headbin

Interactive Ideas - software distributor feedback

I asked Michael Trup, CEO of indie distributor http://www.interactiveideas.com
these questions:

How many sales would you anticipate of a product such as this?

What percentage could we, the producers, expect to get from total sales revenue? In that, I mean that we would probably act as both publisher and developer for the demo and subsequent product.

His response:

The questions are much easier to answer in reverse order. At £9.99 retail, the ex-vat price is £8.50. Major retailers (Game, PC World) will want a minimum 50% discount but probably neareer 55% = £3.85 and we as a distributor would buy at approx. 65% discount = £2.97 These prices are for PC CD-ROM. For DVD films, retail etc. take somewhat smaller margins but as this is to be used pro-actively on a computer rather than played on a DVD player it will be treated as software.

Happy to meet a chew the fat if you think I can be of any more help.

NESTA project summary

Ian Poitier from NESTA has helpfully provide a section of his final report (see below) for comment on by Tuesday to ensure that the project is fairly represented.

Any comments on whether these sections fairly represent the proposal from your angle, please advice via comment.

THE PROJECT

The proposal is to develop tools and resources, which will allow film sampling (audio/visual assets) to become as commonplace as music sampling.
The idea is to produce a short film, ‘Sanctuary’, which will act as a demo to show how it can be experienced as passive entertainment (a DVD film) as well as a re-mixable film to be played with on a gaming console as well as in an online environment.

Key Features & Benefits

A re-mixable film product will allow the consumer to:
o Watch a film as normal on DVD
o Play a rhythm game to experience how the cinema mix is constructed in real-time (out of video, audio, 360 degree panoramas and 3D animation) and explore how it is malleable
o Re-cut the film or extract elements of the film for use elsewhere
o Insert content from elsewhere into the film experience
o Re-mix (and even re-code) the film experience for performance and gameplay
o Share re-mixes by uploading them to the Internet

THE MARKET

Three key markets exist:

1. Filmmakers who can generate additional revenue streams by shooting films in a way which allows elements to be re-mixed by consumers in a gaming environment, or exploit their existing film libraries further by finding new uses for films which are otherwise past their active shelf life. Merchandising opportunities will also be enhanced.
2. Game developers who will have additional tools to provide a wider range of gaming products
3. Consumers who can interact with films in new ways

Market Trends

In line with the overall trend for entertainment products, both the film & game markets are still growing, with even the sleepier demographics (35yrs+) displaying growth for appropriately targeted products.
As ever, most revenue is channelled back to distributors with small producers (films & games) relying more on ancillary products for revenue (e.g. DVD sales, merchandise etc)
These observations hold true at global, regional and national levels, although with the global market for licensed entertainment property generating $42.5 billion in worldwide retail sales in 2002 (interestingly at the tail end of the global economic downturn), trying to put valuations on the market potential of individual products is not very meaningful (e.g. the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings/Matrix film & games products while generating strong individual performances have arguably also helped to grow the categories significantly)

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

At this stage, technology IP will be protected via copyright and confidentiality agreements.
Software patents are, at present, not considered the most viable form of protection for this idea given the requisite costs and the social dimension of the project, which concerns wider sharing. Legal advisors will be monitoring the project and this position may change based on the outcome of the development phase. Traditionally game developers have not patented technology and game publishers often take the view that "ideas are cheap, development is expensive".
The project will carry out "defensive publication" of the technology to avoid someone else patenting the idea. Websites and key industry publications will be used defensively as a place to publish research in order to make it "prior art". The principal revenue stream will come from copyrighted assets but this tactic will protect against the possibility that someone else patents the relevant material.
It will be at the company's later discretion as to what modules of the eventual console software (excluding whatever engine is licensed) will be released as open source code to support wider take-up. The remainder of the code base will be a key asset.
The company will allow unprecedented access to film assets in order to maximise public exposure to the business model in order to encourage take-up of assets for commercial use (under license for further interactive development and with clearance fees for broadcast and synch rights).

