‘Isn’t that Keanu Reeves?’ and other phrases overheard at Sundance

“Look, it’s — what’s his name?” (This from a woman who had just taken a quick selfie with old what’s-his-name.)

“Keanu Reeves is over there!”

“Did you look in that cafe? It’s like hipster central in there.”

“Who’s everybody waiting for?” (This is overheard, and asked, a lot.)

What can I tell you? Alec Baldwin sat behind me at a film the other night. Really. It is a scene. There’s always the sense that something wonderful (i.e. celebrity-centered) is going on — just in there, where a large man is guarding the door and you don’t have a pass to get in. Oh, well. The setting is spectacular amid the mountains and snow, even if there’s not been that much snowfall so far this year. Off in the distance there’s a snow-making machine in perpetual “on” mode.

Sundance is still about the films, of course, and you can watch them from early morning until late at night. I quickly slipped into the otherwise abnormal practice of seeing movies at 9 a.m. Another thing that hit me, as it did on my first visit, is the sheer number of films available that I might not otherwise get to see. And that leads to the question: What happens to all these movies after Sundance? That’s the focus of our second Sundance story, airing tonight. It’s so difficult to get here with a film. You get your moment with a premiere and several screenings. But then what?

We look at newer distribution models — particularly video on demand — and how they impact filmmakers. We were able to spend time with some interesting people from this world. Among them, Christine Vachon, a veteran producer of such films as “Boys Don’t Cry” and “Still Alice.” (She made me laugh when telling me how she came here many years ago for the first time and won the Grand Jury Prize — for the film, “Poison.” She’s been back with some 21 other films and never won again.)

And Joe and Kris Swanberg, husband and wife, both directors, both with films at Sundance this year — that must be quite unusual. When I asked about being the realities of being a “two-income independent filmmaker family,” Joe answered that they’re more like a “two-gambler family” given that they typically take all earnings from films and re-invest them in the next one. “It’s a tricky industry,” he said, “and it’s an industry that pays off if you invest in yourself. But that payoff comes in weird ways and over a long period of time.” There’s a third member of this indie film family, by the way: young son, Jude, who’s appeared in several of dad’s films. When I pointed out that that must help keep down costs, Joe said yes, but Jude actually does get paid and Kris added with a laugh that he probably has earned more than his parents. And, unlike them, “he doesn’t have any debt.”

I also spoke with Kerry Trainor, CEO of Vimeo, about his company’s model of video on demand. Interesting to think about it: Vimeo doesn’t have ads. The “payday” for filmmakers comes if they’re able to entice consumers to pay $5 or $10 or more to watch a film. So the key is finding and holding onto that passionate audience. It’s “niche” programming. As Trainor told me, “When you’re selling a piece of work, it really only takes tens of thousands of buyers for selling something at 5 or 10 dollars to make hundreds of thousands of dollars.” Compare that to the YouTube model, with advertising, that requires, say, millions of views to pay out. Niche versus mass. All still evolving before our eyes.