One of the first world renowned film festivals was created in 1981 by acting legend Robert Redford. Named after his character in the 1969 film Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, the mission of the festival was to “encourage independent filmmakers and introduce them to potential financiers (filmstyle.com).” For decades, Sundance has been a special gem in the middle of Park City where unconventional and unique films got a chance to grace the silver screen.

However, in recent years with the advent of streaming, services like Netflix and HBO have taken their films and television shows to Venice, Cannes, and Sundance with the intention to push for publicity and marketing. Likewise, streaming services have dominated the green light market for independent films, creating a monopoly of streaming that limits the independent studios that can squeeze through.

When a producer comes upon a promising project or a marketable idea, their ambition only takes them as far as the pay checks that they’re offered. Often, services get into bidding wars and spend most of their allotted money getting one project, then spreading the resources and financing multiple films. This was especially true in 2021, when Apple fought for the worldwide rights to the film, CODA, which ended up winning three Oscars, including Best Picture, at the 2022 Academy Awards. Netflix and Amazon were also bidding on the film, and Apple ended up winning out for $25 million. Spending that much money on acquiring one film was unheard of, and it changed the landscape of how film festivals provided financial opportunities for independent avant-garde films.

Over 13,000 films get submitted for consideration at Sundance every year. In 2022, the official lineup included “82 feature films, 15 New Frontier projects, and six indie episodic features. 91% of the Festival’s feature films in 2022 were world premieres (trulyexperiences.com).” This means that more films than ever are being submitted, and less are being financed because services are coming in with the most amount of the money and the fewest selections. What does this mean for filmmakers and independent studios?

“If you hooked the seven streamers up to a polygraph, they’d probably admit that their content budgets are close to an aggregate of $120 billion,” says John Sloss, a veteran manager, agent and the founder of Cinetic Media. “Obviously, that’s not spent entirely on Sundance movies, but that’s a lot of money.”

-Variety Magazine

The onslaught of the Coronavirus pandemic also affected the monetary gain of independent films that came out of festivals like Sundance. Virtual screenings and diminished box office numbers made financiers less eager to take chances on independent films. In 2023, Netflix and Apple acquired films for $20 million and a smaller studio like Searchlight Pictures only spent $8 million to acquire their project, Theater Camp, starring Ben Platt. The line has blurred between theatrical releases and streaming releases, and many independent filmmakers are content with either  if it means getting their passion projects off the ground.

It’s also worth noting that film festivals don’t just exist for financial funding. If a festival reacts positively to a screening, that reputation has the potential to spread through media and distribution offices that later lead to distribution deals. That’s why big Hollywood movies like The Whale and Dune premiered at the Venice film festival, because the highest percentage of movies at festivals are the features themselves. Online streaming services offer a variety of opportunities where projects might land, and because the pandemic distanced the possibility of theatrical releases, online alternatives seemed promising to festivals like Sundance. So, if your movie is lucky enough to be selected for a festival and then gets chosen by a streaming service, that is what is now considered success within the industry.

While festivals like TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival) are often a pitstop for Hollywood feature films, “the Cannes film festival is heavily focused on French cinema production and doesn’t accept Netflix premieres for this reason (festivalsherpa.com).” In 2017, the festival instigated a rule saying that films “competing for prizes must have a theatrical release in France (qz.com).” They believe that opening the doors to streaming services gives them an unfair advantage compared to lesser known companies and studios. This has been argued by Thierry Frémaux, the Cannes artistic director himself. It points to the running argument that cinema is what is screened in actual theaters. If everyone sits at home watching a series premiere on HBO, is that really worth a full premiere?

Everyone knows of the infamous applause videos that surface after films premiere at Cannes. They range from eight to twelve minutes long, often cluing in the larger media world of the coming box office success. Filmmakers like Martin Scorsese and Wes Anderson have had reactions like this and as a result, more attention is given to the marketing potential of their films. Not to mention, journalists are often given press passes that allow them to write early reviews before the release date. Regardless of the intent that these streaming services have, its no mystery that they’ve changed the landscape of film festivals indefinitely.