Nesta Revenue Timeline

http://thequality.com/flics/10weeks/blog/archives/docs/Timeline.xls

Nesta Revenue Streams

http://thequality.com/flics/10weeks/blog/archives/docs/Nesta Revenue resp final.doc

Key processes

Agents shopt movie scripts with game design documentation

About time...

"Taking things even further, agents now are beginning to shop movie scripts with game-design documents together, so that a movie studio and a game publisher can nurture a potential franchise simultaneously across mediums. "

Wired News: Games, Movies Tie the Knot

Compromises

The original scope for the project is proving difficult for people to absorb. I'm thinking about the following ways to simplify the concept.

Sell film assets for commercial re-use via the web

Shoot SANCTUARY on high-definition video

Cut out the SWITCH (plug-in an existing open source DJ/VJ tool)

Do a deal with Lionhead to create "The Movies" compliant assets

Final NESTA page

I see a need for:

* a new framework for making and distributing stories
* an open pool of film-making resources that can drive creativity, business and education in a more sustainable way

No one else is doing this because:

* I am one of the few cross-over artists with experience in online film production, management and distribution.
* Classical film training doesn't identify the gap we are exploiting
* Games focus on giving the player control, not narrative and story-telling
* Interactive business focus is technology, not content
* Film assets which remain unused in the final cut are typically viewed as disposable rather than re-cyclable
* Film-makers fear the intrusion of an alien discipline into their craft
The target audience would like this because:
* re-mixable films allow the movie-going public to match their own tastes more closely
* people like mastering technology
* people crave original stories that appeal to their own particular tastes
* family interactive (digital) entertainment is rare
* subcultures are actively dabbling in this field "under the radar"

What we sell is:

* Films in the form of re-usable art on DVD
* Commerical spin-offs generated from films on demand - e.g. ring-tones, chat line capability
* Subscription to a development community based around re-usable film assets
* Professional services to help others exploit their film assets in a similar framework
* Events to promote the framework and build a community

to people who buy:

1) film and interactive products
2) consultancy services in media production
3) education and training resources

Brands/teams interested in this:

1,3) British Council
1) BAFTA Interactive Festival

2) Marc Evans (Dir. My Little Eye)
2) Simon Pummell (Dir. Bodysong
2)Andrew Mason (City Productions)
2) David Minkowski (Stillking Productions - AVP, XXX, etc.)
2) Filmbank Distributors

3) Nesta Fellowships
3) Artemis-Digital/Edinbrough Games Festival
3) EURIMAGE

Industry endorsements

INTERACTIVE INDUSTRY

"The time is right to try something like this."
Adrian Curry, XBox Account Manager, Microsoft UK

"I'd publish something like that. I'll be your producer"
Grant Dean, Executive Producer (ex-Eidos, THQ, Midway Games)

You're selling looms, not cotton. That's interesting."
Terry Braun, braunarts multimedia production company.

"That sounds really interesting. I'll put you in contact with The Movies team so you can see how it might work."
Peter Molyneux, Founder Lionhead Studios (potential licensee)

"what you are planning - really stimulating and mind-stretching!"
Peter Wienand, Partner, Farrer & Co.

"What you're attempting is the holy grail of interactivity. Getting non-gamers to play."
Nick Button-Brown, Business Development Manager Europe, Electronic Arts

FILM INDUSTRY

"That's really interesting. I want you to meet my producers."
Marc Evans, Director My Little Eye, Trauma

"It's a good idea. Let's meet again."
Simon Pummell, Director, Bodysong

"Great idea. This should be looked at as part of entertainment. It's good that there are people like you out there. Otherwise things won't ever change"
David Glennon, Sales Manager, Filmbank Distributors (potential services client)

Round-up from What's the Story?

For those who didn't come to the event I hosted mid-week or any other BAFTA Interactive Festival events, here's an update. My event was reasonably well attended, overall people seemed to find it interesting and I've had quite a few new leads and introductions. No one (so far) has disputed the premise of re-mixable films although I tried not to couch the debate in those terms.

