t even rise to the level of a side gig like driving for Uber or doing freelance production work. 

I’m not saying any of this to be critical. My own first documentary landed squarely in this space, despite my best intentions. That’s the nature of the work and the delicate economic reality of this part of the media and entertainment industry. 

Development often takes years. Yet the system rewards speed, scarcity, and short-term survival rather than the patient development of long-term value.

This Isn’t a People Problem

Over the last several years, I’ve talked with filmmakers, investors, distributors, attorneys, creators, and entrepreneurs across the industry. I’ve studied business models and analyzed what succeeded and what failed.

What I found was both encouraging and frustrating.

There’s no shortage of talented storytellers. There’s no shortage of compelling stories. And there’s no shortage of audience demand.

What’s missing is a system designed to create long-term value.

That’s not a people problem. It’s a systems problem.

Industry Growth & Disruptive Change

Deadline recently reported on Interbrand’s latest Best Global Brands report, which ranks entertainment as the world’s second most valuable sector by brand value, behind only technology and now ahead of automotive. The combined brand value of entertainment companies reached $332.5B, an increase of 12.4% year-on-year, with Netflix, YouTube, and Spotify all posting significant gains. 

The industry’s revenue is growing, too. PwC’s latest Global Entertainment & Media Outlook projects worldwide entertainment and media revenue will reach $4.2 trillion by 2030. Global advertising spending passed $1 trillion for the first time in 2025. 

Those numbers, and the consolidation reshaping the industry, underscore what is at stake. The industry is growing while significant disruption is underway at the same time.  I see opportunity for rethinking approaches and doing business in a new way. 

Disruption creates entrepreneurial opportunity. 

Think of the way Netflix disrupted Blockbuster and profoundly changed the entertainment industry. Today, Netflix is one of the brands driving entertainment’s rise in the Interbrand rankings. How people consume media is still rapidly evolving.  That signals opportunity. 

The Exceptions Prove the Point

Systematic, sustainable business models are rare in independent media. But there are a handful of notable exceptions, and they’re worth studying.

A24 built a brand that audiences follow. People show up for an A24 film because they trust the taste behind it, not only because of the title or the star.

Blumhouse built a repeatable production model: disciplined budgets, a clear genre focus, and a way for filmmakers to share in the upside when a film works.

Angel Studios built a direct relationship with its audience. Its Guild members help decide which projects get released, which turns viewers into partners.

They’re very different companies. But each one built something that lasts longer than any single film: a brand, a process, or a community. Each project makes the next one easier.

That’s the difference between a series of startups and a studio.

What a System Looks Like

That’s what STORYSMART® STUDIOS is built to be.

Each project will still stand on its own. But none of them will start from scratch. The knowledge, relationships, rights, and audiences from one story will carry forward to the next.

We will build balanced slates, not isolated creative bets. Every project will be judged on creative merit, and on an honest assessment of how it can reach an audience, how it can be financed responsibly, and how it fits the broader portfolio.

We must be rigorous and disciplined about the projects we greenlight. 

Some people hear “discipline” and assume it means less creativity. I see it the other way around. Discipline is a safeguard. It protects creators, investors, and the studio by making sure ambition is matched with realism.

And because the studio owns and stewards the story IP it develops, the value doesn’t disappear when the credits roll. It compounds.

Talent isn’t the scarce resource in independent media. Infrastructure is.

Next time, in Part 4, I’ll look at the most valuable thing independent filmmakers keep losing between projects: their audience.

About Ron Watermon

Ron Watermon is a creator, builder, media entrepreneur, filmmaker, and the founder of STORYSMART. He writes about professional storytelling, media entrepreneurship, filmmaking, and the business of turning stories into valuable assets.

Ron is the author of STORYSMART Storytelling for ALL and is currently building STORYSMART STUDIOS, an independent media company dedicated to developing, producing, and owning profitable, enduring original media properties.

The STORYSMART® Way

For deeper studio thinking and more content around the business of filmmaking and professional storytelling, The STORYSMART Way is Ron's monthly email newsletter to members of the STORYSMART community. You can join for FREE at https://storysmart.net/join

About My STORYSMART® Perspective

At STORYSMART, we approach storytelling, filmmaking, and media development as a long-term, rights-first business rather than a project-by-project creative exercise.

Our focus is on understanding how stories create value over time through ownership, disciplined development, audience relationships, and thoughtful risk management.

The articles, commentary, and educational materials published here are intended to contribute to broader conversations about storytelling, media, and intellectual property. They are provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or financial advice.



Nothing contained in this publication is intended to promote or solicit investment in any specific project, company, or security. Any discussions regarding potential business or investment opportunities are conducted separately and, where applicable, pursuant to appropriate agreements and offering materials.