Some observations:

* "The Movies" game that was previewed by Peter Molyneux can be thought of as a 3rd party editing application in terms of the NESTA proposal. Not only would it be feasible and desirable to license SANCTUARY assets to Lionhead Studios if the film was mega-successful (e.g. so people could stage scenes in the sanctuary) but Peter suggested I talk to the development team later on to explore the technicalities.

* Support from the IPR specialists Farrer & Co who apparently also provide legal advice to NESTA. The guy we spoke to said that the idea was sound, albeit "mind-stretching" and that we were in a position to write our own licensing terms and business model because there was none out there to share. Christine discovered to her surprise that the games industry, on a whole, don't pay any mechanical royalties due to the logistical nightmare and costs that would entail in this kind of business. It suggests (to me at least) that NESTA need to consider the creative appeal of the end product over and above the risk of the business model as businesses evolve to this kind of thing.

* Strong support from e-learning practitioners who keep repeating the mantra that there are "huge pots of money for e-learning". The idea that the re-mixable film is in itself a tool for open ended (almost anarchical) creativity was suggested as a potential antidote to the widespread apathy within the school system between the ages of 14 and 18.

* A surprisingly small number of game industry developers attended the festival, suggesting a certain degree of inward focus and a reason for the technology-driven approach. If you rarely see your peers, how do you share ideas?

* There is contention between game executives as to whether film assets are directly re-usable or not. The person with the most experience of film production(e.g. Jason Kingsley from Rebellion) seemed to think it was possible.

* Only one person in the audience (and no-one on the panel) had ever experienced the Sing-along Sound of Music.

* Real-time 3D avatar manipulation during the discussion split the audience. Some felt it was a bit distracting, others loved it.

* Hardly anyone from the film industry attended the BAFTA Interactve Festival.
* The game industry are ill-equipped to think about live applications yet many small interactive industry companies are trying to work closer to theatre groups.

* Considerable surprise by many people as to how long this project has been in gestation. Suggesting it is really time to get on with the demo, NESTA funding not-withstanding. The theory kinda stops here. {:-)

Since the event I have also been in discussion with a mo-cap company that has been asking similar questions that we have been asking ourselves for this project. I'm also being sounded out about chairing an event produced by them for the Edinburough Games Festival on this theme.

I think it's interesting (and promising) that a technical services company (to both film and game companies) saying that they want to compare the business structure and the technical standards of the two industries. I take it as some validation of my idea that there is a HUGE market awaiting the earlier adopters of convergent tools.

I'm not particular excited about mo-cap in creative terms but I think it's a great indictor of the kinds of activities which film and game companies are mad not to consider unifying up-front.

The mo-cap guys want to explore the following:

What are the major differences in the technology used for making games and movies?

It seems that certainly on the graphics front the use of 3D Max and Maya is common across both. What other similarities are there and are there fundamental differences of application?

Can Movie assets be used in Games or visa versa? .

If not what could be done to make it possible in the future?

What is the structure of the film production business?

Is their ability to grow and shrink production companies a model that could be adopted more by developers?

Is there the wealth of freelance talent and service companies out there to support developers?

If not why not?

Is it their unique technology that which differentiates developers?

Is this always a good thing?

Is it due to the unique technology employed in each developer which makes hiring freelancers and interfacing with supply companies difficult?

Mortal Combat, Final Fantasy and Tomb Raider are three examples of games IP that have been exploited as films, why has The Getaway and more games like this not spawned more?

What were these companies experiences like?

How could it be done better?

Similar slant also on Games companies that have licence IP from the film business, are the deals equitable, what are the the do's and don'ts about managing the relationship?

Notes on meeting with Simon Pummell (Director)

The Bodysong website won a BAFTA Interactive award last night (Online Learning) and I met Simon, the Director, this morning. Simon conceived of the film (which had a six week cinema release in Dec 2003) as a film/web project. The website presents a 3D graphical browser of every scene in the film, arranged into thematic loops. Each scene also has a page of accompanying text which can be viewed online.

Notes on Bodysong. Budget 1.1Million from Film Four. Film Four, despite supposedly greenlighting the film/web concept then decided that they didn't have to pay for film (because "you can get the money elsewhere"). As a result, the site ended up being sponsored by The Hospital (Paul Allan's creative investor).

Notes on pitch. Liked the idea that this approach does not require film-makers to change their ways of working. Film companies are quite conservative.

MOD Films strap-line

"The person who tells you everything right away is a bore."
Alfred Hitchcock (Film Director)

"You can't look at humanity separate from machines."
Will Wright (Game Designer)

"A bad artist imitates, a good artist steals."
Pablo Picasso (Artist)

What's your story? What are you doing with it?

The IPR Minefield

Archie, Christine, Ann-Kristin, Nick from Addictive TV (who produce the VJ series MixMasters) and myself are meeting an IPR specialist tomorrow to put re-mixable films IPR issues under the spotlight.

Any thoughts on key issues or particular questions related to your area that we should be asking, please forward to me. I'll be blogging a report subsequently.

Kelseus endorse project

Antics from Kelseus is reviewed in Develop magazine (Feb 2004):

"Productivity and flexibility are the buzzwords within the animation sector. Whether it be games, TV or movies, studios are re-using as much content as possible to reduce both costs and scheduling pressures."

Kelseus are providing a free license in support of the MOD Films proposition and to generate pre-vis sales.

http://www.antics3d.com/

Quote from Jeremy Heath-Smith

Jeremy Heath-Smith (CEO Core - Tomb Raider) writes in Develop magazine (Feb 2004):

It was only on the last Tomb Raider that we got it right, with a complex in-house Intranet. This afforded the marketing and PR people throughout the territories a certain level of freedom within the centre of the development process; they had access to company specific details which made them feel much closer to the process. It also enabled us to feed information out at a more controlled pace. It's this sort of level of understanding and commitment that will be required to make the transition to the upcoming round of hardware.

His tips for getting publishers interested:

Timekeeping: don't be late

Have a plan: think beyond the pitch... publishers want overall team experience... look at using middleware

Have a team: your team should be already employed

Finances: if you can finance the work on a project for up to 12 months and produce an awesome demo, you immediately got to the top of the food chain... there is not a publisher in the industry who does not want to work closely with their developers... go through a company cashflow and projection with them, figuring out how you can work together to finance the project... by having your overheads covered - with a small amount of fat built in - you and the publisher have a common goal.

AK comments on proposal

Dear Michela,

I have carefully read the NESTA proposal and I must tell you it is quite impressive. The amount of work that has gone into that thing is astonishing. It is bursting with information. I see why they have been enthusiastic about the vision.

I have also, as you asked me to, jotted down some thoughts about the things I found a bit unclear or unfocused:

• My overall impression is that it is great, but I am not sure what to do with it. How will this actually work?
• MISSING LINKS: All the components are explained, but not always the link in between such as how does development lead directly to sales and distribution. And how does that distribution lead to customers using the product.
• GAP IDENTIFICATION: You have done a fantastic job in identifying the cross-over gap, but not quite convinced me of the need to fill it. You might tell me we don’t have a hybrid of a fish and a bicycle, but that does not meant that I will automatically go out and buy one. The opportunity is clear, but why do people want it? I think the market NEED is a crucial component as I don’t see how these dinosaurs of media conglomerates today will be willing to risk any of their traditional markets. I can therefore envision that they will indeed do anything to STOP this development out from a tradition of conservation. They might actually create more hurdles specifically to bring you down!
• PIRACY: One of the most exciting words in your proposal was piracy as this is something I can see to be crucial in convincing the majors that this is another way for them to exploit their royalties and licences in a market that is rapidly changing and where they will inevitable lose control. I think this is one of the most alluring economic arguments in the proposal and could easily be played up more.
• There is an eerie lack of critical approach to the saturation of the market. There is an underlying assumption that consumers will naturally jump at this, rather than have to discover the fun. It seems a bit easy when we see a trend in television which has started to slow down and abandoned ideas about letting the audience program and mix their own TV diet or fragmentation of the market into various specialised digital platforms simply because people are saturated by CHOICE. How will this be different, and why do consumers need it? We are already inundated with content. There also seems to be an assumption that every link in between will also think this is great and be willing to take a risk on it. Some of these components are already hard to access, and it seems a bit naïve to assume the film will be invited to festivals and claim the script will fetch $700,000 when so many films and scripts are clamouring for this market. How is this miracle going to happen?
• THE CONSUMER, the end customer, is not very clear to me. Sometimes he or she appears to belong to the popcorn demographic, sometimes he or she is just referred to as people.
• ECONOMICS: Show me the money! One of the hottest areas I had a difficulty figuring out was the money. I can’t extract from the proposal how the money works. There is no point asking for money for something that will be a charity without sustainable economic feet of its own. So, there are several revenue streams mentioned, but not particularly explained how one rolls into another. I read words like DVD sale, advertising, subscription, royalties, but I don’t see how they are structured in the process, how much they are worth for each product, how the money will be divided, and what time it will take to get back into MOD films pockets. This part of the proposal seems to me to be weak if not non-existing.
• There are sections for technical hurdles and creative hurdles, but none for distribution or consumer access.
• The proposal seems to be based entirely on game research. There is very little in it that pertains to the film industry.
• The exit strategy is very good.
• There is a noticeable discrepancy between your personal goal and the company goal. This is where the proposal gets very murky as it is not clear how the relationship between Sanctuary and the company vision is built. Is Sanctuary the overall goal, and the company simply there to support the film project? Or is the company project there to be sustainable in and of itself and will use Sanctuary to prove its own merit? There are two parallel tracks here. It becomes particularly clear when you describe your own reasons for doing the project is to promote your own work. With the lack of overall financial projections for the company, it can make it sound like you simply could not get an agent on your own so you’re making a short film instead to convince the majors to do your film. There are parts of the proposal that sounds like you are waiting for the Hollywood to just come pay you out and that leaves the rest of the idea and us hanging. It will not be popular with NESTA as it not only neglects to support sustainable development in the interactive industry in Britain, it goes directly against it! Remember the Film Council created the greenlight film fund to keep talent here so they would not go to Hollywood.
• The implementation stage of the project is a bit hazy. The timelines do not follow all the way through to money going back into your coffers. The timeline is not broken down into clear stages with cut-off and revision dates.
• It is not clear how the company will work with other projects than your own. As you aptly put it: you want to be the lead singer for a few years, but then what? For the other projects, will they be taken on by consensus governed by economic or quality concerns? How will this be a resource to the rest of the film community? What exactly are you offering: content consultation of how to remix teaching artists about the potential of their story? How to access the technology? How to distribute and find their audience?
• I think your idea about dropping the console is a good one.
• There are references to the old copyright being out-dated, but there is very little explanation of how this will work in the future. What are the legal trends?
• There is lots in the proposal about what you are going to do and with what, but little about how you are going to do it, for whom, and for what in return.

I hope this can be of some use to you!

Revenue Streams that need quantifying

MOD Films production service for 3rd party film projects

Direct DVD sales to home users

MOD Films production service for 3rd party production libraries

SANCTUARY clearance fees for producers

Online community advertising

Technology licensing for 3rd party developers

Film IP option for film producer

SANCTUARY royalties (indirect sales) from games publisher

Meeting with Adrian Curry (Microsoft)

Adrian says that given the impending release of XBox Music Mixer, the timing is right to try this concept.

The concept is also more timely as the XBox is entering its end of life cycle meaning 1) lower price titles 2) opportunity for niche markets 3) opportunity for quirkier titles 4) small publishers are coming on-board

He (along with Grant and MikeE) suggests that the demo should be developed firstly for PC. I'm sold!

The project could get console developer status (to allow MOD Films to buy XBox development hardware and write the demo for this) but an application is likely to be refused at this time on the basis that no game code has yet been written by the company. By developing a demo for the PC and establishing the business during the NESTA phase, the company would be in a realistic position to apply for a console license.

The key criteria for getting licensed developer status are staffing experience and current plans for the business.

He is interested in seeing the completed PC demo and being kept abreast of the project. He is coming to the What's the Story event.

He is happy to be a listed contact for NESTA but Microsoft cannot give "concept approval" because that is something that is only typically given to licensed publishers. Concept approval is a formal process in the games industry, the first step towards getting a title released. Microsoft doesn't normally give concept approval direct to developers because that could be used to the business advantage of an unlicensed publisher (seeking to become XBox licensed) who had signed up the developer already.

Agreed that a licensed publisher would need to see a demo before serious interest.

Suggested a large publisher like EA is unlikely to be interested in the title because their business model is to only publish titles that are likely to sell one million+ copies (i.e. tried-and-true formulae)

Unconvinced that XBOx Music Mixer will be a big-seller but confirmed that Microsoft is keen to using that product as a market opener which this product could follow through on.

Interested in the idea that the film would function as a glorified game lobby (one of the more basic ideas in the proposal). Microsoft are finding that XBox Live players have "friends lists" bigger than they expected and that there is a demand for game lobby areas outside the games themselves (e.g. like Sony's model).

Interested in the idea that the title would give a rationale for using the voice masking feature (make your voice sound like something else). It is a feature of XBOx Live which is underused because people seem to want to sound like themselves. In SANCTUARY, the voice masking feature could useful to enable the MODder to more easily make a seamless voice MOD (e.g. we provide voice masks for key characters like State troopers, CD etc...)

New issue raised: Security issue of letting users download something into console. MODs would need to be certified to go onto console, with community acting as the gatekeeper. Would moderators have to review code? Would this be cost-feasible to do? --- All good reasons to steer clear of console in first release.

Access to XBox Live development environment is limited to titles with concept approval (i.e. that have a publisher). "Partner Net" is a copy of XBoxLive network for developers. The architecture is revised every 6-8 months.

Calga Springs sanctuary

Newsletter and bird list of the Calga Springs wildlife sanctuary north of Sydney. I shot some good bush there in January. The cicadas were on a seven year high volume.

http://thequality.com/flics/10weeks/blog/archives/docs/Volume1-2004.pdf

http://thequality.com/flics/10weeks/blog/archives/docs/calga bird species list.pdf

MOD Films logo

NESTA new deadline

All auxilary materials need to be with NESTA by February 27th.

Meeting with Marc Evans

Had a productive meeting with Marc Evans (Director, My Little Eye) to discuss the re-mixable film concept and the potential of re-mixable film production services.

The highlights:

* "I want to extend the creative potential of the world of the story"
* "Film is a very wasteful process"
* "No one wants to pay for a film web site. Marketing people say the web site doesn't contribute to a film's success. No web site for My Little Eye."
* "Using the blogs for internal asset management is very interesting"
* "No one wants to pay for services that aren't directly related to the production of the film, everything is done in a mad rush"
* "the film audience wants to lean back, not lean forward, not take responsibility"
* "let's talk more about asset management for these upcoming projects"

Michael shoots the Concorde for VR

Michael Eleftheriades' work after the last-ever Concorde flight is being showcased on the REALVIZ site.

http://www.realviz.com/products/showcase.php?id=54&product=st

SANCTUARY - new script breakdown

http://thequality.com/flics/10weeks/blog/archives/docs/20040204_sanctuary.fdr

AK and I made some good progress today on this.

EXT. BUSH - NIGHT

State troops set a trap for the activists.

INT. ACTIVIST HQ - NIGHT

Activists do their virtual reconnaissance of the State.
There is too much information on-screen, not enough
intelligence. Mark asks Jon if he is going to ask his
brother Daniel for help. Jon says no.

INT. HOME - NIGHT

Jon has asked Daniel but Daniel says "No way. I have a
family to think of now." A family portrait hangs in view.

EXT. BUSH (VIRTUAL WORLD) - DAY

Straight laced and serious Blake is giving a class
presentation on State fauna and flora from within a virtual
bush environment. She's a natural. She adeptly manipulates
the view, sliding a tree out of the way to reveal a rare
wallaby in a clearing.

INT. CLASSROOM - DAY

Neat rows of students sit attentive as Blake up the front,
controls her presentation with body language. Her avatar
(within the virtual bush environment) is projected behind
her. A pair of boys snigger up the back of the room as they
call up Daniel's State prison record. Blake is thrown as
her dad's image comes up on her touchpad. She tries to
continue the talk while trying to clear the image. She
accidently sends Dad's image to the big screen behind her.
The class roars with laughter at her distress.

INT. STATE REGISTRY (VIRTUAL WORLD) - DAY

Blake hacks the school's data warehouse, a cavernous array
of disorganised filing cabinets and folders, destroying all
the references she can find on her dad. Her software agent
stick figure sidekick CD questions her motives. This is
most unlike her. A shadowy figure challenges Blake. She is
busted.

INT. BEDROOM - NIGHT

Dad rampages through Blake's messy bedroom confiscating
cables, cameras and misc. hardware. She's suspended so
she's grounded. No more Net acess. Blake accuses Dad of it
all being his fault. He's the ex-con.
Dad dismisses her defensively. "You don't know what you're
talking about. Maybe you will when you're older."

INT. HALLWAY - NIGHT

Blake sneaks out of her bedroom.

INT. OFFICE - NIGHT

Blake hacks Dad's old PC squinting and fumbling with the
mouse, clearly showing her frustration with 90s tech.

INSERT. STATE FILES ON ACTIVISTS

INSERT. STATE MAPS SHOWING TROOP ACTIVITY

INSERT. WORKSPACE

CD coaxes Blake to log off but then accidently uncovers the
plan to commence logging of the sanctuary tomorrow.
"Smokin'!"

INSERT. STATE MEMO ON PLANS FOR BARGO

CD asks if Blake is going to blow the whistle. She says
they would never listen to me.

INT. ACTIVIST HQ - NIGHT

A mushroom cloud erupts on the tactical map of the State. A
myriad panicked voices. They've being hacked. Jon calms the
group down and points at the new incriminating information
spilling out of Bargo.

EXT. BUSH - DAY

The activists enter the sanctuary cautiously. No activity.
They come across the smoking remains of a logging vehicle.
Something's wrong.

INT. BEDROOM - DAY

Dad's voice "Have a good day love. Bye." Door slams.
Blake's eyes open.

INT. OFFICE - DAY

Back at Dad's PC. More scanning. Oh shit.

EXT. BUSH - DAY

Come out into the open and put your hands in the air. It's
a trap. Run! The activists flee.

The nano-bats awaken and scatter to the wind in a vain
effort to record the massacre. One by one they are shot
down.

Jon is chased down by a dog with a visor for eyes. The
troopers close in on him as he's mauled.

INT. OFFICE - DAY

Blake watches a low bandwidth nano-bat cam video stream in
tears.

EXT. BUSH - DAY

Blake stumbles awkwardly through the bush in the aftermath
of the battle. She forgets it's real, trying to move a tree
aside with a palm-press.

INT. CLASSROOM - DAY

Blake blends in with the rest of the class as the teacher
relates the day's lesson on the virtues of the State. A
trading-floor-style newsticker begins scrolling a
newsflash. The teacher gestures for the big screen to come
on.

INSERT. NEWSFLASH

The children are warned to be vigilent for terrorist
suspects still at-large after a catastrophic systems
collapse in the Bargo region. Blade, a strikingly athletic
thirtysomething, and CD are the suspects.

INT. CLASSROOM - DAY

Blake's steely gaze behind glasses.

Australian Conservation Society

Real activists in Aus write:

Hi ACF Supporters

Right now, ACF needs your support to put a stop to a disturbing new chapter in the ongoing fight to save the Tasmanian wilderness.

In Tasmanian old growth forests, trees too big to be sawn are being demolished with explosives. 500-year old trees are literally blown up in a second. Then, after clearing the site, to remove native wildlife from the plantation area carrots are distributed. Once the starving animals start to enjoy this sweet new treat it is then laced with 1080 - a deadly poison that attacks the nervous system and kills animals slowly. The recovering flora is destroyed using herbicides.

This month on the ACF website we have an in-depth look at the destruction of forests in Tasmania, and explain what you can do to help. Plus, there's the debate on the US-Australia Free Trade Agreement, and much more.